54 resultados para Justice System


Relevância:

70.00% 70.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Iowa Code Section 216A.135 requires the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council (CJJPAC) to submit a long-range plan for Iowa's justice system to the Governor and General Assembly every five years. The Criminal and Juvenile Justice Advisory Council directed that the 2005 plan be developed with input from the public. A public hearing was held in September 2004, utilizing the Iowa Communications Network at 5 sites across Iowa. Using the information gained, the Council developed new goals and strategies and modified others from the 2000 plan. The 2005 Long Range Goals for Iowa’s Criminal and Juvenile Justice Systems, organized as follows, are meant to facilitate analyses and directions for justice system issues and concerns in Iowa.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Newsletter for professionals who work with girls involved in or at risk for involvement in the juvenile justice system.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six month’s impact of Senate File 543 on the justice system. SF 543, enacted during the 2001 legislative session, changed the maximum penalty for first-offense Burglary-3rd degree, and established new sentencing options available to the court: * An alternative determinate prison sentence for certain Class D felons * Extended felony sentence reconsideration from 90 days to one year

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The issue of effectively holding juveniles accountable for criminal behavior is a topic of public concern and debate. Congress created the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) program and appropriated new federal funds through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). The goals of the program are to reduce juvenile delinquency, improve the juvenile justice system, and increase accountability for juvenile offenders.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Bi-monthly newsletter about gender-specific services for young women involved in or at risk for involvement in the juvenile justice system.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Over the last several years, lawmakers have been responding to several highly publicized child abduction, assault and murder cases. While such cases remain rare in Iowa, the public debates they have generated are having far-reaching effects. Policy makers are responsible for controlling the nature of such effects. Challenges they face stem from the need to avoid primarily politically-motivated responses and the desire to make informed decisions that recognize both the strengths and the limitations of the criminal justice system as a vehicle for promoting safe and healthy families and communities. Consensus was reached by the Task Force at its first meeting that one of its standing goals is to provide nonpartisan guidance to help avoid or fix problematic sex offense policies and practices. Setting this goal was a response to the concern over what can result from elected officials’ efforts to respond to the types of sex offender-related concerns that can easily become emotionally laden and politically charged due to the universally held abhorrence of sex crimes against children. The meetings of the Task Force and the various work groups it has formed have included some spirited and perhaps emotionally charged discussions, despite the above-stated ground rule. However, as is described in the report, the Task Force’s first set of recommendations and plans for further study were approved through consensus. It is hoped that in upcoming legislative deliberations, it will be remembered that the non-legislative members of the Task Force all agreed on the recommendations contained in this report. The topics discussed in this first report from the Task Force are limited to the study issues specifically named in H.F. 619, the Task Force’s enabling legislation. However, other topics of concern were discussed by the Task Force because of their immediacy or because of their possible relationships with one or more of the Task Force’s mandated study issues. For example, it has been reported by some probation/parole officers and others that the 2000 feet rule has had a negative influence on treatment participation and supervision compliance. While such concerns were noted, the Task Force did not take it upon itself to investigate them at this time and thus broaden the agenda it was given by the General Assembly last session. As a result, the recently reinstated 2000 feet rule, the new cohabitation/child endangerment law and other issues of interest to Task Force members but not within the scope of their charge are not discussed in the body of this report. An issue of perhaps the greatest interest to most Task Force members that was not a part of their charge was a belief in the benefit of viewing Iowa’s efforts to protect children from sex crimes with as comprehensive a platform as possible. It has been suggested that much more can be done to prevent child-victim sex crimes than would be accomplished by only concentrating on what to do with offenders after a crime has occurred. To prevent child victimization, H.F. 619 policy provisions rely largely on incapacitation and future deterrent effects of increased penalties, more restrictive supervision practices and greater public awareness of the risk presented by a segment of Iowa’s known sex offenders. For some offenders, these policies will no doubt prevent future sex crimes against children, and the Task Force has begun long-term studies to look for the desired results and for ways to improve such results through better supervision tools and more effective offender treatment. Unfortunately, much of the effects from the new policies may primarily influence persons who have already committed sex offenses against minors and who have already been caught doing so. Task Force members discussed the need for a range of preventive efforts and a need to think about sex crimes against children from other than just a “reaction- to-the-offender” perspective. While this topic is not addressed in the report that follows, it was suggested that some of the Task Force’s discussions could be briefly shared through these opening comments. Along with incapacitation and deterrence, comprehensive approaches to the prevention of child-victim sex crimes would also involve making sure parents have the tools they need to detect signs of adults with sex behavior problems, to help teach their children about warning signs and to find the support they need for healthy parenting. School, faithbased and other community organizations might benefit from stronger supports and better tools they can use to more effectively promote positive youth development and the learning of respect for others, respect for boundaries and healthy relationships. All of us who have children, or who live in communities where there are children, need to understand the limitations of our justice system and the importance of our own ability to play a role in preventing sexual abuse and protecting children from sex offenders, which are often the child’s own family members. Over 1,000 incidences of child sexual abuse are confirmed or founded each year in Iowa, and most such acts take place in the child’s home or the residence of the caretaker of the child. Efforts to prevent child sexual abuse and to provide for early interventions with children and families at risk could be strategically examined and strengthened. The Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force was established to provide assistance to the General Assembly. It will respond to legislative direction for adjusting its future plans as laid out in this report. Its plans could be adjusted to broaden or narrow its scope or to assign different priority levels of effort to its current areas of study. Also, further Task Force considerations of the recommendations it has already submitted could be called for. In the meantime, it is hoped that the information and recommendations submitted through this report prove helpful.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six months’ impact of Senate File 543 (which enacted a number of sentencing changes) on the justice system; monitoring of the correctional impact of this bill was at the request of several members of the legislature. Since then, the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council has requested that CJJP monitor the correctional impact of enacted legislation of particular interest. This report covers monitoring results or future plans to monitor the following: 1. Changes in “crack” cocaine and “powder” cocaine penalties under Chapter 124.401 (effective FY2004; see p.3). 2. Commitments to prison involving manufacture, distribution, or possession of methamphetamine under Chapter 124.401 (see p.5). 3. Prosecution of offenders for child endangerment under Chapter 726.6(g) for permitting the presence of a child or minor at a location where a controlled substance manufacturing or a product possession violation occurs (see p.7). 4. Provision of an enhanced penalty for manufacturing of controlled substances under Chapter 124.401C when children are present and the offender is not charged under section 726.6(g) (see p. 7). 5. Creating a new offense when a retailer sells more than two packages of any product containing pseudoephedrine (chapter 126.23A) and providing for an enhanced penalty under Chapter 714.7C when a theft involves more than two packages of similar products (see p.8). 6. Establishment of parole eligibility at 70% of time served for persons sentenced under the “85% law” provisions of Iowa Code Section 902.12. (effective FY2005; see p. 9).

