PROPOSITION 21.   Term Paper ID:30796 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Examines the 2000 California ballot measure.... More...

8 Pages / 1800 Words 7 sources, 22 Citations, MLA Format $32.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Examines the 2000 California ballot measure. Presents argument for and against the "get-tough" initiative which passed. Changes in the juvenile justice system resulting from Prop 21. Legal definition of juvenile. Philosophy of juvenile courts. Issues of public safety, youth gangs, growing violence of juvenile crimes, treatment of juveniles. Contends the inititative is flawed. Paper Introduction: Juvenile crime has become one of America’s most prominent issues, even as the overall crime rate has declined to the lowest point in decades. Several celebrated cases have helped create an image of teenagers run amok and younger and younger kids committing major felonies. Once apprehended, these children enter a juvenile justice system that many claim utilizes an outdated approach. In some cases, murderers have gone free at age 25 simply because that is the incarceration limit for the juvenile justice system. In response, an advocacy group placed a get-tough measure (called Proposition 21) on the California ballot. This initiative, which passed overwhelmingly (62 percent to 38 percent), calls for dramatic changes in the juvenile justice system. This paper will examine Proposition 21, highlighting the argum Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. Analysts predict thatCalifornia's economy will actually outpace the nation's in the next fewyears. "Did 'Three Strikes' Cause the Recent Drop in California Crime? Such political motivations almost inevitably lead to badlaw, as happened here. The state punished them like adults. Meanwhile, most states also set a maximum age (suchas 21 or 25) where juvenile system authority over a young personterminates. Many juveniles will end up in adult prisons, and probation is greatlyrestricted under the initiative. Moreover, judges aresupposed to make tough calls (San Jose Mercury News). "Crack Down on Juvenile Crime." The Bakersfield Californian (February 9, 2 ): www.bakersfield.com/edt/ i--1261995138.asp- - -. The opponents' stance has some weaknesses. The status of "child" did not existfor most of history. Fourth, Proposition 21 will cost $33 million a year, plus another one-time charge of $75 million. TheCalifornia legislature already passed a bill that mandates automaticremoval to Superior Court for any juvenile 16 or older charged with afelony with a prior (San Jose Mercury News). The initiative altersjuvenile court jurisdiction by giving the Superior Court jurisdiction overdefendants 14 years or older who are charged with violent felonies. In most states, that age is 18, while others set 17 and a handful use 16.The criminal justice system of each state also sets limits on when theadult criminal system can intervene (for California, it is 14). Juvenile crime has become one of America's most prominent issues, evenas the overall crime rate has declined to the lowest point in decades.Several celebrated cases have helped create an image of teenagers run amokand younger and younger kids committing major felonies. The defendant could argue against that motion,and the prosecutor had the burden in that hearing (called a "fitnesshearing"). It goes way too far. Thus, although backers claimthat Proposition 21 does not target petty offenders, it eventually willimpact such people because it will drain resources away from other programs(San Jose Mercury News). Previously, waiver had been at the discretion of the judge after amotion by the prosecutor. Of course, this argument rests on the premise that teen crime actuallyhas exploded and actually will continue to do so. After the state legislature rejected itin 1998, he gathered signatures and had it put on the ballot for 2 ,apparently believing it would help his presidential aspirations (San JoseMercury News). The clause alsoincludes penalty enhancements for gang offenses committed near schools andfor threats against witnesses. This initiative will not change theway the system deals with petty offenders. So maybe the arrests reflect improved police work or better reporting,or a combination of the two factors. It does not. The treatment of juveniles after trial also changes under Proposition21. Finally, while it seems that the backers of Proposition 21 wereconcerned about some possible loopholes in the juvenile justice system,their initiative is overkill. According to initiativebackers, arrests of juveniles have increased by 46 to 54 percent (dependingon which agency and time period). The backers, however, never define whatthat increase is based against. Districtattorneys face election every four years. The most important provisions of Proposition 21 are the amendments tothe California Welfare and Institutions Code. The solution, they say, is lock upmore juveniles. Second, treating juveniles as adults in criminal cases may actuallycreate criminals rather than deterring them. Fourth, Proposition 21 will streamline the process. Regardless, the statistics aredubious at best, as is the assumption that the increase in juvenilepopulation will lead to a commensurate increase in juvenile crime. No state tries more juvenilesas adults than Florida. It revises theCalifornia Penal Code to make street gang members liable for the acts ofthe entire organization based on a charge of conspiracy. These days, however, changes are neededto insure public safety. Another provision adds murder by a gang member (for the benefit of thegang) to the list of offenses that carry the sentence of life imprisonmentwithout the possibility of parole. In response, an advocacy group placed a get-tough measure (calledProposition 21) on the California ballot. Crime has declined dramatically in all phases, includingjuvenile crime. In addition, the code is amended so that juvenile criminal recordswill no longer be expunged and so that juvenile defendants will no longerautomatically be released to their parents