Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects of the main argument but not all.

This assignment aligns with the chapter objective for this week. The point value is 20 points, and you may complete this assignment in teams of two.
Proposition 57, the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, substantially amended the process by which juvenile offenders may be transferred to the jurisdiction of the criminal court by (1) eliminating the authority of prosecutors to directly file petitions in criminal court and (2) requiring that the juvenile court hold a hearing and determine if a transfer is appropriate. Before Proposition 57, the prosecutor can initiate a transfer hearing when:
The minor is 16 years or older and is alleged to have committed any felony or a crime listed in W&I Code 707(b); OR
The suspect was 14 or 15 when he/she allegedly committed an offense specified in W&I Code 707(b), AND the minor was not apprehended until he/she was 18.
**Review Jordan’s response to the community’s Invitation to Comment on proposed amendments to Prop 57 by the Judicial Commission. Jordan’s review will give you a clear roadmap of Prop 57.
Jordan’s ReviewActionsMinimize File Preview
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=707.&lawCode=WICLinks to an external site.
TASKS:
Review the case information from the link noted below. (Start @ pg. 32)
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff, and Respondent, v. JACK EMMIT WILLIAMS,
Actions
Minimize File Preview
II. Summarize the facts of the case.
III. Respond to the following questions:
Q: Would you have supported the transfer of jurisdiction from juvenile to adult court in this case?
Q: Is your decision different than in the case of Charlie victim who witnessed George violently attacking his mother (previous assignment case)? Articulate why your decision either aligns or differs from the perspective of George’s case.
Review the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) report prepared by Richard E. Redding (2010) entitled Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency? The article is accessible from the link below. Research findings ? indicate that youth handled in criminal courts have higher recidivism rates when compared with similar youth processed in juvenile court.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/220595.pdf.Links to an external site.
*Respond to the following questions:
Q: Based on the information in the article, are juvenile transfer laws an effective deterrent to delinquency?
Q: After reviewing Redding’s report, would you have supported transferring the case to criminal or adult court in Brenda?* Video on Brenda’s case is accessible in 8.3 Discussion Board.
Q: Explain your rationale for your position.
Q: What are your conclusions about transfer laws? Do transfer laws “work”?
Noted below is the link that provides a tutorial for student collaboration in Canvas Groups.
https://community.canvaslms.com/docs/DOC-10516-421264913Links to an external site.
Rubric
Rubric: Chapter Review Assignment (3) (1)
Rubric: Chapter Review Assignment (3) (1)
CriteriaRatingsPts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent/Conceptualization
12 to >11.0 ptsResponse displays a full understanding of the complexity of the issue addressed and multiple points of view. Recognizes varied interpretations and implications. excellent exposition, clearly and concisely written, well argued, and displaying good original input from the student.
Author directly addresses main question or issue, and adds new insight to the subject not provided in lectures, readings, or class discussions. The author has retained nearly all of the knowledge presented in class. He/She is able to synthesize this knowledge in new ways and relate to material not covered in the course. Provides compelling and accurate evidence that convinces reader to accept main argument. The importance/relevance of all pieces of evidence is clearly stated. There are no gaps in reasoning—i.e., the reader does not need to assume anything or do additional research to accept main argument. Conclusion-Elegantly synthesizes and reframes key points from the paper. Suggests new perspectives or questions relevant to the central argument, and brings closure
11 to >9.0 ptsGood exposition, but lacks clarity and concision, or doesn’t have much original input, or offers poor support for important claims.
Author competently addresses main question or issue, but does not add much new insight into the subject. That said, it is clear that the author has learned a great deal in class and is able to communicate this knowledge to others. Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects of the main argument but not all. The importance/ relevance of some evidence presented may not be totally clear. Reader must make a few mental leaps or do some additional research to fully accept all aspects of main argument. Conclusion-Synthesizes and brings closure but does not examine new perspectives or questions
9 to >7.0 ptsNo Description
Response does not address some aspects of the assignment. (and/or…) Response demonstrates a somewhat shaky grasp of criminological principles. The response represents the authors’ arguments, evidence and conclusions accurately though not sufficiently clearly. (and/or…) Conclusion-Restates the same points as the topic paragraph without reframing them. (and/or…) Introduces new material rather than new perspectives.
7 to >5.0 ptsNo Description
Author attempts to address main question or issue, but fails. The author has retained some information from the course, but does not fully understand its meaning or context and cannot clearly convey it to others. Not enough evidence is provided to support author’s argument, or evidence is incomplete, incorrect, or oversimplified. Information from lectures and readings is not effectively used. Conclusion-Is missing or cursory. (and/or…) Repeats the topic paragraph more-or-less verbatim.
5 to >4.0 ptsNo Description
Fails to understand some aspects of the material, and/or is very unclearly written. Main points lack detailed development. Ideas are vague with little evidence of critical thinking. Shows some thinking and reasoning but most ideas are underdeveloped and unoriginal.
4 to >1.0 ptsNo Description
Response does not address the assignment. Fails to follow format and assignment requirements; incorrect margins, spacing and indentation; neatness of essay needs attention.
1 to >0 ptsDid not submit a paper; plagiarized material; made no effort to understand the material or shows no sign of having read it.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization/Structure/Mechanics
4 to >3.0 ptsFull Marks
Essay contains an intro, main body, and conclusion. Introduction lays out main argument and gives an outline of what the reader can expect in the essay. The conclusion brings everything together, acknowledges potential shortcomings of the paper, and gives the reader a sense of what further work might be done to advance the subject matter described in the paper.
3 to >2.0 ptsNo Description
The introduction gives the reader an idea of what to expect in the paper, but does not effectively lay out the main argument. It may begin with a set of rhetorical questions, or an anecdote that is never fully explained. The conclusion does little more than restate the problematic introduction. Intro and/or conclusion may be too wordy or short.
2 to >0 ptsNo Marks
Essay has no clear organizational pattern.
4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpelling/Grammar/APA
4 to >3.0 ptsFull Marks
All sentences are grammatically correct and clearly written. No words are misused or unnecessarily fancy. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are always explained. All information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread (ideally by you and somebody else), and contains no errors
3 to >2.0 ptsNo Description
A few sentences are grammatically incorrect or not clearly written. Several words are misused. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are rarely explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread, but still contains several errors. Reader’s ability to understand essay may be compromised by these errors.
2 to >0 ptsNo Marks
Paper is full of grammatical errors and bad writing. Several words are misused. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are rarely explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has not been spell-checked or proofread, and contains numerous errors. Reader has a difficult time understanding essay because of errors.
4 pts
Total Points: 20
PreviousNext

Do you need any assistance with this question?
Send us your paper details now
We’ll find the best professional writer for you!