Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Heidelberg, 1972. / Bibliography: p. 282-289.

Univ., Diss.--Göttingen, 2002.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Florida State University, 2005. / Advisor: Dr. Marc Gertz, Florida State University, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed June 9, 2005). Document formatted into pages; contains x, 179 pages. Includes bibliographical references.

Inaug. Diss. -- Freiburg i.B. / Bibliography: p. v-vi.

Dissertation--Zürich. / Curriculum vitae. "Rechtquellen [und] literatur": p. [x]-xii.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Zürich, 1947. / Vita. Bibliography: p. xix-xxvi.

Text in Afrikaans / Weens die gebrek aan wetenskaplike bewerking van die legaliteitsbeginsel in die strafprosesreg, moet leiding gesoek word by leerstukke en beginsels van die staatsreg wat gemoeid is met die onderdaan-staatsgesagproblematiek (rule of law, die regstaat, due process of law en menseregte) asook by die legaliteitsbeginsel in die strafreg. 'n Leerstelling wat gemeenskaplik aan al hierdie leerstukke en beginsels is, is dat willekeurige owerheidsgesagsuitoefening teenoor die regsonderdaan in bedwang gehou moet word deur reelgebondenheid. Daar moet veral gelet word of daar blyke is van ontwikkeling vanaf die formele aspek (die beperkte eis dat daar 'n regsbasis vir owerheidsoptrede moet wees) na 'n materiele inhoud (of die betrokke leerstuk ingestel is op waardes wat aanduiding kan gee van 'n besondere geregtigheidsopvatting). Die legaliteitsbeginsel in sy basiese verskyningsvorm vereis dat owerheidsoptrede moet voldoen aan voorafbepaalde en vasstaande regsvoorskrifte; met wetmatigheid as hoofkomponent van hierdie vorm van legaliteit, is die onderskeidende kenmerk daarvan legalisme. In sy omvattende gedaante sluit die legaliteitsbeginsel die meeste van die attribute van die engere verskyningsvorm in, maar stel verdere vereistes: dit verg dat owerheidsoptrede moet voldoen aan voorafbepaalde, vasstaande en regverdige voorskrifte wat behoorlik verorden is en volgens 'n vaste prosedure uitgeoefen word - behalwe in daardie gevalle waar owerheidsoptrede, in die afwesigheid van uitvoerige regsreeling deur toepaslike norme, gestruktureerde en gekontroleerde diskresieuitoefening noodsaak. Daar word ter oorweging gegee dat die strafprosessuele regte van die individu die materiele inhoud van die legaliteitsbeginsel in die strafprosesreg vorm. Die meeste van hierdie regte is vervat in die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika 200 van 1993. Weens die eise van geregtigheid in die individuele geval, word diskresie-uitoefening deur owerheidsagenture soos die polisie en aanklaer asook regterlike beamptes deur die legaliteitsbeginsel geduld, maar diskresie-aanwending moet gestroop word tot die noodsaaklike, aan beperkings onderhewig gestel word en ook gekontroleer en gestruktureer word. Met die koms van die nuwe grondwetlike bedeling en die instelling van 'n Konstitusionele Hof kan stellig verwag word dat die strafprosessuele regte verder verfyn sal word en dat die toekoms nuwe insigte op die gebied van strafprosesregtelike legaliteit sal bring. / Due to the lack of scientific treatment of the principle of legality in criminal procedure, guidance must be sought from constitutional law doctrines that address the problematic inter-relation individual vis-a-vis state authority (rule of law, the Rechtsstaat, due process of law and human rights) and from the principle of legality in criminal law. A tenet shared by these doctrines, is that the arbitrary exercise of executive power over the individual should be restrained through adherence to rules. Whether development from the formal aspect (that a legal basis for executive action is required) to a substantive content (whether the doctrine concerned is committed to values reflecting a specific concept of justice) occurs, is examined. Basic legality requires that state action comply with rules that are certain and previously formulated; with adherence to rules ("wetmatigheid") as its main component, its distinguishing feature is legalism. In its comprehensive form, the principle of legality includes most of the attributes of the basic form, but makes further demands: executive action must conform to rules that are certain, already formulated and just, properly ordained and executed in accordance with a fixed procedure - except in those cases where executive action, in the absence of detailed regulation by legal norms, necessitates the structured and controlled exercise of discretion. It is submitted that the procedural rights of the citizen constitute the material content of the principle of legality in criminal procedure. Most of these rights have been included in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993. Because of the demands of justice in the individual instance, the exercise of discretion by the agencies of the state, the police and prosecution, as well as judicial officers, is tolerated by the principle of legality: provided that this exercise of discretion is limited to what is absolutely necessary, and is restrained, controlled and structured. With the advent of the new constitutional dispensation and the institution of the Constitutional Court, it may be expected that procedural rights will be further emended and that some new perceptions in the field of legality in criminal procedure are imminent. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. D.

In dieser Arbeit werden wesentliche Verletzungen des Strafprozesses, ihre Uhrsachen, die Merkmalen, unterscheidende wesentlichen Prozessverletzungen von anderen Verletzungen des Strafprozesses, die Ordnung der Anerkennung als wesentlich, und auch die Folgen, analysiert.

The juvenile justice system was originally set up under the philosophy that juveniles are inherently different than adults and therefore should not be subject to same harsh punishment as adult criminals. Rehabilitative treatment methods became the center of the juvenile justice system in order to reduce recidivism rates and help reintegrate youths back into society as smoothly as possible. This philosophy changed early in the 21st century, and many states began treating youth offenders in ways similar to adult offenders, with a particular increase in direct files of juveniles to adult court. After about a decade of harsh punishment, the system once again reverted back to the rehabilitative model. California did so through several legislative reforms; however these reforms have not been as successful as they should have been, and the system is still in a state of disarray. California is currently balancing a failing state juvenile justice system while trying to simultaneously support realignment efforts to the county level. After evaluating the failures of Division of Juvenile Justice and the capacity of the counties, it is evident that counties are not only physically equipped to take on the increased responsibility but are much better suited to do so financially. To best uphold the original goals of the juvenile justice system and the rehabilitative model, California should move to close the Division of Juvenile Justice and completely realign all responsibility to the counties. Keeping juveniles close to their communities creates stronger ties, more continuity of treatment, and reduces the likelihood a youth will reoffend. By tailoring treatment to the individual on a local level, problems such as mental illness, substance abuse, and anger management, can be directly targeted and solved. Intervening at first arrest with effective treatment programs is crucial to decreasing the chance that a juvenile will become a career adult criminal. These juveniles are the future of society; focusing on the rehabilitation of these youths will not only increase community safety but will also produce healthy, productive citizens to contribute to the economy.

No description available.