Community Justice Initiatives in the Galena District Court

This article examines a community outreach program in rural Alaska whereby an Alaska Court System judge uses restorative justice principles in village sentencing hearings.[Introduction] / Community Involvement / Restorative Community Outreach in the Yukon-Koyukuk Region / Using Talking Circles to Generate Community Recommendations / ConclusionYe

Restorative Justice: Theory, Processes, and Application in Rural Alaska

An exploration of the principles behind using restorative justice as an alternate form of sentencing in criminal cases, with a focus particularly on how restorative justice might be of benefit in rural Alaska. Includes a bibliography. A sidebar, "Restorative Justice Programs and Sentencing", looks at amendments to Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure 11(i) and Delinquency Rules 21(d)(3) and 23(f) which describe the requirements for referral to a restorative justice program as part of the sentencing process.[Introduction] / Restorative Justice / Restorative Processes / Victim-Offender Mediation / Conferencing / Circles / Restorative Processes in Rural Alaska / Conclusion / SIDEBARS / Restorative Justice Programs and Sentencing / Change to Alaska Criminal Rule 11 / Restorative Justice ReferencesYe

McMinnville Habitat for Humanity: Homeownership and Resources Survey

This report outlines the overall satisfaction that homeowners feel in regards to their new homes provided through the Habitat for Humanity program. Details include the overall building experience for Habitat for Humanity homeowners, and the report also includes aspects of possible improvement in the Habitat for Humanity program

Alvarado Revisited: A Missing Element in Alaska’s Quest to Provide Impartial Juries for Rural Alaskans

In Alvarado v. State, the Alaska Supreme Court declared that an impartial jury is a cross section of the community and that the community where the events at issue transpired must be represented in the jury. This decision spurred changes to jury selection procedures and the creation of Criminal Rule 18, an effort to ensure defendants from remote villages are judged by a jury representative of these rural areas. The Alaska Court of Appeals recently addressed an issue of first impression regarding the application of Criminal Rule 18. In Joseph v. State, the defendant was convicted of murdering his girlfriend in the tiny Native village of Rampart. His trial was conducted in Fairbanks by a jury selected from an area that does not include Rampart or any other similar Native village. Criminal Rule 18 allowed the defendant a limited time to transfer his trial to Nenana, which more closely resembles the characteristics of Rampart. However, the defendant was never informed of this right. His trial counsel believed trial location was a decision for the attorney and did not see a need to request the change. In a memorandum opinion that creates no binding precedent, the Court of Appeals agreed with this view and held it did not violate the defendant’s due process rights not to be informed of the opportunity to have his case heard at an alternative trial site. This Article challenges that view, arguing it fails to safeguard the spirit and purpose of the constitutional right to an impartial jury. To remote villagers in Bush Alaska whose customs, culture, and ways of life are vastly different than in larger cities within the state, the opportunity to be judged by those sharing similarities is of upmost importance. Consequently, decisions of trial venue, for purposes of Criminal Rule 18, should be knowingly made or waived by the defendant

The Anchorage, Alaska Municipal Pretrial Diversion Program: An Initial Assessment

Pretrial diversion programs have the potential to prevent future criminal behavior through intervention and community based services. This may be particularly true for specific populations of offenders such as those with mental illness, substance abuse disorder, and those with co-occuring disorders. Pretrial diversion programs take low-level offenders out of the jail population, both reducing system overpopulation and costs of incarceration. The programs also provide speedy case processing for minor crimes resulting in savings to the court system and personnel. Pretrial diversion can help an offender avoid a criminal conviction and potentially avoid future criminal violations. Results indicate that most Anchorage pretrial defendants comply with and complete the pretrial conditions in a very short time period, an additional savings in case processing time. This research details the initial assessment of the Anchorage Municipal Prosecutor Pretrial Diversion program. This assessment examines system savings in time and money, as well as policy implications for the justice system that may assist other jurisdictions as they consider implementing a pretrial diversion program

The Anchorage, Alaska Municipal Pretrial Diversion Program: Initial Outcome Assessment

This report provides an initial outcome assessment of the Anchorage Municipal Pretrial Diversion Program, a voluntary program aimed at diverting first-time offenders in certain criminal and traffic cases from traditional case processing, with successful complion of the terms of the program resulting in dismissal of charges. Pretrial diversion agreements under AMC 08.05.060 typically require the defendant to pay a fine or do community work service, usually within a month. The initial assessment examines offender completion under the program, adherence to conditions of probation, and time and cost savings for the Anchorage Municipal Prosecutor's Office.Office of the Anchorage Municipal Prosecutor, Municipality of Anchorage, AKAcknowledgments / Section I: Executive Summary / Counts and Charges of Defendants Offered Pretrial Diversion / Demographic Variations Among Defendants Offered Pretrial Diversion / Conditions of Pretrial Diversion / Length of Time for Pretrial Diversion Processes / Number of Court Hearings and Estimated Time Spent / Section II: Introduction / Section III: Literature Review / Descriptions of Pretrial Diversion / Pretrial Diversion in the United States / Description of Pretrial Diversion in Anchorage / Section IV: Methods / Data Collection / Section VI: Findings / Counts and Charges of Defendants Offered Pretrial Diversion / Demographic Variations Among Defendants Offered Pretrial Diversion / Conditions of Pretrial Diversion / Length of Time for Pretrial Diversion Processes / Number of Court Hearings and Estimated Time Spent / Section VII: Conclusion / References / Appendix: Anchorage Municipal Pretrial Diversion Data Collection For

systemfit: A Package for Estimating Systems of Simultaneous Equations in R

Many statistical analyses (e.g., in econometrics, biostatistics and experimental design) are based on models containing systems of structurally related equations. The systemfit package provides the capability to estimate systems of linear equations within the R programming environment. For instance, this package can be used for "ordinary least squares" (OLS), "seemingly unrelated regression" (SUR), and the instrumental variable (IV) methods "two-stage least squares" (2SLS) and "three-stage least squares" (3SLS), where SUR and 3SLS estimations can optionally be iterated. Furthermore, the systemfit package provides tools for several statistical tests. It has been tested on a variety of datasets and its reliability is demonstrated.

Russian gas games or well-oiled conflict? Energy security and the 2014 Ukraine crisis

This essay explores the link between energy security and the 2014 Ukraine crisis. Whenever there is an international conflict involving a major oil or gas producer, commentators are often quick to assume a direct link, and the Ukraine crisis was no exception. Yet, the various avenues through which energy politics have affected the Ukraine crisis, and vice versa, are not well understood. This paper seeks to shed light on the issue by addressing two specific questions. First, how exactly did energy contribute to the crisis in the region? Second, can energy be wielded as a ‘weapon’ by Russia, the EU, or the US? We find that Russian gas pricing played a crucial role as a context factor in igniting the Ukrainian crisis, yet at the same time we guard against ‘energy reductionism’, that is, the fallacy of attributing all events to energy-related issues. We also note that there are strict limits to the so-called energy weapon, whoever employs it. In the conclusion we provide a discussion of the policy implications of these findings