Report Of The Alaska Supreme Court Advisory Committee

1y ago
50 Views
1 Downloads
1.50 MB
218 Pages
Last View : 11d ago
Last Download : 6m ago
Upload by : Ronan Garica
Transcription

Report of theAlaska Supreme CourtAdvisory Committeeon Fairness and AccessOctober 31, 1997Alaska Court System303 K StreetAnchorage, AK 99501907-264-0548Prepared with the assistance ofSJIStateJusticeInstitute

PURPOSE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTSIn 1995, a group of judges and administrators from the Alaska Court System attendeda national conference on Eliminating Race and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, sponsoredby the State Justice Institute. Following this conference, the Alaska Supreme Courtappointed the Advisory Committee on Fairness and Access to identify concerns aboutracial and ethnic bias in the state court system and make recommendations. TheFairness and Access Committee enlisted many community members and courtemployees to serve on its six subcommittees, to make findings and recommendationsto the full committee on a broad range of topics. This report is intended to assist theAlaska Supreme Court in addressing those concerns.The Fairness and Access Committee thanks the many people who have worked to makethe project succeed. The committee received a major grant from the State JusticeInstitute to hire a project director, conduct research, hold meetings by teleconference,and seek out public participation. The State Justice Institute provided further travelsupport for the subcommittee members to receive training and work together on theirfindings and recommendations. The administration of the Alaska Court Systemprovided administrative support and staff time. The Area Court Administratorsprovided funding for travel and research. The Alaska Judicial Council provided stafftime and research support. The individual committee and subcommittee members gavegenerously of their time.The Fairness and Access Committee gives special thanks to the many Alaskans whotook time to testify at public hearings, write letters, make phone calls and tell thecommittee of their experiences. This effort could not have occurred without them.This project was developed under grant number SJI 96-206-A-151 from the StateJustice Institute. Points of view expressed here are those of the authors and do notnecessarily represent the official position or policies of the State Justice Institute.i

COMMITTEE MEMBERSJustice Jay A. Rabinowitz (retired), co-chairJudge Mary E. Greene, co-chairTeresa W. Carns, Vice-chairJudge Larry D. CardJudge Dale CurdaJudge Roy Madsen (retired)Judge Larry ZervosStephanie ColeAlaska Supreme Court, JuneauAlaska Superior Court, FairbanksAlaska Judicial Council, AnchorageAlaska Superior Court, AnchorageAlaska Superior Court, BethelAlaska Superior Court, KodiakAlaska Superior Court, SitkaAlaska Court System, AnchorageSUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSConsumer/User SubcommitteeJudge Larry Zervos, chairAlaska Superior Court, SitkaMarla GreensteinAlaska Commission on Judicial Conduct, AnchorageJim LaBelleRural Affairs Coordinator, Alaska Dept. of Corrections, AnchorageBrant McGeePublic Advocate, Office of Public Advocacy, AnchorageBob SawyerCommunity Activist, FairbanksRichard SlatsChevak Traditional Council, ChevakCourt as Employer SubcommitteeJustice Jay A. Rabinowitz (retired), chairAlaska Supreme Court, JuneauTeresa W. CarnsAlaska Judicial Council, AnchorageCindy ChasePersonnel Director, Alaska Court SystemJim ChaseDepartment of Military and Veteran Affairs, AnchorageStephanie ColeDeputy Administrative Director, Alaska Court SystemJean GamacheNative Rights Advocate, AnchorageAndrew GuyCalista Native Corporation, AnchorageDorothy JonesAffirmative Action Program, University of Alaska, FairbanksCynthia MadreyEmployment Coordinator, NAACP, AnchorageCarmen NewtonPersonnel Specialist, Alaska Court SystemSharon RenfroClerk of Superior Court, JuneauBarbara WilsonAffirmative Action Program, University of Alaska, AnchorageDisparate Confinement of Adults and YouthJudge Mary E. Greene, chairAlaska Superior Court, FairbanksKirsten BeyAssistant Public Defender, NomeDonna BrooksCivil Rights Activist, AnchorageNancy SchaferUniversity of Alaska Justice Center, AnchorageDonna M. SchultzDivision of Family and Youth Services, JuneauJohn TetponAlaska Federation of Natives, AnchorageJohn VacekAssistant District Attorney, NomeSteve WidmerAlaska Department of Corrections, Fairbanksii

