Matching Items (35)
Description
The presence of drug cartels within Mexico impacts U.S. national security, foreign policy, U.S. crime rates, and public health policy. Due to the direct and indirect effects that the cartels have on the United States, this paper examines the Mérida Initiative, the current U.S. anti-cartel policy, and makes several recommendations for future policy directions. Using official documents as well as current academic research, this paper examines the outcomes of past comparable policies that the United States has implemented in Colombia and Afghanistan to address the issue of drug trafficking. The paper then builds on the present successes of the Mérida Initiative by recommending several policies in the areas of international cooperation, agricultural development, Mexican targeting and enforcement, and U.S. law enforcement. This paper recommends that information sharing between countries should be increased to reduce the likelihood that pressure place on cartels will cause displacement; crop eradication cease and alternative crop development be implemented to reduce illicit crop growth; the joint Mexican-U.S. enforcement focus should move from high-value targets to more highly connected members; the United States should increase vetting for gun purchases to help keep guns out of the hands of cartel members; and domestic drug policies should shift toward treatment and demand-focused policies. By implementing the recommended policies, this paper suggests that the influence of cartels within Mexico as well as the United States may be reduced.
ContributorsMulrooney, Megan (Author) / Rodriguez, Nancy (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Becerra, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The study of non-U.S. citizens in criminal justice system outcomes has often been neglected in the sentencing literature. When citizenship is considered, there are generally no distinctions made within this group. The research fails to consider differences according to legal status, race/ethnicity, nationality and other distinctive markers that might play a role in sentencing outcomes. Using federal sentencing data collected by the United States Sentencing Commission for fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2008, this study examines the effect of offender citizenship status, legal status, and national origin on the likelihood of imprisonment and length of imprisonment for offenders convicted of drug offenses. The current study considers differences among foreign-born and Latino immigrant subgroups (e.g., Colombian, Cuban, Dominican, and Mexican nationals). The key findings in this dissertation include: (1) non-U.S. citizens have greater odds of imprisonment than U.S. citizens. However, non-U.S. citizen offenders receive significantly shorter prison terms relative to U.S. citizen offenders; (2) undocumented immigrants are more likely to be incarcerated compared to similarly situated authorized immigrants and U.S. citizens. However, legal status does not have an effect on sentence length; and (3) with respect to national origin, Mexican nationals are significantly more likely than Colombians to be incarcerated and are given significantly longer prison sentences than Dominican nationals. The implications of these findings and future research are addressed in the concluding chapter.
ContributorsValadez, Mercedes (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Wright, Kevin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Although prior research has identified negative consequences from marijuana use, some states are legalizing marijuana for medical use due to its medical utility. In 2010, the State of Arizona passed medical marijuana legislation, yet, to date, little research has been published about the specific population characteristics of medical marijuana users or their criminal activity. The purpose of this study is to present the characteristics of medical marijuana users and examine the relationship between medical marijuana use and crime, including substance use, by comparing four groups which are medical marijuana users with authorized medical marijuana ID card (authorized medical marijuana users, AuMM users), medical marijuana users without authorized medical marijuana ID card (non-authorized medical marijuana users, NonAuMM users), illegal marijuana users without authorized medical marijuana ID card (non-authorized marijuana users, NonAuM users), and non-marijuana users (Non-users). Data were collected from a sample of recently booked arrestees in Maricopa County, Arizona through the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) project. A total of 2,656 adult arrestees participated in the study. Findings show that authorized medical marijuana users were more likely to be male, younger, and high school graduates. Medical marijuana users, on average, were likely to acquire more marijuana and spend more money on obtaining marijuana compared to non-authorized marijuana users. Whereas the authorized medical marijuana users had a higher probability for DUI and drug selling/making than non-marijuana users, non-authorized medical marijuana users had a higher probability for involvement property crime, violent crime, DUI, and drug selling/making than non-marijuana users. Authorized medical marijuana users were less likely to use meth compared to non-authorized medical marijuana users and non-authorized marijuana users. This study suggests that it is important to recognize the non-authorized medical marijuana users under medical marijuana policy as well as the DUI regulations and medical insurance.
