DOCSLIB.ORG

Great Questions from NIBRS Contributors in Washington State

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Great Questions from NIBRS Contributors in Washington State Great Questions From NIBRS Contributors in Washington State Questions Submitted Between 2017 - 2019 Abstract The following pages are a compilation of some of the great questions related to NIBRS submission that the WASPC CJIS team has received from our contributors. This information is provided as a resource in the interest of expanding everyone’s knowledge about NIBRS. [email protected] (360) 486-2400 Contents Administrative Segment ................................................................................................................................. 5 Cargo Theft: Yes or No (Data Element 2A) ........................................................................................ 5 Incident or Report Date (Data Element 3) ....................................................................................... 6 Cleared Exceptionally (Data Element 4) ........................................................................................... 7 Hate Crime (Bias Motivation) (Data Element 8A) ........................................................................ 9 Offense Segment.................................................................................................................................................. 9 UCR Offense Code (Data Element 6) .................................................................................................... 9 Animal Cruelty (UCR Offense Code 720) ............................................................................................ 9 Arson (200) ................................................................................................................................................. 10 Assault Offenses ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Aggravated Assault (13A)................................................................................................................. 11 Simple Assault (13B) .......................................................................................................................... 14 Intimidation (13C)............................................................................................................................... 14 Bribery (510) ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Burglary (220) ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Counterfeiting/Forgery (250) ............................................................................................................. 17 Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property (290) .................................................................. 19 Drug/Narcotic Violations (35A) ......................................................................................................... 21 Drug Equipment Violations (35B) ..................................................................................................... 22 Embezzlement (270) ............................................................................................................................... 23 Fraud Offenses ........................................................................................................................................... 24 Fraud - False Pretenses/Swindle/Confidence Game (26A) ................................................ 25 Credit Card/Automated Teller Machine (ATM) Fraud (26B) ............................................. 26 Fraud - Impersonation (26C) .......................................................................................................... 27 Wire Fraud (26E) ................................................................................................................................. 28 Fraud - Identity Theft (26F) ............................................................................................................ 28 Fraud - Hacking/Computer Invasion (26G) .............................................................................. 28 Homicide Offenses.................................................................................................................................... 29 Negligent Manslaughter (09B) ....................................................................................................... 29 Justifiable Homicide (09C) ............................................................................................................... 30 Kidnapping/Abduction (100) .............................................................................................................. 30 1 Larceny/Theft Offenses ......................................................................................................................... 30 Theft - Shoplifting (23C) ................................................................................................................... 31 Theft from Building (23D) ................................................................................................................ 32 Theft from Motor Vehicle (23F) ..................................................................................................... 33 Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts or Accessories (23G) ................................................................ 35 Theft - All Other Larceny (23H) ..................................................................................................... 35 Motor Vehicle Theft (240)..................................................................................................................... 36 Pornography/Obscene Material (370) ............................................................................................ 37 Robbery (120) ........................................................................................................................................... 38 Sex Offenses ................................................................................................................................................ 39 Rape (11A) ............................................................................................................................................. 40 Sodomy (11B) ....................................................................................................................................... 40 Fondling (11D)...................................................................................................................................... 40 Statutory Rape (36B) ......................................................................................................................... 41 Stolen Property Offenses (280) .......................................................................................................... 41 Traffic Offenses .......................................................................................................................................... 42 Weapon Law Violations (520) ............................................................................................................. 