Jury Composition SubcommitteeJudge Larry Card, chairAlaska Superior Court, AnchorageMorgan CoggswellJury Clerk Supervisor, AnchorageStephen ConnAlaska Public Interest Research Group, AnchorageJudge Peter FroelichAlaska District Court, JuneauKari Bazzy GarberNative Rights Attorney, AnchorageAveril LermanAttorney, AnchorageCeleste HodgesAlaska NAACP, AnchorageJudge Donald HopwoodAlaska Superior Court, KodiakLaurel PetersonAttorney, AnchorageLanguage and Culture SubcommitteeJudge Richard H. Erlich, chairRobin BronenThelma BuchholdtMike A. JacksonHeather KendallKimberly MartusGalen PaineJudge Larry ZervosAlaska Superior Court, KotzebueCatholic Social Services, AnchorageAttorney, AnchorageAlaska Court Magistrate, KakeNative American Rights Fund, AnchorageTribal Justice Advocate, AnchorageAssistant Public Defender, SitkaAlaska Superior Court, SitkaRural Access SubcommitteeJudge Dale Curda, co-chairAlaska Superior Court, BethelJudge Roy Madsen (retired), co-chairAlaska Superior Court, KodiakLouise BradySitka Tribe of Alaska, SitkaJames JacksonAlaska Court Magistrate, GalenaJudge Michael JefferyAlaska Superior Court, BarrowJohn McIntyreAssociation of Village Council Presidents, BethelJudge Eric MorrisonTlingit and Haida Central Council Tribal Court, Juneauiii

TABLE OF CONTENTSPurpose and acknowledgmentsCommittee and subcommittee membersTable of contentsExecutive summaryChapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Purpose and Structure of this Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Need for Examination of Ethnic and Cultural Bias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Formation of the Fairness and Access Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Understanding Barriers to Court Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lack of Legal Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Financial and Physical Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Emotional Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Role of Other Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiivvii112344555Chapter 2: Committee Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Scope of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Issues Addressed by the Subcommittees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Consumer/Users of Court System Services Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . 8Court as Employer Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Disparate Confinement of Youths and Adults Subcommittee . . . . . . . . 9Jury Composition Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Language and Culture Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Rural Access to the Court System Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Chapter 3: Recommendations to the Alaska Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . .A. Increased Services to Rural Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B. Public Education Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C. Language Interpreters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .D. Cross-cultural Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .E. Local Dispute Resolution and Cooperation with Local OrganizationsF. More Effective Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G. Studies of the Criminal Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .H. Expanding Sentencing Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I. Expanding the Jury Pool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .J. Diversifying the Alaska Court System Workforce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .K. Cultural Navigator Pilot Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .L. Child in Need of Aid Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M. Implementation of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iv1314171821222425262830323334

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)Chapter 4: Recommendation to Other Institutions andState Legal Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A. Language Interpreters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B. Cross-cultural Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C. Local Dispute Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .D. Expanding Sentencing Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .E. Study of Effects of Ethnicity on Criminal Justice Processes . . . . . . . .F. Public Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G. Child in Need of Aid Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .H. Funding for Alaska Legal Services and State Legal Agencies . . . . . . .353638394043444546Chapter 5: Subcommittee Findings and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Consumer User Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Court as Employer Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Disparate Confinement Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Findings about Adult Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Findings about Juvenile Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Jury Composition Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Language and Culture Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91Language Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91Culture Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97Language Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98Culture Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101Rural Access Subcommittee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109AppendicesA. Project Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1B. Summary of Public Testimony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1C. Estimated Fiscal Impact of Implementing Recommendations . . . . . . . . C-1D. Languages and Culture Groups by Court Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1E. Probation Conditions and Revocations by Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1F. Distribution of Justice System Resources by Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-1G. Access to Justice Services by Judicial District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G-1H. Rates of Incarceration by Crime Category and Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . H-1I. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-1v

