Agency Role and Perspective Courts

Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs (OMCGs) is a contemporary issue that engulfs Australian society. What makes prosecution of such gangs so complex is the strong foothold that gangs have in organised crime and the façade that is worn in order to evade the eyes of the law. Various responses have been implemented in order to cease all violence and more importantly disenfranchise organised crime and prosecute those within the illegal syndicates. Legal responses put into act are: task forces and intelligence and lastly, targeting the organisation and membership. The non-legal responses on the other hand are, the media and the formation of political parties.

Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs (OMCG’s) inhabit an active presence in all states and territories in Australia. Some members of these gangs are responsible for serious organised crime and yet the total gang and membership numbers of Australian OMCGs is rising.

Even though gangs provide a sense of support, the "values" instilled in members are horribly dangerous to society. Murders and drive-by shottings go unpunished more often than not in areas like the Henry Horner Homes. Gangs have become powerful enough that high-ranking members who are forced to face the law are protected by high-priced attorneys and investigators (163).

For the past 50 years, America’s criminal justice system has encountered several significant changes dealing with courts and policing. According to Marion and Oliver (2006), the historical Supreme Court rulings like Mapp v. Ohio and Miranda v. Arizona mold the way courts and law enforcement handle individuals charged with committing crimes. This paper will discuss the evolution of courts and law enforcement reflects the diverse and changing need for today’s population which is first importance, the urgency for cooperation and communication among criminal justice agencies and law enforcement within the country. Individuals must

Next, the appointment power given to the president is another caveat of the institutional constraint. This constraint showed strong support for the constrained court view in the case of Obergefell v Hodges because the vague laws involved in this case gave room for personal opinions from the justices to influence their decision. Of course, the factor of ideological influence did create an argument for the dynamic court view as it related to doctrine, but in the case of institutional constraint, these ideological influences are seen as a result of institutional powers given to the president. The appointment power gives power outside of the courts and let’s another branch of government influence the decisions of the court by choosing justices which reflect their own ideological beliefs. So, the decision was split along ideological lines because of the influence that previous presidents had on the courts, which promotes the constrained court view as an institutional constraint.

There are many different types of crimes that occur on a daily basis in this country; from homicide to petty theft to white collar crime. Due to the diversity and variation of these illegal activities, it would be imprudent not to have courts that are specialized to the vast majority of individuals who commit these crimes. This paper will discuss the different types of problem solving courts that exist, along with what kind of offenders they deal with. Furthermore, this paper will also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of specialized problem-solving courts and whether they are truly effective.

Divided into the police, courts and corrections, and the people, the criminal justice system nonetheless works as a unit, with the action or inaction of one affecting the potential choices for another. Briefly examined in relation to these three are how legislation influence them. How a particular group is organized determines the scope of authority and discretion each actor holds; examined are how it may also inherently create ethical dilemmas. Issues recur despite attempts to remedy them and examples are given, as well as possible solutions.

By the 1980's the FBI recognized motorcycle gangs as an important step in its crime program just behind La Cosa Nostra. Federal agencies joined with state and local police to arrest and convict members of major outlaw motorcycle gangs. As the law enforcements actions grew stronger the gang members hired attorneys to fight federal prosecutors and multi-agency task forces. Some gangs members thought longer sentence were good because they learned better criminal techniques from other prisoners. Long sentences gave them a new look on criminal careers because of the better education on the world of crime and making new contracts.

I believe that the North Side Protectors gang was allowed to continue with their roles and delinquency in the community of Rio Sellas for so long because the Police Department didn’t file a civil injunction order against the gang members sooner. In the past the police department didn’t put their

-Judicial review is when the court examines a decision of an agency. Judicial Review is conducted to make sure the agency as not violated constitutional rights in the for of procedural due process, substantive due process, and equal protection. Within this process the court also makes sure the court has not acted beyond its delegated powers.

Phase 2James Dunbar is the representative of the commercial organization that was assembled by Chief Moore, which is a profit-driven agency. I will take the role by James Dunbar in the project of bringing down the Very Bad Bike Club (VBBC) when it becomes successful. This will help our organization Dunbar to form a partnership with VPD and the Virtual Commercial Merchants’ Association. Moreover, it will be a stepping stone to more contracts with the larger jurisdictions. This will make Dunbar fulfill their primary objective of making more profits since the members will have motivation. My organization is devoted towards achieving the primary objective of eradicating criminals. As from the records by VPD, though there is no sufficient investigations

To the untrained eye it might appear that most criminal trails are simple in nature. However even the most mundane case is a well-managed event even though may it lack the drama of a high profile case. No matter the importance, all cases require a number of participants, each of who has a different role to fulfill. These participants are divided into two categories: professional and outsiders. The professional are the official courtroom-working group, such as the judge and lawyers. While the outside participants are those members who are temporary such as the jurors and witnesses.

As the “tough on crime” mantra appears to becoming a thing of the past, one thing is for certain, 2015 will be one of the best years in modern history to be a “bad guy.” Yes, all over the country, our criminal justice system is transitioning away from being tough on criminals to something more of a friend to criminals. In other words, punishment and accountability are no longer the answers to preventing crime. Instead, those concepts have been replaced with more politically correct soft on crime concepts of “more understanding” and “more caring” towards those who are accused of crimes. Now proponents of this approach often say that they aren’t being soft on crime, but rather they are just being “smart on crime.” While well intentioned

Community Prosecution is a problem-oriented, proactive approach. As each community has its own social needs, community prosecution is shaped directly by the needs and dysfunction of communities. “Prosecutors have the responsibility not only to prosecute cases but also to reduce crime” (Neubaeur & Fradella, 2014). The key to success is then found in working directly within communities through neighborhood offices. Prosecutorial dictates are detrimental to community prosecution. Therefore, change can only occur through effective partnerships with community stakeholders that help to shape the crime-fighting agenda.

Court observations provide excellent opportunities to witness some of the most crucial work that occurs in North Carolina’s criminal justice system. My observation of a Superior Court session at the Watauga County Courthouse highlighted some of the concepts that have been included in our class discussions. For example, every case during my two and a half hours at the courthouse consisted of a plea bargain between the defense and the prosecution. For each plea deal, the judge followed the same procedure: asking questions regarding the defendant’s education level, current drug and alcohol use, citizenship