42 Violation of No Contact/Protection/Anti-Harassment Order (500) .................................... 43 Attempted or Completed (Data Element 7) .................................................................................. 44 Location Type (Data Element 9) ......................................................................................................... 44 Number of Premises Entered (Data Element 10) ...................................................................... 45 Type of Weapon/Force Involved (Data Element 13) ............................................................... 45 Property Segment ........................................................................................................................................... 46 Type of Property Loss/Etc. (Data Element 14) ........................................................................... 46 Property Description (Data Element 15) ....................................................................................... 47 Value of Property (Data Element 16) ............................................................................................... 51 Victim Segment ................................................................................................................................................. 55 Victim Connected to UCR Offense Code (Data Element 24) .................................................. 55 Type of Victim (Data Element 25) ...................................................................................................... 55 LEOKA (Data Elements 25A-C) ............................................................................................................. 57 Race of Victim (Data Element 28) ...................................................................................................... 59 Resident Status of Victim (Data Element 30) ............................................................................... 59 2 Aggravated Assault/Homicide Circumstances (Data Element 31) ................................... 60 Type of Injury (Data Element 33) ...................................................................................................... 60 Relationship of Victim to Offender (Data Element 35) ........................................................... 60 Offender Segment ...........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Charging Language
    1. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abduction ................................................................................................73 By Relative.........................................................................................415-420 See Kidnapping Abuse, Animal ...............................................................................................358-362,365-368 Abuse, Child ................................................................................................74-77 Abuse, Vulnerable Adult ...............................................................................78,79 Accessory After The Fact ..............................................................................38 Adultery ................................................................................................357 Aircraft Explosive............................................................................................455 Alcohol AWOL Machine.................................................................................19,20 Retail/Retail Dealer ............................................................................14-18 Tax ................................................................................................20-21 Intoxicated – Endanger ......................................................................19 Disturbance .......................................................................................19 Drinking – Prohibited Places .............................................................17-20 Minors – Citation Only
    [Show full text]
  • L'équipe Des Scénaristes De Lost Comme Un Auteur Pluriel Ou Quelques Propositions Méthodologiques Pour Analyser L'auctorialité Des Séries Télévisées
    Lost in serial television authorship : l’équipe des scénaristes de Lost comme un auteur pluriel ou quelques propositions méthodologiques pour analyser l’auctorialité des séries télévisées Quentin Fischer To cite this version: Quentin Fischer. Lost in serial television authorship : l’équipe des scénaristes de Lost comme un auteur pluriel ou quelques propositions méthodologiques pour analyser l’auctorialité des séries télévisées. Sciences de l’Homme et Société. 2017. dumas-02368575 HAL Id: dumas-02368575 https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-02368575 Submitted on 18 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License UNIVERSITÉ RENNES 2 Master Recherche ELECTRA – CELLAM Lost in serial television authorship : L'équipe des scénaristes de Lost comme un auteur pluriel ou quelques propositions méthodologiques pour analyser l'auctorialité des séries télévisées Mémoire de Recherche Discipline : Littératures comparées Présenté et soutenu par Quentin FISCHER en septembre 2017 Directeurs de recherche : Jean Cléder et Charline Pluvinet 1 « Créer une série, c'est d'abord imaginer son histoire, se réunir avec des auteurs, la coucher sur le papier. Puis accepter de lâcher prise, de la laisser vivre une deuxième vie.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 7: Criminal Offense, Criminal Responsibility, and Commission of a Criminal Offense
    63 Section 7: Criminal Offense, Criminal Responsibility, and Commission of a Criminal Offense Article 15: Criminal Offense A criminal offense is an unlawful act: (a) that is prescribed as a criminal offense by law; (b) whose characteristics are specified by law; and (c) for which a penalty is prescribed by law. Commentary This provision reiterates some of the aspects of the principle of legality and others relating to the purposes and limits of criminal legislation. Reference should be made to Article 2 (“Purpose and Limits of Criminal Legislation”) and Article 3 (“Principle of Legality”) and their accompanying commentaries. Article 16: Criminal Responsibility A person who commits a criminal offense is criminally responsible if: (a) he or she commits a criminal offense, as defined under Article 15, with intention, recklessness, or negligence as defined in Article 18; IOP573A_ModelCodes_Part1.indd 63 6/25/07 10:13:18 AM 64 • General Part, Section (b) no lawful justification exists under Articles 20–22 of the MCC for the commission of the criminal offense; (c) there are no grounds excluding criminal responsibility for the commission of the criminal offense under Articles 2–26 of the MCC; and (d) there are no other statutorily defined grounds excluding criminal responsibility. Commentary When a person is found criminally responsible for the commission of a criminal offense, he or she can be convicted of this offense, and a penalty or penalties may be imposed upon him or her as provided for in the MCC. Article 16 lays down the elements required for a finding of criminal responsibility against a person.