ALASKA SUPREME COURTADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FAIRNESS AND ACCESSEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Alaska Supreme Court formed the Advisory Committee on Fairness and Access toexamine racial and ethnic bias in the Alaska state court system. The eight-membercommittee spent 20 months identifying public concerns, gathering facts, and weighingproposed recommendations. The committee was greatly assisted by six subcommitteescomposed of community members and court employees from a variety of ethnicbackgrounds, professions, and locations. These subcommittees supplied the findingsand recommendations upon which the committee based its own recommendations tothe supreme court.I. Scope of the ProblemThe Alaska Court System strives to be an impartial and fair forum, accessible to all.In the course of its work, the committee heard almost no complaints of intentionalracial or cultural bias by the court system or its employees. It did, however, learn ofunintentional bias, cultural misunderstandings, inadequate services, lack ofaccessibility, and troubling disparities in a number of important areas.The committee heard from Alaska residents of many ethnicities, economic levels, andexperiences. It learned that while most people find legal problems and courtproceedings to be difficult, many minority residents find the courts intimidating to thepoint of being inaccessible. Their cases are complicated by language barriers, culturaldifferences, lack of access to attorneys, lack of familiarity, and mistrust. Villageresidents, often Alaska Natives, have additional problems caused by distance andexpense.At least a quarter of Alaska’s people come from racial or ethnic minority groups. ManyAlaska Natives speak Native languages, and a number of recent immigrants speakEnglish poorly or not at all. As the state increases in diversity, the potential forlinguistic and cultural misunderstandings also increases. If the Alaska Court SystemAlaska Court System 1997 vii

Alaska Supreme Court Advisory Com mittee on Fairness and Accessis to provide equal justice for all, all judges and court employees must understand theunique needs of minority citizens.II. Work Process and Public ParticipationThe six subcommittees first identified the issues they believed important to address,and then researched the issues by reading existing studies, inviting experts to speak,and listening to public testimony. They also conducted a number of their own researchprojects, with assistance from Alaska Judicial Council staff, the Institute for Social andEconomic Research, and the Justice Center at the University of Alaska. The committeeheld public hearings in nine locations, conducted five radio call-in shows, and spoke atvarious statewide meetings. Through letters and telephone interviews, the committeescontacted several hundred community groups and individuals likely to know ofcomplaints about the court system. The subcommittees made findings andrecommendations based on all of this information. The full committee reached its ownrecommendations based on the subcommittee work and on cost estimates provided bycommittee staff and the Alaska Court System. All subcommittee findings andrecommendations and the full committee recommendations are contained in the report.III. Issues AddressedThe subcommittees examined a number of issues: experiences of court users of different ethnicities, ways to help peopleunderstand the court system, and public perceptions of the state justice system; court hiring practices and work environment for minority employees; disparate confinement of racial and ethnic minorities, including length of prisonsentences, access to bail, probation and parole practices, and juveniledelinquency detention, adjudication, and institutionalization; jury selection practices affecting minority and rural jurors; language barriers and cultural differences in responding to the legal system,including the importance of language interpreters and special problems raisedby particular cultures; and rural access to the state court system, disparate availability of state services,and availability of local dispute resolution and social services.viii Alaska Court System 1997

