American Court System U5IP - Research Paper Example

Wichita Police Department Major Crimes Unit’s Recommendations for the Filing of Cases against Jones, Smith and Thompson. Name Professor’s Name University Name City, State Date Jones, who has been previously convicted, assisted in the investigation that ensured the success of these cases. Justice demands that Jones is charged before a federal court, where maximum sentences are available (Wold, 2004). The police department however, in view of his cooperation, recommends that Jones’ February 6, 2005 cocaine possession case is filed in the District Court, unlike the rest of Sedgwick County where people found to be possessing small amounts of illegal drugs in Wichita were no longer sent to jail.

Jones will be a key witness and his cooperation will ensure that the task force’s undercover investigative work will lead to convictions. The Investigations also proved that Smith was a cocaine dealer and had sold to the undercover agents on two occasions, July 12, 2005 and August 3, 2005. While making the decision about the jurisdiction of Smith’s case, the Department considered the classification of Drug Felonies. The severity level of a drug felony is defined by statute, one of the considerations being a person’s criminal history (The Wichita Eagle, 2007).

An indicted person’s possible sentence is resolute by finding the severity level of the crime charged, and the accuser’s prior criminal history. Smith does not have prior records, but still poses a danger to society through his drug dealings. One of the strategies set by the department is through two elements; controlling the supply and need for drugs. In addition, the quantity and form of cocaine involved in the offense are two factors in determining the appropriate penalty, besides, other features of the offense and the offender can be equally be more important (Wold, 2004).

Therefore, the task force recommends that Smith is charged at the Municipal Court, which presides over drug violations and effectively handles the case. The department also established that Thompson is a major dealer and observed him selling the drugs. This was established through his open display of large quantities of cash and the other information that the undercover officers were able to gather regarding possession in his house and the presence of firearms. In order to obtain the higher penalties for drug possession, the department acclaims that Thompson is tried in Federal Court.

According to the State laws and published ordinances, in relation to firearms, persons in possession of firearms should permit inspection of their premises as a condition of their licenses by the Wichita police department. This will aid in the recovery of the drugs in his hidden safe in the bedroom floor of his house, and the firearms throughout his house. The task force acknowledges that Thompson must be stopped in view of Cocaine’s negative effects to society. The use of the drugs is leading to an increase in the national crime rate; significantly threatening public health, leading to a progressively violent drug trade.

It is this deep concern regarding the societal impact of cocaine that has guided the federal sentencing guidelines (Finn & Murphy, 1996). In addition, the drug’s ease of manufacture and relatively low cost- per-dose has made it readily marketable, thus, increasing the urgency of permanently addressing this matter. The jurisdiction of the federal district courts is concurrent with that of the state courts. The presence of Jones as a witness has made this a strong case at the Federal Court. The task force notes that the terms of the pleas require complete cooperation and possible future testimony.

Depending upon the value of Jones’s assistance, the attorney can give a sentencing recommendation to the judge. Sentencing is often deferred until all trials are finalized. The Federal Court will ensure that Jones is not intimidated and where necessary offer witness protection. The law enforcement agencies and prosecutors' offices have taken measures to prevent witness intimidation, and various jurisdictions have applied the strategies. The state continues to put measures in place to ensure that there is a structured program to protect witnesses and ensure their cooperation (Ingram & Jefferson, 2011).

In the matter of the validity of Jones’s testimony, according to Jefferson L Ingram’s publication, ‘Criminal Evidence’, a witness is required to meet the four elements of competency: oath (or a substitute), original perception, recollection, and an ability to communicate prior to being permitted to testify in court. As a general rule, all witnesses are considered competent and meet the four elements of competency. Therefore, the department ascertains that Jones’s testimony will be credible and acceptable before the court of law having met the criteria set above.

As noted in the Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy, discretion exercised by prosecutors and investigators working on cocaine cases, can have an impact on sentences for any individual cocaine offender (Conaboy, 1997). The considerations made by the undercover agents, and the task force have put all the factors into consideration. The task force therefore recommends that the recommendations given in relation to the cases against Jones, Smith and Johnson be followed to ensure that the state makes a significant step towards the end of the war against drugs (Conaboy, 1997).

References Conaboy, R. (1997). Cocaine & Federal Sentencing Policy. Washington DC: Island Press. Finn, P. & Murphy H. (1996). Preventing Gang- and Drug-related Witness Intimidation. New York, NY: Crown Publishers. Ingram, L. & Jefferson. (2011). Criminal Evidence: Competence of Witnesses, 11th Edition. Chicago: Probus. The Wichita Eagle. (2007). Retrieved on November 5th 2013 from Wold, G. (2004). State laws and published ordinances, firearms, New York: DIANE Publishing.