ContributorsCheon, Hyunjung (Author) / Katz, Charles (Thesis advisor) / White, Michael (Committee member) / Shafer, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The dissertation examines treatment services received by youth on probation in the Maricopa County, Arizona. The project focuses on three primary issues: 1) the factors associated with receiving treatment services while on probation, 2) the factors associated with receiving treatment services through different funding streams, and 3) whether treatment services and specific characteristics of treatment services, particularly the funding source, influence recidivism outcomes of youth. To answer these questions the research used data obtained from the Maricopa County Juvenile Probation Department from July 2012 thru August 2014. Multivariate regression, along with statistical techniques to control for selection bias, were used to identify the factors associated with receiving treatment services, the factors associated with the funding source of treatment services, and the effect of treatment services on recidivism. The findings from the current dissertation suggest that the receipt of treatment services is not equal across groups, and particularly that minorities are less likely to receive treatment services compared to their White counterparts. Additionally, the findings reveal that certain characteristics of youth and the type of treatment service received influence the funding source, but the source of funding does not influence the effectiveness of the treatment services. Finally, using propensity score matching, the current dissertation found that treatment services were effective in reducing recidivism while under probation supervision and 6 months after probation supervision has ended. Implications for policy and research are discussed in light of these findings.
ContributorsWhite, Clair, Ph.D (Author) / Shafer, Michael (Thesis advisor) / Ready, Justin (Committee member) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Since Gottfredson and Hirschi proposed the general theory of crime, the direct link between self-control and delinquency has gained strong empirical support, and low self-control is now considered as a significant predictor of individual delinquent behaviors. However, the indirect link between self-control and delinquency still remains understudied. This study fills this void by introducing thoughtfully reflective decision making (TRDM), an important factor intimated by rational choice theory, as the mediator of the relationship between low self-control and delinquency. Using self-reported data from the city of Changzhi, China, this study finds that self-control is closely related to TRDM, low self-control is a significant predictor of general and non-violent delinquency, and TRDM does not mediate the effect of low self-control on delinquency. Findings from this study largely support the generalizability of self-control theory under the Chinese cultural environment, and also suggest that it might be fruitful to test other criminological theories in the Chinese context. The study's findings and their implications for theory and research are discussed.
ContributorsZhang, Wenrui (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Decker, Scott (Committee member) / Sweeten, Gary (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Prior research has found links between family environment and criminal outcomes, but research is lacking on why these factors often occur together within families. Parental criminality, family size, and family disruption have been analyzed as risk factors for juvenile delinquency, but their relationships with each other have gone largely unexplored. This thesis explores the relationship between parental criminality, having children, number of children, and patterns of residence with children. Data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth '97 are used to associate likelihood of having children, likelihood of having any children out of residence, percent of children in residence, and number of children with arrest prevalence and self-reported offending. Results were generally supportive. Moderate effect sizes were found for likelihood of having children, with large effects on likelihood of having any children out of residence. Moderate effects were found for percentage of children in residence, and large effects were found for number of children.
ContributorsLouton, Brooks (Author) / Sweeten, Gary A (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Rodriguez, Nancy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Since the 1990s, stop and frisk activities have been a cornerstone of the New York Police Department (NYPD). The manner in which the NYPD has carried out stop, question, and frisks (SQFs), however, has been a focal point of discussion, resulting in public outrage and two major lawsuits. Recently, the Federal District Court Judge ruled that the NYPD was engaging in unconstitutional stop-and-frisk practices that targeted predominately Black and Latino New Yorkers. Questions surrounding the NYPD’s SQF practices have almost exclusively focused on racial and ethnic disproportionality in the rate of stops without necessarily considering what transpired during the stop. This study will fill that void by examining the prevalence and nature of use of force during those stops, along with testing the minority threat hypothesis. By combining micro-level measures from the NYPD’s 2012 “Stop, Question, and Frisk” database with macro-level variables collected from the United States Census Bureau, the current study examines police use of force in the context of SQF activities. The results should help judges, policy makers, police officers, and scholars understand the nature of police use of force in the context of SQFs.
ContributorsMorrow, Weston (Author) / White, Michael D. (Thesis advisor) / Wallace, Danielle M (Committee member) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Fradella, Henry F. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Gender disparity in sentencing outcomes has a long tradition in sentencing literature, with a substantial body of evidence indicating that women offenders are treated with greater leniency over male counterparts. The prior literature on gender and sentencing, however, has ignored broader social contexts within which judicial decision-making occurs. This dissertation attempts to address this limitation by dissecting the nature of gender disparity through ecological lenses. Using federal sentencing data for FY 2001 through 2010 and other complementary data sets, this dissertation, divided into two major sub-studies, has examined the roles of two social contextual variables, such as religioius and political conservatism, in producing gender differentials in sentencing outcomes.
