Prisons or Problem-Solving: Does the Public Support Specialty Courts?

ABSTRACT

Recently, “problem-solving” courts have been developed as an alternative to imprisonment. They are often called “specialty” courts because they process and divert into treatment programs offenders who are seen as different from the general criminal population, such as those with mental health or drug problems, those who are homeless or veterans, and those who engage in domestic violence. Based on a 2017 national survey of 1,000 respondents, the current study examines overall public support for rehabilitation as a goal of corrections and then focuses specifically on support for different types of specialty courts. The analysis reveals that the American public endorses not only the rehabilitative ideal but also the use of problem-solving courts. Further, with only minimal variation, strong support for these courts appears to exist regardless of political orientation and sociodemographic characteristics.     

Seeing the improvement of the criminal trial structure from China’s criminal courtroom arrangements (tribunal design)

The setting of criminal court has become an important representation of the criminal trial structure due to its visual and vivid reflection of the legal position and relations among the three parties of litigation, i.e. the prosecuting party, the advocating party and the judge. As a result of the influence of ancient “inquest” centered trial mode, lack of the defendant’s right to silence and incomplete revolution of the criminal trial mode, the existing criminal court setting features an umbrella shaped structure. To reform the criminal trial structure in China, we should eliminate the air of “inquest” from the existing court interrogation mode, strengthen the hearing of evidence and set up a equiangular triangle shaped trial structure of neutral trial, equality between the prosecuting and advocating parties and litigant oriented. __________ Translated from the Jurist Review, 2005, (2) (in Chinese)     

毒品洗钱犯罪问题研究

毒品犯罪与洗钱犯罪是密不可分的,进入20世纪80年代以后,毒品洗钱犯罪活动日益严重。毒品犯罪集团绞尽脑汁,利用各种可能的方式与手段进行洗钱活动,给全世界、全人类带来了巨大的灾难。分析研究毒品洗钱犯罪的未来发展趋势,使我们可以深刻的认识其危害性,以便今后能够更好的预防和打击这类犯罪活动。     

警察出庭作证:透析与前瞻

警察作为证人出庭作证在国外十分普遍,然而我国一直将警察排除在证人之外,警察出庭作证少之又少。我国警察应当出庭作证,但应限制在特定范围之内。在目前情况下,警察出庭作证还存在较大障碍,这恰恰是我国刑事司法改革之所在。     

RETHINKING JUVENILE STATUS OFFENSE LAWS: CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION ACT

Families struggling with a breakdown in communication, trying to control the behavior of an unruly child, or experiencing a crisis often look for outside help. Many families, particularly those without resources to pay for private support, turn to their local status offense system. Status offenders are young people charged with behavior unique to their status as juveniles such as running away, truancy, or disobedience. In 2007, Congress will begin to consider reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA), the federal act related to status‐offender policy. By providing an overview of recent state status‐offense legislation and case law, this article identifies issues to be addressed by Congress in reauthorizing the JJDPA.     

兽药缓控速释药剂型的研究进展

简要介绍了兽药缓控速释剂型的产生、发展、动力学过程及其分类,并着重阐述了兽药缓控速释药的应用现状、发展动力、研究热点与趋势,分析了兽药缓控速释剂型研究中存在的问题,旨在为广大兽医药工作者研制兽药新剂型提供参考。     

创设海关法院：现实与可能

为适应加入世贸组织的新形势 ,我国应建立与对外贸易相协调的专门海关法院。借鉴美国海关法院制度的经验 ,创设适应社会主义市场经济体制要求的中国海关法院制度 ,对扩大改革开放、促进国际贸易意义重大。     

澳大利亚侵权行为的法律适用问题

文章通过对澳大利亚侵权行为法律适用由古到今、由传统到现代的规则的论述 ,揭示了澳大利亚侵权行为法律适用规则之处 ,从而为中国的侵权行为法律适用提供一些借鉴。     

最高法院出版物:功能解读与成因分析

作为一种重要的治理方式和技术手段,最高法院的出版物通过承担一定的功能(直接功能和间接功能),对于最高法院审判职能以及其他延伸职能的实现发挥着重要的作用。从反馈的信息来看,最高法院出版物的积极效果较为明显。最高法院出版物的生成及其规模化运作,同中国特定的政治控制模式、法院管理体制和法院制度的转型有着密切的联系。当然,最高法院出版物的运作在一定程度上与审判独立原则存在矛盾和冲突。虽然如此,最高法院出版物仍将在今后一定时期内长期存在。     

USING EXTERNSHIPS TO INTRODUCE FAMILY LAW STUDENTS TO NEW PROFESSIONAL ROLES

Law schools are seeking ways to familiarize family law students with exciting new professional roles arising in connection with family court reform. This article describes the family law externship program at William Mitchell College of Law which includes a classroom component allowing students placed in different practice settings to compare and contrast their experiences. The program assists students in making career choices and enhances their ability to counsel future clients.