Executive SummaryIV. Subcommittee FindingsThe six subcommittees made a number of important findings: Urban residents have far more access to justice system services than villageresidents. One-fourth of Alaskans do not live within reasonable reach of manycourt system services. Rural residents do not receive adequate legalrepresentation in either civil or criminal cases. (pages 104-106) Many state residents see the court system as a remote, intimidating, andunfathomable institution. This problem is particularly acute for ethnic andcultural minorities. (page 48) A significant number of people believe that the justice system is unfair tomembers of minority groups, particularly in criminal and children’s cases. Thisperception undermines the effectiveness of the court’s work. (page 49) Alaska judges are not trained to know when a language interpreter is needed,how to decide if a particular interpreter is qualified, or how to use interpretersin court. The Alaska Court System does not train interpreters in legal procedureor ethnics or monitor interpreter qualifications. (page 94) Judges and court system personnel do not receive regular cross-cultural trainingabout ethnic and cultural groups living or working in their area. (page 58) Alaska has a number of non-state justice resources such as tribal courts, disputeresolution boards, and social workers, particularly in rural areas. State lawenforcement officers, social workers, and judges are reluctant to refer cases tothese agencies or ask for input from them. These agencies are underused, whilestate services are overburdened or unavailable. (pages 107-108) The courts serve a significant number of people who do not speak English wellenough to understand court publications, forms, or in-court proceedings. (pages92-93) Alaska Natives, African Americans, and Hispanics make up a disproportionatelyhigh share of the prison population. Native Alaskan and African Americanyouths are more frequently referred by the police on juvenile delinquencymatters and more frequently institutionalized. (pages 66-67, 70-71) The state does not provide enough supervision and treatment services in ruralareas. The state has few treatment programs designed for minority offenders.(pages 68-69)Alaska Court System 1997 ix

Alaska Supreme Court Advisory Com mittee on Fairness and Access The Alaska Court System does not call a number of village residents for juryservice, because of the high cost of transportation to the nearest court. In hubcities like Bethel and Barrow, jurors and their employers feel burdened byfrequent calls for jury service. (pages 81-82; 83-84) Too few minorities are employed by the Alaska Court System, particularly at themanagement level. The court system should improve its affirmative action planand employee development efforts. (pages 56-57)V. Fairness and Access Committee RecommendationsBased on its analysis of the subcommittee’s findings and recommendations, the AlaskaSupreme Court Advisory Committee on Fairness and Access recommends the followingactions: The Alaska Court System should establish its presence in rural areas not nowbeing served and increase its presence in underserved areas. It shouldencourage and fund judicial travel to local hearings, trials, and sentencings, andsend “circuit-riding” judges to travel to rural areas. Judges should appoint localresidents as special masters when possible. The Alaska Court System shouldimprove and update its telephone system and information technology for betterrural access. (pages 14-15) The Chief Justice should establish a standing public education committee toeducate the public about the legal system, and should encourage judges toeducate their communities. Other state justice agencies should encourage theirpersonnel to speak at community meetings and in local forums. (page 17) The Alaska Court System should train judges and magistrates in theappointment and supervision of interpreters. It should recruit interpreters ofcommonly used languages and train them in court procedure. It should developcourt rules addressing the standards for interpreter qualifications, and shouldwork with other agencies to determine the most efficient way to hire and pay forinterpreters in civil and criminal courtroom proceedings. (pages 18-20) The Alaska Court System should provide ongoing cross-cultural training to allof its employees, including judges. Other justice system agencies should offersimilar training. (page 21) The Alaska Court System and its judges should actively support developmentof voluntary local dispute resolution processes. State justice agencies shouldshare information, request assistance, and work cooperatively with tribal courtsand councils, alternate dispute resolution boards, and other local resources.(pages 22-23)x Alaska Court System 1997