    [Show full text]
  • People V Gillis, Unpublished Opinion Per Curiam of the Court of Appeals, Issued
    Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Chief Justice: Justices: Clifford W. Taylor Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Opinion Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman FILED APRIL 5, 2006 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 127194 JOHN ALBERT GILLIS, Defendant-Appellee. _______________________________ BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH MARKMAN, J. We granted leave to appeal to consider whether our state’s first-degree murder statute permits a felony-murder conviction “in the perpetration of” a first- or second-degree home invasion in which the homicide occurs several miles away from the dwelling and several minutes after defendant departed from the dwelling. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of two counts of first- degree felony murder, MCL 750.316(1)(b), with home invasion in the first degree, MCL 750.110a, as the predicate felony. Defendant appealed the convictions, asserting that he was no longer “in the perpetration” of home invasion at the time of the automobile collision that killed the victims. The Court of Appeals concluded that the accident was not “part of the continuous transaction of or immediately connected to the home invasion[,]” and, therefore, vacated the convictions and remanded for a new trial on the charges of second-degree murder. People v Gillis, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued August 17, 2004 (Docket No. 245012), slip op at 3. We conclude that “perpetration” encompasses acts by a defendant that occur outside the definitional elements of the predicate felony and includes acts that occur during the unbroken chain of events surrounding that felony.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Armed Home Invasion Robberies Leads to Arrest of 5 Suspects
    Palos Verdes Estates Police Department Press Release Mark Velez Chief of Police Investigation of armed home invasion robberies leads to arrest of 5 suspects On March 2, 2018, Palos Verdes Estates Police Department officers responded to a report of an armed home invasion robbery in the 700 block of Via La Cuesta. Officers and detectives arrived and documented this violent crime, examined forensic evidence and started an investigation. On July 8, 2018, PVEPD officers responded to another report of an armed home invasion robbery, which oc- curred in the 1300 block of Via Coronel. PVEPD officers and detectives again responded. Our detec- tives analyzed evidence from both scenes and believed both crimes were committed by the same suspects. Through an intense analysis of evidence and data, our detectives were able to identify 5 suspects who they believed to be associated with a South Los Angeles gang. With the assistance of the Tor- rance Police Department, hundreds of hours of surveillance was conducted and additional infor- mation was developed. Our detectives contacted other agencies who had similar home invasion rob- beries. PVEPD detectives developed enough evidence to believe this robbery crew was responsible for an additional 6 home invasion robberies committed in various cities throughout Los Angeles county. These cities included Rancho Palos Verdes, La Habra Heights, La Canada, Playa Del Rey and Palmdale. The estimated loss of these robberies was 1 million dollars. After this intense, fo- cused investigation and collaboration with allied agencies and the LA County District Attorney’s Of- fice, PVEPD detectives obtained arrest and search warrants.
    [Show full text]
  • CRIMINAL ATTEMPTS at COMMON LAW Edwin R
    [Vol. 102 CRIMINAL ATTEMPTS AT COMMON LAW Edwin R. Keedy t GENERAL PRINCIPLES Much has been written on the law of attempts to commit crimes 1 and much more will be written for this is one of the most interesting and difficult problems of the criminal law.2 In many discussions of criminal attempts decisions dealing with common law attempts, stat- utory attempts and aggravated assaults, such as assaults with intent to murder or to rob, are grouped indiscriminately. Since the defini- tions of statutory attempts frequently differ from the common law concepts,8 and since the meanings of assault differ widely,4 it is be- "Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Pennsylvania. 1. See Beale, Criminal Attempts, 16 HARv. L. REv. 491 (1903); Hoyles, The Essentials of Crime, 46 CAN. L.J. 393, 404 (1910) ; Cook, Act, Intention and Motive in the Criminal Law, 26 YALE L.J. 645 (1917) ; Sayre, Criminal Attempts, 41 HARv. L. REv. 821 (1928) ; Tulin, The Role of Penalties in the Criminal Law, 37 YALE L.J. 1048 (1928) ; Arnold, Criminal Attempts-The Rise and Fall of an Abstraction, 40 YALE L.J. 53 (1930); Curran, Criminal and Non-Criminal Attempts, 19 GEo. L.J. 185, 316 (1931); Strahorn, The Effect of Impossibility on Criminal Attempts, 78 U. OF PA. L. Rtv. 962 (1930); Derby, Criminal Attempt-A Discussion of Some New York Cases, 9 N.Y.U.L.Q. REv. 464 (1932); Turner, Attempts to Commit Crimes, 5 CA=. L.J. 230 (1934) ; Skilton, The Mental Element in a Criminal Attempt, 3 U.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Intent Mean?
