The Compendium of Scheduled Violations and Scheduled Fines, July 2013

This Compendium of Scheduled Violations and Scheduled Fines is designed and published by the Iowa Department of Public Safety and the Department of Natural Resources. It is intended for the use of all courts, law enforcement officers and agencies of the State of Iowa. The cost of this publication is paid out of the budget of the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Natural Resources.

Statewide Process and Comparative Outcomes Study of 2003 Iowa Adult and Juvenile Drug Courts, August 2009

A statewide evaluation of the six adult and three juvenile drug courts in operation during calendar year 2003 was conducted. Completion rates, recidivism, substance abuse treatment, and supervision and placement (juveniles only) costs were examined by model (Judge and Community Panel) and by Judicial District. In addition, adult drug court participants were compared with a group of offenders who were screened and declined or were rejected by drug court in 2003 (referred) and a sample of offenders starting probation in 2003 (probationer). The adult participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through December 31, 2007. This yielded an average post-program follow-up time of almost 3 years (2.9) for drug court participants. For the juvenile portion, drug court participants were compared with a group matched on several demographic and offense variables (Matched Comparison group) and juveniles referred to drug court who did not enter the program (Referred Comparison group). The juvenile participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through approximately 16 quarters after program discharge with an end date of December 31, 2007.

Governor's Youth Race and Detention Task Force; Full Force, May 2009

This report, the Full Report, is the culmination of the Task Force’s responsibilities as set out in Executive Order 5, dated October 30, 2007. The Executive Order specifies a number of goals and report requirements.There is a commonly held perception that the use of detention may serve as a deterrent to future delinquency. Data in this report reflect that approximately 40% of youth detained in 2006 were re-detained in 2006. Research conducted by national experts indicates that, particularly for low risk/low level offenders, that the use of detention is not neutral, and may increase the likelihood of recidivism. Comparable data for Iowa are not available (national data studied for this report provide level of risk, but risk level related to detention is not presently available for Iowa). The Task Force finds no evidence suggesting that recidivism levels (as related to detention risk) in Iowa should be different than found in other states. Data in this report also suggest that detention is one of the juvenile justice system’s more costly sanctions ($257 - $340 per day). Other sites and local jurisdictions have been able to redirect savings from the reduced use of juvenile detention to support less costly, community-based detention alternatives without compromising public safety.

Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grand Fund Outcomes Report and FY2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary, January 2002

This document contains two related, but separate reports. The Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is a summary of outcomes from services and activities funded through the Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund in FY2001. The Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary describes Iowa communities’ current prevention and sanction programs supported with funding from the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) during FY2002. The material in Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is presented in response to a legislative mandate to report specific prevention outcomes for the community Grant Fund. It includes a brief description of a Youth Development Results Framework established by the Iowa Collaboration for Youth Development. Outcomes are reported using this results framework, which was developed by a number of state agencies as a common tool for various state programs involving youth development related planning and funding processes. Included in this report is a description of outcomes from the prevention activities funded, all or in part, by the Community Grant Fund, as reported by local communities. The program summaries presented in the Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary provide an overview of local efforts to implement their 2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development plans and include prevention and sanction programs funded through the combined resources of the State Community Grant Fund and the Federal Title V Prevention, Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Act Formula Grant and Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant programs. These combined funds are referred to in this document as the Juvenile Justice Youth Development (JJYD) funds. To administer the JJYD funds, including funds from the Community Grant Fund, CJJP partners with local officials to facilitate a community planning process that determines the communities’ priorities for the use of the funds. The local planning is coordinated by the Iowa’s Decategorization Boards (Decats). These local officials and/or their staff have been leaders in providing oversight or staff support to a variety of local planning initiatives (e.g. child welfare, Comprehensive Strategy Pilot Projects, Empowerment, other) and bring child welfare and community planning experience to the table for the creation of comprehensive community longterm planning efforts. The allocation of these combined funds and the technical assistance received by the Decats from CJJP is believed to have helped enhance both child welfare and juvenile justice efforts locally and has provided for the recognition and establishment of connections for joint child welfare/juvenile justice planning. The allocation and local planning approach has allowed funding from CJJP to be “blended” or “braided” with other local, state, and federal dollars that flow to communities as a result of their local planning responsibilities. The program descriptions provided in this document reflect services and activities supported with JJYD funds. In many cases, however, additional funding sources have been used to fully fund the programs. Most of the information in this document’s two reports was submitted to CJJP by the communities through an on- line planning and reporting process established jointly by the DHS and CJJP.

State of Iowa 1998 Inmate Profile, 1999

This report was compiled at the request of the Department of Corrections. The first section describes Iowa’s prison inmate population at mid-year. The first section also provides a comparison of the mid-year 1998 prison population with the population one year ago, and five years ago. Included is analysis of sex, race/ethnicity, age categories, life terms, mandatory minimum sentences, number of sentences per inmate, and offense type. Following the statewide section are Facility Profiles that examine each Department of Corrections institution. The facility profiles cover the same types of information as the statewide report for mid-year 1998, except that committing county and judicial district, Board of Parole risk scores and sex are excluded.

Long-Range Goals for Iowa's Criminal & Juvenile Justice Systems, February 2005

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.

Uniform Crime Reports as a Vehicle For Reporting State Wide Data on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, April 1998

This project is part of an effort conducted by the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) under a grant whose objective is to provide states with descriptions of existing methodologies to collect Domestic Violence (DV) and Sexual Assault (SA) data. JRSA has identified three different methodologies to collect such data: · Incident-based reporting as part of the Uniform Crime Reports · Specialized data collection from law enforcement through a separate data collection system · Specialized data collection coming directly from service providers. One state has been selected as an example of each type of data collection above, with Iowa selected as a representative of states with incident based reporting (IBR) as part of the UCR system.

Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy Five-Year Strategic Plan July 1, 2010-June 30, 2015

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.

Molecular crime and cellular punishment: active detoxification of misfolded and aggregated proteins in the cell by the chaperone and protease networks.

Labile or mutation-sensitised proteins may spontaneously convert into aggregation-prone conformations that may be toxic and infectious. This hazardous behavior, which can be described as a form of "molecular criminality", can be actively counteracted in the cell by a network of molecular chaperone and proteases. Similar to law enforcement agents, molecular chaperones and proteases can specifically identify, apprehend, unfold and thus neutralize "criminal" protein conformers, allowing them to subsequently refold into harmless functional proteins. Irreversibly damaged polypeptides that have lost the ability to natively refold are preferentially degraded by highly controlled ATP-consuming proteases. Damaged proteins that escape proteasomal degradation can also be "incarcerated" into dense amyloids, "evicted" from the cell, or internally "exiled" to the lysosome to be hydrolysed and recycled. Thus, remarkable parallels exist between molecular and human forms of criminality, as well as in the cellular and social responses to various forms of crime. Yet, differences also exist: whereas programmed death is the preferred solution chosen by aged and aggregation-stressed cells, collective suicide is seldom chosen by lawless societies. Significantly, there is no cellular equivalent for the role of familial care and of education in general, which is so crucial to the proper shaping of functional persons in the society. Unlike in the cell, humanism introduces a bias against radical solutions such as capital punishment, favouring crime prevention, reeducation and social reinsertion of criminals.

What is the value of forensic science? : an overview of the effectiveness of forensic science in the Australian criminal justice system project

Forensic science is increasingly relied upon by law enforcement to assist in solvingcrime and gaining convictions, and by the judicial system in the adjudication ofspecific criminal cases. However, the value of forensic science relative to the workinvolved and the outcome of cases has yet to be established in the Australiancontext. Previous research in this area has mainly focused on the science andtechnology, rather than examining how people can use forensic services/science tothe best possible advantage to produce appropriate justice outcomes. This fiveyearproject entails an investigation into the effectiveness of forensic science inpolice investigations and court trials. It aims to identify when, where and howforensic science can add value to criminal investigations, court trials and justiceoutcomes while ensuring the efficient use of available resources initially in theVictorian and the ACT criminal justice systems and ultimately across Australiaand New Zealand. This paper provides an overview of the rationale and aims ofthe research project and discusses current work-in-progress.

Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Laws and You, 2012

Iowa’s alcoholic beverages industry operates within the confines of a carefully cast partnership between the Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Division (Division), licensees and law enforcement officials. Close cooperation among these three entities is essential for regulation and enforcement of Iowa’s alcoholic beverages laws in order to achieve compliance. This manual was developed to provide licensees (their employees and agents) with the information needed to protect the welfare and safety of Iowans through compliance with laws addressing the manufacture, distribution and sale of alcoholic beverages.

Meskwaki Tribal Court Interim Study Committee : final report, 2007

This is the final report on the Meskwaki Tribal Court Study Committee that was charged with continuing the work from previous legislative sessions to determine the proper manner for the Iowa Court system to recognize civil judgements, decrees, and orders issued by the Meskwaki Tribal Court.

Optimization of HS-SPME/GC-MS analysis and its use in the profiling of illicit ecstasy tablets (Part 1)

A headspace solid-phase microextraction procedure (HS-SPME) was developed for the profiling of traces present in 3,4-methylenedioxymethylampethamine (MDMA). Traces were first extracted using HS-SPME and then analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy (GC-MS). The HS-SPME conditions were optimized using varying conditions. Optimal results were obtained when 40 mg of crushed MDMA sample was heated at 80 °C for 15 min, followed by extraction at 80 °C for 15 min with a polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene coated fibre. A total of 31 compounds were identified as traces related to MDMA synthesis, namely precursors, intermediates or by-products. In addition some fatty acids used as tabletting materials and caffeine used as adulterant, were also detected. The use of a restricted set of 10 target compounds was also proposed for developing a screening tool for clustering samples having close profile. 114 seizures were analyzed using an SPME auto-sampler (MultiPurpose Samples MPS2), purchased from Gerstel GMBH & Co. (Germany), and coupled to GC-MS. The data was handled using various pre-treatment methods, followed by the study of similarities between sample pairs based on the Pearson correlation. The results show that HS-SPME, coupled with the suitable statistical method is a powerful tool for distinguishing specimens coming from the same seizure and specimens coming from different seizures. This information can be used by law enforcement personnel to visualize the ecstasy distribution network as well as the clandestine tablet manufacturing.

Safety & You, September 2011

Iowa State University Police Department annually prepares and distributes “Safety & You” to all students, faculty, staff, as well as potential students and employees. Campus crime, arrest and referral statistics include those reported to the ISU Police, designated campus officials (including, but not limited to, Department of Residence, Dean of Students Office, athletic coaches, and advisors to student organizations), Ames Police and the Story County Sheriff’s Office. The ISU Counseling and Thielen Student Health Centers are exempted by patient confidentiality laws from disclosing reported information. Iowa State University does not have a voluntary confidential procedure for reporting crimes to law enforcement

Safety & You, September 2012

Iowa State University Police Department annually prepares and distributes “Safety & You” to all students, faculty, staff, as well as potential students and employees. Campus crime, arrest and referral statistics include those reported to the ISU Police, designated campus officials (including, but not limited to, Department of Residence, Dean of Students Office, athletic coaches, and advisors to student organizations), Ames Police and the Story County Sheriff’s Office. The ISU Counseling and Thielen Student Health Centers are exempted by patient confidentiality laws from disclosing reported information. Iowa State University does not have a voluntary confidential procedure for reporting crimes to law enforcement