Executive Summary The Alaska Court System should revise its forms, related instructions andpamphlets using clear, simple English. It should translate its instructions,publications, and arraignment videotape into commonly used languages. (page24) The Alaska Court System and other criminal justice agencies should request thelegislature to fund a study of the effects of ethnicity and culture on the criminaljustice process, for evidence of unwarranted disparities among ethnic groups andbetween urban and rural residents. (page 25) Judges and magistrates should seek culturally relevant, local sentencing optionsfor minority offenders. The Department of Corrections and the Division ofFamily and Youth Services should increase locally available rehabilitationprograms, supervision alternatives, and culturally relevant sentencing options.Native communities should develop culturally relevant ways to rehabilitateoffenders and deal with social issues within the community. (pages 26-27) The presiding judge in each judicial district should identify ways to include moreresidents as jurors. The Alaska Court System should work to increase thelikelihood that citizens will respond to requests for jury service. To lower theburden on citizens serving as jurors, the number of peremptory challenges incriminal cases should be reduced. (pages 28-29) The Alaska Court System should develop a new affirmative action plan toattract, retain, and promote qualified minorities, evaluate its current practices,and monitor progress toward its diversification goals. (pages 30-31) The Alaska Court System should seek funding to develop a pilot program ofcourt facilitators to help members of ethnic and cultural minorities throughcourt processes. (page 32) All agencies with responsibility for Child in Need of Aid cases should reviewtheir procedures to assure that they are handling these cases appropriately,without cultural misunderstandings or unjustifiable disparate impact on ethnicand cultural minorities. Employees of the responsible agencies should beregularly trained in the Indian Child Welfare Act. (page 33) The Alaska Legislature should fund Alaska Legal Services and state legalagencies at a level that assures access to the justice system for indigentAlaskans. (page 46) To assure that these problems are promptly addressed, the Alaska SupremeCourt should appoint a committee to implement these recommendations duringthe next three years. (page 34)Alaska Court System 1997 xi

Alaska Supreme Court Advisory Com mittee on Fairness and AccessVI. ConclusionImplementation of these recommendations will help alleviate problems caused byunintentional bias and unequal distribution of resources. The committee believes thatall of these recommendations are feasible and fiscally responsible. Where significantadditional funding is required, the added expense is justified by the magnitude of theunderlying problem. These recommendations are designed to promote a justice systemthat is accessible, affordable, and understandable to all.xii Alaska Court System 1997

CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONI. Purpose and Structure of this ReportThis report presents recommendations to the Alaska Supreme Court made by thesupreme court’s Advisory Committee on Fairness and Access. The report also containsfindings and recommendations made by six subcommittees to the Fairness and AccessCommittee.The Fairness and Access Committee was appointed by the Alaska Supreme Court toidentify concerns about ethnic and cultural bias in the courts and makerecommendations. The basic questions before the committee were whether the AlaskaCourt System was fair and unbiased in its treatment of ethnic and cultural minorities1and whether it provided them with equal access to court services. The committeeenlisted many community members and court employees to serve on its sixsubcommittees, asking them to make findings and recommendations on a broad rangeof topics. This report is intended to assist the Alaska Supreme Court in addressing theproblems identified.The committee focused on the barriers faced by members of ethnic and culturalminority groups in using court services. The ethnic groups most commonly mentionedin the course of this project were Native Alaskans, African-Americans, HispanicAmericans, and Asian-Americans. The committee studied the problems faced by courtusers who do not speak English proficiently. Because of the large percentage of NativeAlaskans living in remote villages, the committee also studied differences in courtservices between urban and rural locations.1This report uses the term “ethnic” to refer to distinctions that also are called “racial” -- that is,categories created on the basis of perceived physical differences. The term “cultural” is used to refer todistinctions based on language, social institutions, belief systems, and arts that are shared bypopulations. The terms “minorities” and “minority groups” refer to ethnic and cultural groups whoexperience unequal treatment or discrimination from American society at large because of they aremembers of that group.Alaska Court System 1997 1