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six months’ impact of Senate File 543 (which enacted a number of sentencing changes) on the justice system; monitoring of the correctional impact of this bill was at the request of several members of the legislature. Since then, the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council has requested that CJJP monitor the correctional impact of enacted legislation of particular interest.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This report was developed to provide summary information to allow practitioners and juvenile justice system officials access to specific sections of Iowa’s Three Year Plan. It includes the “System Flow, “Crime Analysis”, and “Child in Needs of Assistance” sections of Iowa’s 2006 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act formula grant Three-Year Plan. The complete Three Year Plan serves as Iowa’s application for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act formula grant funding. The information included in this report overviews system processing for delinquent youth. It also provides data and analysis from key system decision pointsand services.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This report was developed to provide summary information to allow state agency staff, practitioners and juvenile justice system officials to access specific sections of Iowa’s Three Year Plan. It includes the “Service Network” section of Iowa’s 2006 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act formula grant Three-Year Plan. The complete Three Year Plan serves as Iowa’s application for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act formula grant funding. The information included in this report overviews some of the systems and services that relate to Iowa’s delinquency and CINA systems. The systems and services discussed include substance abuse , mental health, alternative or special education, and job training.

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six month’s impact of Senate File 543 on the justice system. SF 543, enacted during the 2001 legislative session, changed the maximum penalty for first-offense Burglary-3rd degree, and established new sentencing options available to the court: * An alternative determinate prison sentence for certain Class D felons * Extended felony sentence reconsideration from 90 days to one year

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six month’s impact of Senate File 543 on the justice system. SF 543, enacted during the 2001 legislative session, changed the maximum penalty for first-offense Burglary-3rd degree, and established new sentencing options available to the court: * An alternative determinate prison sentence for certain Class D felons * Extended felony sentence reconsideration from 90 days to one year

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six month’s impact of Senate File 543 on the justice system. SF 543, enacted during the 2001 legislative session, changed the maximum penalty for first-offense Burglary-3rd degree, and established new sentencing options available to the court: * An alternative determinate prison sentence for certain Class D felons * Extended felony sentence reconsideration from 90 days to one year

Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six month’s impact of Senate File 543 on the justice system. SF 543, enacted during the 2001 legislative session, changed the maximum penalty for first-offense Burglary-3rd degree, and established new sentencing options available to the court: * An alternative determinate prison sentence for certain Class D felons * Extended felony sentence reconsideration from 90 days to one year