University Honors

Information about the Criminal Justice System, let alone the state of California’scriminal court system, is elusive and non-circulating. Subsequently, victims are not directlyinformed of their individual rights, how criminal cases work, the steps to the Criminal JusticeSystem, and so forth until after they are involved in a criminal case. This lack of informationcould cause detrimental effects that people are unaware of until they are or have been directlyimpacted by the justice system. The line, “after a police report is filed by the district attorney,the case is out of your hands and it is up to the state of California whether or not they chooseto drop it” is daunting, but most commonly used amongst California’s and the federalCriminal Justice System due to the “no-drop policy” implemented with the mandatoryprosecution policy of domestic violence cases. This paper poses as an evaluation of whetheror not this policy and other criminal justice proceedings should be in effect along with bothits benefits and detriments. By studying and analyzing existing victim experiences andinstitutional legitimacy in-depth, the normative reasonings about the implemented policiesthrough extensive critical evaluation will produce and organize possible solutions to combatthe disparity between the expectations and realities. The main objective of this article is toraise awareness to dispel the possible determinants of the “no drop policy” within theprosecution of domestic violence cases and to mend these disparities on an institutional level.