Alaska Supreme Court Advisory Com mittee on Fairness and AccessThe report consists of five chapters. This introduction gives the background of theproject and discusses the general barriers faced by citizens who use the state courts.The second chapter explains the scope of the Fairness and Access Committee’s work,its six subcommittees, and the public’s participation in the study. The third chaptersets out the Fairness and Access Committee’s recommendations to the Alaska SupremeCourt. The fourth chapter sets out the Fairness and Access Committee’srecommendations to other agencies. The fifth chapter contains the findings andrecommendations submitted to the Fairness and Access Committee by each of the sixsubcommittees. Following the conclusion are appendices containing a summary ofpublic comment, several tables, and a bibliography.II. Need for Examination of Ethnic and Cultural BiasThe Alaska Court System has long worked to create an impartial and fair forum,accessible to all. Over the last twenty-five years, Alaska’s judicial branch has reviewedracial and ethnic disparities in criminal sentencing statistics,2 cultural diversity issues,and its ability to satisfy the need for language interpretation. While the researchrevealed no current evidence of intentional ethnic or cultural bias in the court system,unintentional bias, cultural misunderstandings, and unjustified disparities remain aconcern. The public perception of bias also is an issue, since public perceptions of ethnicor cultural bias erode confidence in the justice system.Alaska courts face the unique challenge of administering justice in a state coveringmore than 586,000 square miles and hosting a relatively small population of 615,000people from many distinct cultures. Over half of the total population, including mostof the state’s African-American and European-American people, lives in Anchorage andthe surrounding communities. Many of the non-urban residents who live in more than200 villages across Alaska belong to one of the five major indigenous peoples.3 Roadsdo not connect most of the villages to larger communities. Residents travel by plane,boat or snowmobile to hub villages. Many people, including Yupiks in the southwest,Inupiat in the northwest, and Athabascans in the northcentral and northeast, speakNative languages -- indeed, many elders speak little English.2See A LA SK A J U DICIAL C O U N C IL , I N TE R IM R E PO RT O F TH E A LA SK A J U DICIAL C O U N CIL ON F IN D IN G Sof data on felony cases from Anchorage,Fairbanks and Juneau from 1974-76, giving evidence of racial and other disparities in sentencing forcertain types of offenses); A LASKA J UDICIAL C O U N C IL , A LA SK A M ISD EM E A N O R S E N TE N C ES : 1974-76 R A C IA LD ISPAR ITY (1979) (showing significant racial disparity in m isdem eanor sentences for several categoriesof offense); A LA SK A J U DICIAL C O U N C IL , A LA SK A F ELON Y S E N TE N C ES : 1976-79 (1980) (showingdisappearance of most racial disparities); A LA SK A J U DICIAL C O U N C IL , A LA SK A F ELON Y S E N TE N C ES : 1980(1982) (showing disappearance of racial disparities).OF A

Judge Larry Zervos Alaska Superior Court, Sitka Rural Access Subcommittee Judge Dale Curda, co-chair Alaska Superior Court, Bethel Judge Roy Madsen (retired), co-chair Alaska Superior Court, Kodiak Louise Brady Sitka Tribe of Alaska, Sitka James Jackson Alaska Court Magistrate, Galena Judge Michael Jeffery Alaska Superior Court, Barrow

Related Documents:

May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)

On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.

̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions

Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được

Alaska Airlines Inflight Magazine. Economics 300: Economy of Alaska, Notes-Introduction to Alaska Geography, page 9 Alaska Census Areas For purposes of collecting and reporting economic and social Alaska data, Alaska is divided into 27 “census areas.” These census areas are shown in the map below.

Jun 07, 2021 · MESSAGE FROM SUPREME PRINCESS ROYAL Your Supreme Majesty, Past Supreme Queens, Supreme Elective Officers, Supreme Appointive Officers, Supreme . completed online using a credit card (charges will be in Canadian funds). . Farewell Heather Kras

Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.

current trends and techniques in the fi eld of analytical chemistry. Written for undergraduate and postgraduate students of chemistry, this revised and updated edition treats each concept and principle systematically to make the subject comprehensible to beginners as well as advanced learners. FEATURES Updated nomenclature Addition of tests for metals based on fl ame atomic emission .