№ files_lp_3_process_9_31143
File format: docx
Character count: 423911
File size: 708 KB
Legal and policy resource guide presenting statutory frameworks, jurisdictional analysis, model provisions, and commentary concerning tribal responses to crimes against American Indian and Alaska Native children within United States federal and tribal legal systems.
Year:
2008
Month:
August
Subject:
Crimes Against American Indian and Alaska Native Children
Focus:
Victim-Centered Approach
Type of Document:
Resource Guide and Workbook
Sponsoring Organization:
Tribal Law and Policy Institute
Funding Source:
Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice
Grant Program:
Children’s Justice Act Partnerships for Indian Communities Training and Technical Assistance Grants
Grant Numbers:
2000-VI-GX-0001; 2003-VI-GX-0007; 2006-VI-GX-0001
Authors:
Pat Sekaquaptewa, J.D.; Roe Bubar, J.D.; JoAnne Cook, J.D.
Geographic Scope:
United States; Indian Country
Primary Legal Context:
Tribal Law; Federal Indian Law
Intended Audience:
Tribal Governments; Tribal Courts; Tribal Lawmakers; Policy Developers
Publisher Address:
West Hollywood, California; Anchorage, Alaska; Saint Paul, Minnesota
Chapters:
19 chapters addressing jurisdiction, statutory drafting, specific crimes against children, victims’ rights, evidentiary rules, and sanctions
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2021
Region / city:
Moshi
Theme:
Legal proceedings, narcotics trafficking, criminal defense
Document type:
Court submission
Authority / institution:
High Court of United Republic of Tanzania
Author:
Legal representatives of the accused
Target audience:
Legal professionals, judges, and parties involved in the case
Period of validity:
N/A
Date of approval:
N/A
Date of amendments:
N/A
Year:
2026
Region / City:
South Carolina
Theme:
Legal / Criminal Law
Document Type:
Legislative Bill
Organization / Institution:
South Carolina General Assembly
Author:
Reps. Landing, Bustos, Teeple, Hartnett
Target Audience:
General public, legal professionals
Effective Period:
From the date of approval by the Governor
Approval Date:
Pending
Amendment Date:
N/A
Grade Levels:
9-12
Note:
Lesson Objectives
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Kosovo
Topic:
War Crimes Documentation
Document Type:
Organizational Report
Organization / Institution:
Institute of Crimes Committed During the War in Kosovo (IKKL)
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Researchers, State Institutions, International Partners
Period of Activity:
1998–2000
Approval Date:
October 31, 2024
Date of Amendments:
None
Year:
2024
Region / City:
New York
Topic:
Legal analysis of criminal law and immigration law
Document type:
Legal briefing
Organization / Institution:
Immigrant Defense Project
Author:
Andrew Vaccaro
Target audience:
Legal professionals, immigration lawyers
Period of validity:
N/A
Date of approval:
N/A
Date of amendments:
N/A
Year:
2020
Region / City:
United States
Subject:
National Security Law
Document Type:
Syllabus
Organization / Institution:
University of Houston
Author:
Dycus et al.
Target Audience:
Students of Law
Period of Validity:
Fall Semester
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Online
Subject:
Environmental Crimes
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization / Institution:
UNICRI, SIOI
Author:
UNICRI
Target Audience:
Applicants for the Winter School
Period of Validity:
17-21 November 2025
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2019
Region / city:
Guatemala
Topic:
Human rights, International law
Document type:
Appeal
Organization / institution:
Amnesty International
Author:
Amnesty International
Target audience:
General public, Human rights advocates
Period of validity:
Until 12 March 2019
Date of approval:
17 January 2019
Date of changes:
N/A
Reference:
FOI 25-3724
Date of response:
15 January 2026
Legislation:
Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002
Exemption cited:
Section 34(1)(b) – Investigations
Public authority:
Police Scotland
Subject:
Recorded crimes of Theft by Shoplifting in Largs
Geographical area:
Largs, Scotland
Time period covered:
October 2024 – October 2025
Total recorded crimes:
195
Information requested:
Number of reported shoplifting crimes by premises with name and address, items stolen, monetary value and dates
Decision:
Partial disclosure with refusal of detailed incident information under Section 34(1)(b)
Review procedure:
Internal review within 40 working days
Appeal body:
Office of the Scottish Information Commissioner
Further appeal:
Court of Session (point of law only)
Publication note:
To be added to the Disclosure Log
Year:
1914
Region / City:
Australia
Subject:
Criminal law
Document type:
Legislation
Authority / Institution:
Australian Government
Author:
Government of Australia
Target audience:
Legal professionals, law enforcement, government bodies
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Date of approval:
1914
Date of amendments:
2023
Note:
Year
Year:
2018–2023
Region / City:
Westhill, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Document Type:
Freedom of Information Response
Institution:
Police Scotland
Reference Number:
FOI 23-2990
Date of Response:
December 2023
Subject:
Police call outs and recorded crimes at Hampton by Hilton hotel
Data Scope:
January 2018 – November 2023
Data Source:
Internal Police Scotland systems
Geographic Detail:
AB32 6BP, Westhill, Aberdeen
Access Limitation:
Section 12(1) – Excessive Cost of Compliance
Content Format:
Tables of incidents and crimes, monthly breakdown
Keywords:
Hampton by Hilton, police attendance, recorded crimes, Westhill
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Albania
Theme:
Criminal Law, International Law
Document Type:
Academic Article
Institution / Organization:
EPOKA University, Department of Law
Author:
Alba Gerdeci
Target Audience:
Legal professionals, scholars, policymakers
Legal Context:
International Criminal Court membership, European Union accession
Key Topics:
Genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, transnational crimes, Albanian criminal legislation
Publication Status:
Draft consultation stage for New Albanian Criminal Code
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Criminal law
Document type:
Educational lesson plan
Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Kenneth Hong
Intended audience:
Law students or criminal justice trainees
Duration:
50 minutes
Key topics:
Probable cause, tips of crimes, anonymous tips, corroboration, Supreme Court case analysis
References:
Spinelli v. United States (1969), Illinois v. Gates (1983), Draper v. United States (1959), Florida v. J.L. (2000)
Classroom methods:
Lecture, discussion, opinion poll activity
Learning objectives:
Knowledge, skills, attitude development
Year:
2013–2015
Region:
England and Wales
Type of Document:
Freedom of Information Response
Issuing Authority:
Ministry of Justice, Justice Statistics Analytical Services
Contact:
[email protected]
Reference Number:
FOI/106699
Data Coverage:
Recorded offences resulting in caution, reprimand, warning, or conviction
Scope Limitations:
Cannot distinguish between court bail and police bail, conditions of bail not recorded, potential inaccuracies in central data
Data Availability:
Annex included with offence numbers
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Australia
Subject:
Joint venture formation
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Solicitors, legal professionals
Year:
2023
Region / city:
California
Topic:
Anti-SLAPP motions
Document type:
Legal guide
Organization / institution:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target audience:
Legal professionals
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of amendments:
N/A
Note:
Year