    WHAT DOES INTENT MEAN? David Crump* I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 1060 II. PROTOTYPICAL EXAMPLES OF INTENT DEFINITIONS......... 1062 A. Intent as “Purpose” ..................................................... 1062 B. Intent as Knowledge, Awareness, or the Like ............ 1063 C. Imprecise Definitions, Including Those Not Requiring Either Purpose or Knowledge .................. 1066 D. Specific Intent: What Does It Mean?.......................... 1068 III. THE AMBIGUITY OF THE INTENT DEFINITIONS.................. 1071 A. Proof of Intent and Its Implications for Defining Intent: Circumstantial Evidence and the Jury ........... 1071 B. The Situations in Which Intent Is Placed in Controversy, and the Range of Rebuttals that May Oppose It................................................................... 1074 IV. WHICH DEFINITIONS OF INTENT SHOULD BE USED FOR WHAT KINDS OF MISCONDUCT?....................................... 1078 V. CONCLUSION .................................................................... 1081 * A.B. Harvard College; J.D. University of Texas School of Law. John B. Neibel Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center. 1059 1060 HOFSTRA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 38:1059 I. INTRODUCTION Imagine a case featuring a manufacturing shop boss who sent his employees into a toxic work environment. As happens at many job sites, hazardous chemicals unavoidably were nearby, and safety always was a matter of reducing their concentration. This attempted solution, however, may mean that dangerous levels of chemicals remain. But this time, the level of toxicity was far higher than usual. There is strong evidence that the shop boss knew about the danger, at least well enough to have realized that it probably had reached a deadly level, but the shop boss disputes this evidence. The employees all became ill, and one of them has died. The survivors sue in an attempt to recover damages for wrongful death.
    [Show full text]
  • Home Invasion Robbery
    Problem-Specific Guides Series Problem-Oriented Guides for Police No. 70 Home Invasion Robbery Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series No. 70 Home Invasion Robbery Justin A. Heinonen John E. Eck This project was supported by cooperative agreement #2010-CK-WX-K005 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement of the product by the author(s) or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of this publication. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity. © 2012 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Inc. The U.S. Department of Justice reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, this publication for Federal Government purposes. This publication may be freely distributed and used for noncommercial and educational purposes. www.cops.usdoj.gov ISBN: 978-1-932582-16-1 February 2013 Contents Contents About the Problem-Specific Guides Series. 1 Acknowledgments. 5 The Problem of Home Invasion Robbery. 7 What This Guide Does and Does Not Cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Division Practice Exams
    Department of Homeland Security Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers Glynco, Georgia Legal Division Practice Exams (Use of Force, 4th Amendment, 5th and 6th Amendments, Courtroom Evidence, Electronic Law and Evidence, Federal Court Procedures, Federal Criminal Law, Courtroom Testimony, and Officer Liability) August 2015 FLETC Legal Division Practice Exam Guide – August 2015 Notes for the student: 1. The purpose of the practice exams is to help students learn how to apply legal principles in a factual situation. 2. This practice exam may not address all the EPOs you are responsible for, or all the materials you must know to master an EPO. The student is responsible for knowing and mastering the EPOs. 3. These questions may be harder or easier than those found on the actual exam. 4. Reviewing the answers - even the correct ones - will help you master the principles. 5. Use a piece of paper to cover the answers on the bottom while you are answering the question. 4th Amendment Practice Exam 1. Thompson is suspected of running a counterfeiting operation out of his garage. The garage is attached to the dwelling. Without a warrant, three officers step onto his curtilage, shine a flashlight into the garage, and take a quick look. They observe a number of what appear to be $100 bills hanging from a clothesline. Was the observation into the garage lawful? a. No, because the officers physically intruded on a constitutionally protect location without either a warrant or an exception to the 4th Amendment. b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson’s reasonable expectation of privacy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revenge of Jenji Kohan
