Policies in Los Angeles, California: Comparison and Contrast Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction: Policies Statement

Los Angeles policies are directed at maintaining law in the society. Being a criminally overloaded region of the USA, California police tries to do all possible to implement order, protect obedient citizens and punish criminals. There are three levels of jurisdiction in the USA, federal, state and local. It has always been a rule that federal policies are directed at treason, piracy, and counterfeiting, however, the increased rate of crimes have made it necessary for the government to create a number of policies and regulations which violation leads to many years of imprisonment (Anderson & Jackson, 2004). It is generally accepted that there are two specific models, conflict and crime control and consensus and due process ones. To consider the model which exists in the Californian society, two policies are going to be compared and contrasted with the reference to their effectiveness and the role of different criminal justice system components in their implementation.

Conflict and Crime Control Model vs. Consensus and Due Process Model

Considering conflict and crime control and consensus and due process models, it should be stated that they have different goals and therefore implement various tasks. Packer (2004) describes in detail the contradictory aspects of these models. Pointing at the polar differences of these two models, Packer (2004) also dwells upon similar grounds, such as the US Constitution, the limits to the governmental rights to investigate and arrest people suspected in crimes, the procedural process, a day in court, and some other assumptions which are obligatory for legal systems no matter which model is implemented.

Crime Control Model is explained by the importance of repression of criminal conduct, while Due Process Model is aimed at preventing and eliminating crimes. To understand the differences of these models in detail, the following features should be considered. Criminal justice should be gained via repression of crime in Crime Control Model, while in Due Process Model criminal justice is achieved via fundamental fairness of the legal process. According to Crime Control Model, police power should be directed at investigation where fact-finding is highly reliable. In case of Due Process Model, police power should be aimed at elimination of oppression of a person and the facts should not be used as the proofs for persons guiltiness unless legal procedures are followed (Packer, 2004).

Having an intention to compare and contrast California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) and Consent Decree (2009), it should be stated that these policies tend to be guided by two different models. While California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) is guided by Public Order or Crime Control Model, as it is directed at controlling order rather than protecting human rights and sacrificing human freedoms for maintaining order in the society. Consent Decree (2009) contradicts some aspects of the California Three Strikes Law (1994) that makes it Due Process Model, aimed at civil rights and stressing on control power of the law enforcement.

The Role of Law Enforcement in the Policies

Police department plays an important role in the implementation of each of these two policies as they have much impact on each of the components of criminal justice system. In the relation to California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994), law enforcement plays important role as it is aimed at monitoring those who have already been convinced and bringing those to jail in case second or third crime is committed. According to the policy, the law shall not apply to a person convicted of selling, furnishing, administering, or giving, or offering to sell, furnish, administer, or give to a minor any methamphetamine-related drug or any precursors of methamphetamine, thus the fact-finding testimonies of police officers are really important as they may be considered as crucial evidence. The role of police on Consent Decree (2009) is much lower as this policy is mostly directed at corrections agencies which are to perform their direct responsibilities.

The Roles of the Prosecutor and Courts in the Policies

The impact of courts in California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) is important as it prescribes a criminal for 25-years-to-life sentences for offenders with two prior serious or violent felony convictions who are convicted of a third felony, whether or not the third felony is serious or violent (Beres & Griffith, 1998, p. 101). It means that it is a courts responsibility to identify a crime committed by a person as disobedience or violent and serious felonies. Therefore, a failure to consider the testimonies and evidence correctly leads to the wrong verdict and a person may be imprisoned for many years in the future no matter whether the crime committed is violent or not.

Consent Decree (2009) is also subjected to the impact of courts as the sentences they pass influence criminals destinies. Thus, this policy is aimed at decreasing the number of inmates in jails by means of releasing those who have been convicted for minor drug offences. Courts bear responsibility to sentencing those who fall under this definition. Therefore, it may be concluded that even though California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) and Consent Decree (2009) operate under different models of legal enforcement, the courts component of criminal jurisdiction system is equally applied.

The Role of Corrections in the Policies

The role of corrections agencies in both cases is significant. Considering California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994), it should be stated that professionals point at the increase of the number of inmates in jails with the policy adoption. Generally, according to the information provided by CDCR, 44% of prisoners were convicted of a serious or violent current offense while 56% on inmates were convicted of nonserious or nonviolent offenses (Brown, & Jolivette, 2005, p. 18).

