of resources were also a concern amongst drug court participants. They were grateful for the resources available through their drug court program but believed there could be more services and other support systems (Farole & Cissner‚ 2005; Goldkamp et al.‚ 2001). Some of those extra resources wanted by drug court participants were enhanced access to employment‚ job training‚ education‚ transportation and housing services. A good proportion of drug court participants or recent grads have difficulties
Premium Drug addiction Addiction Drug
There was restriction regarding extension of time for filing written statement. It was held that the limitation provided under Rule 1 is only directory and finally Court empowered to extend time limit in exceptional cases. (iii) Execution of decree – Section 39 (4) and Order 21 Rules 3 and 48: Section 39 does not authorize the Court to execute decree outside its jurisdiction but it does not dilute other provisions giving such power on compliance of conditions stipulated therein. Order 21 Rules 3
Premium Dispute resolution Alternative dispute resolution Mediation
safety plan initiated involving the paternal aunt as a Safety Service Provider (SSP). Mother and child stayed with her as father already had planned to stay with a relative. It is reported and documented that father had his bags packed by the time LEA and CPS went to the home on October 8‚ 2015. We understand the safety plan was in place for less than a week as mother then moved back home with child and agreed to have friends check in on her. Parents were very cooperative and able to plan parenting
Premium Family Mother Marriage
Table of Contents Introduction 3 Contextual View of the Caribbean Court of Justice 4 The CSME and CCJ Connection 6 Funding and Integration 8 Two Significant Cases 9 Appendix 3 INTRODUCTION It is said that within the economic sphere‚ the Caribbean is caught between two worlds. The old world of trade preferences‚ concessional flows of financial resources to the region‚ domestic protectionism‚ state dominated‚ and over-regulated economic activity is vanishing or is already gone. The
Premium Caribbean Community
On October 26th 2012 at approximately 9:30‚ I walked through the doors of the Superior Court of Justice in Newmarket located at 50 Eagle Street West with another fellow classmate. Upon arriving to the court house I wasn’t one hundred percent sure what I would witness. Walking through the big doors‚ there’s security with metal detectors‚ then again this is a court house and they have to provide as much security as possible to ensure that everyone is safe. After roaming around for a little bit of time
Premium Constable Police English-language films
observation was completed at Supreme Court of New South located at Phillip Street‚ Sydney. The proceeding that I chose to attend within the Court was listed in the Commercial List‚ at courtroom 11C. On arrival to the court‚ I was stopped at the security checkpoint where guards checked my books and asked me to go through a metal detector. I was very surprised to find out that being a simple member of the public is sufficient and entitles everyone to enter a court room and join a trial. The security
Premium Court Lawyer Jury
The Supreme Court is the highest federal court in the United States. It rules over all federal courts and state courts when pertaining to cases that involve federal laws. Moreover‚ the Court has one Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate Justices that have been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Amongst the Justices there are liberals‚ conservatives‚ and a moderate. The liberal side consists of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg‚ Justice Sonia Sotomayor‚ Justice Elena
Premium United States United States Constitution President of the United States
Supreme Court Decisions Rungwe Rungwe Constitutional Law (LS305-01) Assignment Chapter 4 10/16/2011 The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons‚ houses‚ papers‚ and effects‚ against unreasonable searches and seizures‚ shall not be violated‚ and no Warrants shall issue‚ but upon probable cause‚ supported by Oath or affirmation‚ and particularly describing the place to be searched‚ and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
Bina Murlidhar Hemdev and Others v Kanhaiyalal Lokram Hemdev and Others Supreme Court of India 14 May 1999 Appeal (civil) 3141 of 1999 The Judgment was delivered by : M. Jagannadha Rao‚ J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is filed by the four plaintiffs‚ the widow and children of late Murlidhar Lokram Hemdev who died intestate on or about 8.5.1976. The appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Bombay in Appeal No. 1019 of 1997 dated 12.9.97 confirming the order of the learned
Premium
called an appeal‚ in the county court. These appeals‚ along with royal writs ordering (or exacting) the appearance of the defendant‚ they were recorded by the coroner on his rolls‚ the process of outlawry had expanded considerably to include both civil and criminal actions. Although the county court remained the institution in which outlaws were declared‚ the process of outlawry by appeal had been largely replaced by the issuing of writs of exigent from the central courts‚ either at Westminster or on
Premium Police Crime Supreme Court of the United States