    ThThe Reveevengnge of Jenjnji KoKohanan Smart. Funny. Obsessive. Subversive. How the creator of the hit TV shows Weeds and Orange Is the New Black smoked the doubters and got the last laugh By Paul Hond enji Kohan ’91CC is a rare bird among With the latest season of Orange in the can, the television showrunners: blue-haired and building is quiet today, and Kohan is relaxed. Her female, a punkish Jewish earth mother with private offi ce exudes warmth and comfort, as does a darkly comic vision so basic to her nature Kohan herself. Her hair is the vivid indigo of blue that the goblin of political correctness velvet. Her cat-eye glasses could have been teleported Jshrinks in her presence. As a writer, she is fearless. from a 1962 mahjong game. Objects on her desk She will go there, and keep going. attest to a fondness for thrift-shop fl otsam and novelty “I fi nd the funny in everything, especially the inap- doodads: two Magic 8 Balls, a Weeds condom, and a propriate,” she says. “Maybe it’s my survival technique.” beanbag emblazoned with an unprintable four-letter Kohan’s company, Tilted Productions, is based in word starting with the letter C. central Los Angeles, in a Spanish Colonial–style build- Life wasn’t always this good. “I spent the fi rst part of ing of pink stucco, arched windows, and iron grillwork. my life very frustrated, feeling patronized, and fi ghting Built in 1926 as the Masque Playhouse, it was later injustice, and it doesn’t work when you’re young,” renamed the Hayworth Theatre (legend has it that Kohan says, seated in an armchair with her feet tucked Rita Hayworth’s father once ran a dance studio there).
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Analysis Plan for Household Welfare Analysis∗
    GE Effects of Cash Transfers: Pre-analysis plan for household welfare analysis∗ Johannes Haushofer,y Edward Miguel,z Paul Niehaus,x and Michael Walker{ July 6, 2017 Abstract This document outlines outcomes and regression specifications for estimating the effects of unconditional cash transfers on the welfare of recipient households as part of the General Equilibrium Effects (GE) project. This project is a randomized evaluation of an unconditional cash transfer program by the NGO GiveDirectly (GD) in Kenya. This is a two-level randomized controlled trial where treatment status is randomized at the village level and treatment intensity is randomized at the sublocation level, the administrative unit above a village. This document is part of a series of five pre-analysis plans filed to the AEA trial registry as part of the GE project, and focuses on estimating treatment effects for households eligible to receive transfers from GD using data collected via household surveys. We specify regression equations, primary outcomes, and a catalog of outcomes that we will study, as well as corrections for multiple testing and data checks. We also discuss how the analyses specified here fit in with the other pre-analysis plans filed as part of this project. Appendix A: Endline household survey instrument Appendix B: Baseline household survey instrument Appendix C: Household data management note ∗AEA Trial Registry: AEARCTR-0000505, https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/505 This updates a previously-filed version (also from July 6, 2017) to clarify the multiple inference corrections that we will conduct. The rest of the document is unchanged, and the analysis to date section remains accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hit Man's Tale
    Save paper and follow @newyorker on Twitter Letter from Detroit OCTOBER 15, 2012 ISSUE The Hit Man’s Tale How an honors student became a hired killer. BY NADYA LABI Vincent Smothers at Michigan Reformatory, where he is serving a sentence of fifty to a hundred years. “There’s no atonement,” he says. “I’ve taken people away from people who love them.” PHOTOGRAPH BY ALEC SOTH / MAGNUM incent Smothers thought that it would be a job like any other. In the summer of 2007, he told me, his friend Marzell Black asked him for a Vgun for his mother’s boyfriend. Smothers didn’t sell guns, and he told him so. A few months later, Marzell amended his request, saying, “That dude who was looking for a gun? He asked me how much he would have to pay to kill somebody.” A murder Smothers could handle. “Marzell wasn’t the killing type,” he said. “I told him, ‘That’s not something for you to do. I’ll talk to him and see what this is all about.’ ” Smothers drove Marzell in his black Jeep Commander to a gas station on Detroit’s East Side, the rougher part of a rough city. As they waited in the parking lot, a bald black man opened the rear passenger-side door and got in. It was the boyfriend, whom Smothers knew only as Dave. Staring intently at the back of the seat, he explained that the target was his wife; he was leaving her and didn’t want her to be alone.
    [Show full text]