Looking at the implementation of Consent Decree (2009), it is important to state that the corrections agencies were the initiators of this policy. The jails are overcrowded and the inmates are not offered appropriate treatment. Living conditions are awful, elderly people are not treated in accordance with their age, people are not offered appropriate medical attention. Thus, corrections agencies impact the implementation of Consent Decree greatly. It may be even presupposed that Consent Decree (2004) was the issues because of the California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) as the latter is considered to be one of the main reasons for the increase of the inmates in all Californian prisons, and, as a result, in Los Angeles jails as well (Brown, & Jolivette, 2005).

A Difference between Federal Application and State and Local Application of Policies

It should be stated that in the relation to Three Strikes Law, the implementation of this policy varies from state to state. Much difference is applied on the way the prosecutors and judges implement this policy on the local level. Federal, state and local agencies have various opinions about the means of handling this legislation and, therefore, the policy application differs in some content (Brown, & Jolivette, 2005).

State and federal implementation of policies is similar in the procedure, however each prosecutor applies this or that policy in a different way. Considering more global and more serious crimes, federal court may increase the time of imprisonment for a person under the Three Strikes Law, while the state court will follow the policy recommendations and prescribe the length of the imprisonment required by the law. Federal and state courts consider different crimes which vary in the seriousness of the criminal act, thus, the sentences also vary.

Personal Opinion of These Policies

In my opinion, these two policies have different purposes which cannot be agreed. Thus, California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) is a necessary policy which aims at reducing the cases of recidivism. Implementing the Crime Control Model, this policy is aimed at conducting order in the society by means of strict measures in the relation to criminals. Police play crucial role in implementing this policy as they are responsible for presenting fact-finding evidence for court procedures.

As for me, Consent Decree (2004) is a reaction to the increase of the inmates in prisons and it aims at limiting the effect of the policy mentioned above. Consent Decree (2004) is also important for society as even being prisoners, people deserve appropriate attitude. Moreover, all people are protected under the Fourteens Amendment of the constitution and Consent Decree (2004) reminds corrections agencies about their direct responsibility.

I cannot give preference to any of the discussed policies as California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) is a significant step on the way to reducing the recidivism in Californian criminal world, while Consent Decree (2004) protects human rights. The first policy results in increasing the number of criminals in jails due to lengthy terms of imprisonment, while the second policy demands from the corrections agencies and courts regulate the situation in such a way that the number of inmates reduces to affordable rate.

Conclusion: Measurement of the Effectiveness of These Policies

In conclusion, it should be stated that the effectiveness of the policies has already been measured from different angles. However, scholars are unable to come to the similar conclusion. Using FBI indexes, it was stated that California Three Strikes Law Statute (1994) was effective as the rate of crimes with the implementation of the law reduced from year to year (Beres, & Griffith, 1998).

Consent Decree (2004) may be also considered as a positively influenced policy as the rate of serious crimes in Los Angeles has reduced from the day of its implementation (Stone, Foglesong, & Cole, 2009). Proper organization and collaboration of all three components of criminal jurisdiction system may bring effective results, based on the reduction of the criminal cases in the society. Having considered two different policies, it may be concluded that the number of crimes may be reduced by means of two of the policies, however due to different models used as the basis for their development they are unable to co-exist in one society.

Reference List

Anderson, W., & Jackson, C. (2004). Law as a weapon. Independent Review, 9(1), 85-97.

Beres, L. S., & Griffith, T. D. (1998). Did three strikes cause the recent drop in California crime? An analysis of the California attorney generals report. Loyola of Los Angeles law review, 32, 101-132). A primer: Three Strikes, the impact after more than a decade. Legislative Analysts Office. Web.

California Three Strikes Law Statute. (1994). Attorney Search Network. Web.

Consent Decree: United States of America vs. City of Los Angeles, California, Board of Police Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles, and the Los Angeles Police Department. (2009). CIVIL NO. 00-11769 GAF.

Packer, H. L. (2004). Two Models of the Criminal Process. In J. E. Jacoby (Ed.), Classics of criminology (pp. 398-411). Long Grove: Waveland Press.

Stone, C., Foglesong, T., & Cole, C. M. (2009). Policing Los Angeles under a Consent Decree: The dynamics of change at the LAPD. Program in criminal justice policy and management Harvard Kennedy school. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!