ContributorsKim, Byung Bae (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Wright, Kevin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Public mass shootings occur at a rate in the U.S. that is higher than any other developed country. These event initiate wide spread media attention. The media attention these events achieve have shown to impact the public behavior (e.g., increased firearm sales). However, the impact public mass shootings have on firearm storage and carry habits of the public is not well understood. Using data collected from the Transportation Security Administration, this study examines how mass shootings have led to moral panics occurring within the U.S. through the examination of the firearm carrying habits among the population immediately following mass shootings. The results indicate that loaded firearms with rounds in the chamber detected by the TSA have significantly increased since 2012. Further, firearms detected immediately following a public mass shooting had a higher proportion of firearms loaded with a round in the chamber relative to 7 days prior to the shooting. Moreover, the increase in proportions of firearms found loaded with a round in the chamber exponentially decays as days past the initial shooting, these events occur at a higher rate than the decay rate can normalize these occurrences. I conclude that in the wake of these shootings a moral panic ensues that is partially responsible for the change in the general public’s arming configuration habits. Further research is needed in to determine the impact on crime, and public health related issues due to this change in the public’s firearm carrying habits.
ContributorsCordova, Richard Donald (Author) / Reisig, Michael (Thesis advisor) / Towers, Sherry (Committee member) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
In this dissertation, I examine the treatment and sentencing of American Indian defendants. This work contributes to research on cumulative disadvantage and the role race and social context play to influence federal sentencing outcomes. Disparities in federal sentencing for racial and ethnic minorities are an important concern to scholars and policy makers. Literature suggests that blacks and Latinos are sentenced more harshly than similarly situated white offenders. These findings are concerning because they suggest that minorities are treated unfairly by the criminal justice system, questions the legitimacy of how offenders are processed and treated, and defendants of color who are meted out tougher punishments face substantial social and economic difficulties thereafter. Although the black-white and Latino-white disparities have been identified and highlighted, less is known about whether disparities extend to other minority groups, and consequently little is known about the treatment of these neglected groups.
I investigate whether American Indian defendants experience cumulative disadvantages at multiple decision points, disadvantage over time, and the effect of social context on drawing on American Indian disadvantage, the focal concerns and minority threat perspectives. The focal concerns perspective is used to develop hypotheses about how American Indian defendants will receive harsher punishments at multiple decision points. I also use this perspective to predict that American Indian disadvantages will increase over time. Lastly, I examine social context and its effect on punishment decisions for American Indians using the minority threat perspective. I hypothesize that social context impacts how American Indian defendants are sentenced at the federal level.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the US Census, and the Uniform Crime Report, with a focus on data gathered from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the United States Sentencing Commission. A range of modeling strategies are used to test the hypotheses including multinomial logistic regression, ordinary least squares regression, and multilevel modeling.
The results suggest that cumulative disadvantages against American Indian defendants is pronounced, American Indian disparity over time is significant for certain outcomes, and social context plays a limited role in American Indian sentencing disadvantage.
I investigate whether American Indian defendants experience cumulative disadvantages at multiple decision points, disadvantage over time, and the effect of social context on drawing on American Indian disadvantage, the focal concerns and minority threat perspectives. The focal concerns perspective is used to develop hypotheses about how American Indian defendants will receive harsher punishments at multiple decision points. I also use this perspective to predict that American Indian disadvantages will increase over time. Lastly, I examine social context and its effect on punishment decisions for American Indians using the minority threat perspective. I hypothesize that social context impacts how American Indian defendants are sentenced at the federal level.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the US Census, and the Uniform Crime Report, with a focus on data gathered from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the United States Sentencing Commission. A range of modeling strategies are used to test the hypotheses including multinomial logistic regression, ordinary least squares regression, and multilevel modeling.
The results suggest that cumulative disadvantages against American Indian defendants is pronounced, American Indian disparity over time is significant for certain outcomes, and social context plays a limited role in American Indian sentencing disadvantage.
ContributorsRedner-Vera, Erica N. (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Wallace, Danielle (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019