Criminal Procedure

2019 ◽  
pp. 159-164
Author(s):  
Michael Greenspan ◽  
Amar Mehta ◽  
Merrill Rotter ◽  
Jeremy Colley
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Drug Use ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Substance Use Disorders ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Basic Principles

Chapter 21 includes cases that have helped to define basic principles of criminal procedure. The cases do not all involve individuals with mental illness, but the opinions significantly affect how those individuals are processed in the criminal justice system. Robinson v. California and Powell v. Texas were critical in establishing the scope of prosecution permitted against individual with substance use disorders. The other cases in the chapter are Miranda v. Arizona, North Carolina v. Alford and Colorado v. Connelly. The newest case (Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Eldred) about an alleged violation of probation for recurrent drug use, revisits the Robinson and Powell issue of potentially punishing a person for the symptoms of her addiction (i.e. using drugs).

Criminal Procedure

2014 ◽  
pp. 131-134
Author(s):  
Michael Greenspan ◽  
Amar Mehta ◽  
Merrill Rotter
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Substance Use Disorders ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Basic Principles

Chapter 22 includes cases that have helped to define basic principles of criminal procedure. The cases do not all involve individuals with mental illness, but the opinions significantly affect how those individuals are processed in the criminal justice system. Robinson v. California and Powell v. Texas were critical in establishing the scope of prosecution permitted against individuals with substance use disorders. The other cases in the chapter are Miranda v. Arizona, North Carolina v. Alford, and Colorado v. Connelly.

The Cal-DSH diversion guidelines

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 701-713
Author(s):  
Michael A. Cummings ◽  
Charles Scott ◽  
Juan Carlos Arguello ◽  
Ai-Li W. Arias ◽  
Ashley M. Breth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Substance Use Disorders ◽  
Serious Mental Illness ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Diversion Programs ◽  
Treatment Interventions

AbstractThe Cal-DSH Diversion Guidelines provide 10 general guidelines that jurisdictions should consider when developing diversion programs for individuals with a serious mental illness (SMI) who become involved in the criminal justice system. Screening for SMI in a jail setting is reviewed. In addition, important treatment interventions for SMI and substance use disorders are highlighted with the need to address criminogenic risk factors highlighted.

Public Health and the Criminal Justice System

2019 ◽  
pp. 225-240
Author(s):  
Gary Tennis ◽  
Kenneth J. Martz ◽  
Jac A. Charlier
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Substance Use Disorders ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Public Health Intervention ◽  
Health Care Intervention ◽  
Incarcerated Population

Approximately two-thirds of America’s incarcerated population suffers with untreated or undertreated substance use disorders, and many of those individuals commit several crimes related to drug use and addiction on a daily basis prior to being incarcerated. To end the opioid epidemic in the United States we not only need to bolster our health care and public health response to substance use disorders, we need to engage the criminal justice system as a specific touchpoint for public health intervention in communities and states across the country. The principal argument in the chapter is that while individuals with opioid and/or other substance use disorders should get treatment before ever being involved in crime—if they are justice-involved, it is imperative that the criminal justice system serve as a belated but necessary public health and health care intervention supportive of treatment, recovery, and prevention of addiction.

Victim Participation in Parole Proceedings in South Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
South African ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Prison Inmate ◽  
Parole Board ◽  
Victims Of Crime ◽  
The Right

South African law provides for circumstances in which victims of crime may participate in the criminal justice system at the investigation, prosecution (trial), sentencing and parole stages. In South Africa, a prison inmate has no right to parole although the courts have held that they have a right to be considered for parole. In some cases, the victims of crime have a right to make submissions to the Parole Board about whether the offender should be released on parole. Section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides for the right of victims of crime to participate in parole proceedings. The purpose of this article is to discuss section 299A and illustrate ways in which victims of crime participate in the parole process. The author also recommends ways in which victims’ rights in section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act could be strengthened.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document