pending trial. The first part of Proposition 21 addresses gangs. Yet California already locks up more juveniles than anyother state, at a rate more than twice the national average (SacramentoBee). Though California's decline has not equaled the restof the nation, that may be a function of the fact that the state's economylagged the nation's for much of the 199 s. Department of Justice. "No on Proposition 21: Juvenile Jail Spending Robs Education and Prevention" Sacramento Bee (February 14, 2 ): www.sacbee.com/voices/news/old/ voices 1_2 214.html First,crime has declined. Other provisions penalize adults who useviolence or the threat of violence to coerce juveniles into gangparticipation (California Secretary of State). That is the current situation, and it isfailing (Californians to End Gang Violence). Thejuvenile court's jurisdiction will be waived, and the case removed toSuperior Court, upon application from the prosecutor. The propositionalso expands the use of prior offenses in making determinations of whethera juvenile defendant should be removed to Superior Court (CaliforniaSecretary of State). It addresses habitual offenders, and by keeping them off the streetsfor longer periods, society will be safer because they will not be able tocommit more crimes and because police will be able to direct theirresources elsewhere (The Bakersfield Californian). True, very fewviolent offenders receive such treatment, but some do. Yet studies have shown that youths sent throughthe adult system are twice as likely to commit another crime as thoseprocessed by the juvenile court system (San Jose Mercury News). This paper will examine Proposition 21,highlighting the arguments for and against the initiative, and submit thatthe initiative ultimately is a fatally flawed attempt to correct a problemthat has been greatly overstated. Would a 16-year-old gang member be sufficiently deterred fromtaking a life if he knows that, at worst, the California Youth Authoritycan only hold him until age 25? Moreover, the authors claim that while new laws(such as the Three Strikes Law) have succeeded in reducing the crime rate,"[v]iolent juvenile crime has proven most resistant to this positivetrend." This problem of youth and gang violence will only increase asCalifornia's population of young people continues its rapid growth, aspredicted (California Secretary of State). Such offenses are properly handled bythe Superior Court, which can mete out proper punishment and send the rightmessage. "Generally, the idea of juvenile law is that childrendo not have the maturity to grasp the import of criminality, and, thus,offenders are more in need of rehabilitation than incarceration" (TheBakersfield Californian). The juvenile court philosophy of rehabilitation andtreatment of juvenile offenders was adopted at a time when most juvenilecrime consisted of petty offenses. A juvenile is a young person who has yet to reach the age of majority. Similarly, theCalifornia Department of Justice reported a 54 percent increase in juvenilearrests for violent crimes between 1986 and 1995 (California Secretary ofState). Third, Proposition 21 works on the same principle as the Three StrikesLaw. Kids who commit crimessuch as murder or rape are often beyond rehabilitation, and thus beyond thescope of the juvenile court mandate. Works CitedBeres, Linda S., and Griffith, Thomas D. Second, the current system does not provide enough punishment ordeterrence for juveniles who commit serious crimes. The juvenile court system willhandle petty offenders like it always has (Californians to End GangViolence). They want to appear tough oncrime. Judges have todecide which can be plucked out and rehabilitated and which can't" (Lucas). According to the initiative's authors, street gangs pose a substantialthreat to public safety. Proposition 21, however, insures that will be the case byvesting prosecutors with the power to make this decision. Unfortunately, the state of California is stuckwith this last legacy of the Wilson Administration. Did violent crimeincrease during the period in question? This initiative, which passedoverwhelmingly (62 percent to 38 percent), calls for dramatic changes inthe juvenile justice system. That philosophy is woefully out of dateat a time when juveniles are increasingly committing violent crimes, and itleaves the public at risk (California Secretary of State). However, the weaknesses in the proponents' position are many. The penalties for vandalism areincreased, and penalty enhancements are added to the California Penal Codefor home invasion robberies and carjackings. For example, how does it compare to therate of increase violent crime arrests generally? Opponents counter that Proposition 21 is a bloated, overreachingattempt to address a problem that does not exist. Backers of Proposition 21 state their justification in theinitiative's findings and declarations. Under Proposition 21, removal to Superior Court is solely atthe prosecutor's discretion, and is mandated for any crime, if committed byan adult, that would carry penalties of execution or life imprisonmentwithout the possibility of parole (California Secretary of State). First,the initiative does not represent a dramatic break in philosophy, butrather a recognition of the fact that the current juvenile system fails toaddress the most serious offenders. Once apprehended,these children enter a juvenile justice system that many claim utilizes anoutdated approach. First, the changes areunnecessary. Moreover, almost all juveniles over the age of 14 chargeswith a violent felony already are tried as adults (Sacramento Bee). An Analysis of the California Attorney General's Report." Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 32 (November 1998): 1 1-131.California Secretary of State. Children were property until they reached age five orsix. The system cannotbe perceived as arbitrary, and the system cannot abandon victims' familiesmerely because the perpetrator is not 18. "Crackdown on Kids?" San Jose Mercury News (January 19, 2 ): www.mercurycenter.com/opinion/election/prop21.htm.Lucas, Greg. Inevitably funding for preventionprograms will suffer, programs that work. "Proposition 21: Huge Changes Proposed for Juvenile Justice." San Francisco Chronicle (February 14, 2 ): www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/ archive/2 / 2/14/MN36365.DTL- - -. How does expansion ofwiretaps reform a juvenile justice system that is supposedly allowingmurderers to go free at age 25? Thus, a 16-year-old convicted of murder in juvenile court mustbe released from custody at age 25, with his juvenile record expunged. Juvenile courts are a recent phenomenon (dating only to 1899) becausethe notion of a juvenile is recent. Forexample, depending on the state, children as young as 1 can be "waived"into the adult system. The Legislative Analyst prepared thoseestimates, which the initiative's proponents did not take into account.Where will that money come from? In other words, California, by adoptingProposition 21, abandoned the traditional philosophy of juvenile justice. Superior Courtjurisdiction over juveniles is mandated for certain crimes, includingmurder, rape, and other sex offenses (California Secretary of State). While the overall crime rate hasdeclined, juvenile arrests for serious crimes grew by 46 percent from 1983to 1992, according to the U.S. Juvenile courts replaced that philosophy with a belief inrehabilitation and treatment. Those under a certain age should not be held to the samestandard as adults. After reaching that age, the child had to act according to the samemandates as adults. Indeed, juvenile judges opposed the initiative because they feel "theyare in the best position to decide what makes sense for an individualchild," said Rob Waring, the judges' counsel. The initiative also allowsexpanded use of wiretaps against gangs and requires convicted gang membersto register with state and local authorities (California Secretary ofState). Currently, toremove a juvenile case to Superior Court, the prosecutor must petition thejuvenile court, and a fitness hearing follows, plus a report on the child.This process can take months, depriving victims' families of justice.Moreover, if the trial is held in juvenile court, the victims' familiescannot attend because such proceedings are closed to the public. Youthful indiscretions should not haunt aperson forever. In some cases, murderers have gone free at age 25simply because that is the incarceration limit for the juvenile justicesystem. The reason for the initiative's overreaching is that it began life asGovernor Pete Wilson's proposal. Inevitably, political considerations will play a part in thisdecision, so it is best left to judges, who are subject to fewer politicalpressures (they only face election every 12 years). According to the authors of Proposition 21, thatphilosophy suited a simpler era. "Text of Proposition 21." http: //vote2 .ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/21text.htmCalifornians to End Gang Violence. Backers of Proposition 21do raise some important issues, such as the fact that juvenile records areoften expunged and offenders are released at age 25. Second, according to proponents of Proposition 21, California isfacing an epidemic of juvenile crime. No. Third, the decision of whether to try a juvenile should not be basedon politics. In that case, look for the state's crime rate to decline further,which runs counter to the proponents' view that we are about to experiencea juvenile crime wave because of an explosion in population among youngpeople (Beres and Griffith 112). "Proposition 21." www.votersdigest.com/yeson21/- - -. The solution to these problems, according to the authors, lies injunking the current juvenile justice system and making it more like theadult courts. Indeed, Proposition 21 will free up the juvenile courts fromhaving to hear so many major felony cases and allow them to address theirtrue mission-rehabilitating and treating juvenile delinquents (Lucas). "The analogy would be to ariver and children are floating downstream in need of help. If that has failed, how can locking up even more kids be thesolution? Proponents cite several arguments in favor of Proposition 21. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.

Many of our Papers can be Downloaded From This Site!

PLEASE READ THIS, IT IS IMPORTANT!

Office hours are Monday through Friday, from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). You may place orders for custom research over the phone during office hours. E-mail requests can be made to our graduate and undergraduate department any time, and will be reviewed during office hours. You may also contact customer service any time through e-mail, and we will review your message during business hours. A great many papers can be downloaded right from this site, but not all of them. If you would like to know if a particular paper is downloadable, just look in the description for: "Available for Internet Download: Y" or "Available for Internet Download: N" If you wish to purchase a paper which is NOT available for immediate download, you will need to make other shipping arrangements. Also, please be aware that these orders are processed Monday through Friday from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). If you place your order after 4:45pm on Friday, it will not be processed until the following Monday morning. We charge $8 per page for all of our pre-written reports, plus shipping (and tax for California residents). However, the highest cost of any ONE report is $136, or 17 pages. Please, take a moment. Make sure you have chosen the report you want or need BEFORE you complete your order. If you are not sure, allow us to help you. We do not offer refunds or exchanges, so it is important for you to let us answer your questions during office hours. Reports which are e-mailed or downloaded are in Microsoft Word format. We are making more reports available for e-mail delivery faster than we can update our listings. Please call to check on the status of particular reports. There are many other shipping options which are listed on the Checkout page.