When Advocates Become Adjudicators

Tracing the Effects of Prosecutorial and Public Defense Experience on Judicial Decision Making

Bibliographic Data

ID6179769
AuthorsBanks Miller (0000-0002-7948-8947, The University of Texas at Dallas), Brett Curry (0000-0002-6366-0714, Georgia Southern University)
Year2023
Volume51
Issue6
Pages796-804
Publication date2023-11-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Politics Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1532-673X • E-ISSN: 1552-3373
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1532673x231175138
OpenAlexW4368371213
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited18

We assess the influence professional background – specifically, having been a prosecutor or a public defender – exerts on decision making by federal district court judges. Focusing on search and seizure cases, we analyze nearly 1500 motions to suppress evidence from 2000 to 2022. In addition to controlling for judicial ideology and a judge’s prior experience as a prosecutor or public defender, we utilize matching to address endogeneity concerns related to one’s ability to self-select into one of these positions—which may itself be influenced by that individual’s ideological predispositions. We find that having been a former prosecutor, as well as the length of time that service spans, makes a judge significantly more likely to rule against a motion to suppress. Former public defenders are significantly more likely to grant that suppression motion, though their propensity to do so is not affected by the length of time served in that capacity

Criminal justice · Economics · Endogeneity · Ideology · Judicial opinion · Political science · Politics · Public defender · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies

Tools

Open DOI