7.8. Courtroom Players: Judges and Court Staff 
LORE RUTZ-BURRI 
In their 1977 book, Felony Justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts, James Eisenstein and Herbert 
Jacob, coined the term “courtroom workgroup.” 
1 They specifically referred to the cooperative working 
relationship between prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges in working together (as opposed to an 
adversarial relationship that the public might expect) to efficiently resolve most of the cases in the criminal 
courts. This chapter more generally uses the term to include all the individuals working in the criminal 
courts—judges, attorneys, and the variety of court staff. 
The accusatory phase (the pre-trial phase) and adjudicatory phase (the trial phase) of the criminal 
justice process include individuals who regularly work together in the trial courts. The prosecutor files 
the accusatory instrument called either an information or an indictment, and represents the state in 
plea bargaining, on pretrial motions, during the trial, and in the sentencing phase. The defense attorney 
represents the defendant after charges have been filed, through the pre-trial process, in a trial, and during 
sentencing, and maybe on the appeal as well. Judges, aided by several court personnel, conduct the pretrial, 
trial, and sentencing hearings. Prosecutors, defense counsel, and judges perform different roles, but all are 
concerned with the judicial process and the interpretation of the law. These law professionals are graduates 
of law schools and have passed the bar examination establishing their knowledge of the law and their ability 
to do legal analysis.  As persons admitted by the state or federal bar associations to the practice of law, they are 
subject to the same legal codes of professional responsibility, disciplinary rules, and ethical rules and opinions 
for lawyers. Although the American criminal justice system is said to represent the adversarial model, the 
reality is that prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and court staff work with cooperation and consensus 
rather than conflict. This is understandable when considering the common goal of efficient and expedition 
case processing and prescribed and agreed upon rules for achieving those goals. 
Trial judges: Misperceptions and Realities 
1. Eisentstein, J., & Jacob, H. (1977). Felony Justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts. Boston, MA: Little Brown and Co. 
286