Challenges for the Enforcement and Effectiveness of Criminal Law: The Prohibition on Illegal Drugs

Referencias bibliográficas

• Ashworth A, Zedner L (2014) Preventive justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Beccaria C (1769) An essay on crimes and punishments, 2nd edn, London
• Bachmaier L (2012) Información de inteligencia y proceso penal. In: Bachmaier L (ed) Terrorismo, proceso penal y derechos fundamentales, Madrid, 2012, pp 45–101
• Bachmaier L (2013) The role of the proportionality principle in the cross-border investigations involving fundamental rights. In: Ruggeri S (ed) Transnational inquiries and the protection of fundamental rights in criminal proceedings. Springer, pp 85–108
• Bachmaier L (2014) Information society and penal law. General report for the world congress of the International Association of Penal law. Int Rev Penal Law 85:6–58
• Bachmaier L (2015) Transnational evidence: towards the transposition of the directive 2014/41 regarding the European investigation order in criminal matters, en EUCRIM, 2015/2, pp 47–59
• Bachmaier L (2017a) European investigation order and cross-border investigation of tax offences: mutual recognition and grounds for refusal. Eur Crim Law Rev 7:46–66
• Bachmaier L (2017b) Mutual recognition and cross-border interception of communications: the way ahead for the European investigation order. In: Weyembergh A (ed) The needed balances in EU criminal law. Hart publishing, Oxford, pp 313–336
• Demleitner NV (2002) “Collateral Damage”: no re-entry for drug offenders: no re-entry for drug offenders. Villanova Law Rev 47:1027
• Demleitner NV (2017) Commodifying policing: a recipe for police-community tensions. Georgia Law Rev 51:1047
• Doyle C (2016) An abridged sketch of extradition to and from the United States. Congressional Research Service, 4 October 2016
• Ferguson AG (2015) Big data and predictive reasonable suspicion. Univ PA Law Rev 163:327–410
• Hart MH (1958) The aims of criminal law. Law Contemp Probl 23:401–441
• Hirsch MF (2012) Terrorism causing a shifting responsibility in criminal pre-trial investigation: from repression to prevention. In: Hirsch M et al (eds) Shifting responsibilities in criminal justice. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague, pp 9–29
• Hoffman MB (2001–2002) The rehabilitative idea and the drug court reality. Fed Sentencing Rep 14(3–4):192
• Klingele C, Roberts J, Colgate-Love M (ed) (2012–2013) Collateral consequences of criminal convictions: law, policy and practice. Thomson West
• Manning M et al (2016) Economic analysis and efficiency in policing, criminal justice and crime reduction. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
• Muhuri PK, Gfroerer JC, Davies MC (2003) Associations of nonmedical pain reliever use and initiation of heroin use in the United States. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, www.samhsa.gov/data/2k13/DataReview/DR006/nonmedical-pain-reliever-use-2013.pdf
• Petter Rui J, Sieber U (eds) (2015) Non-conviction-based confiscation in Europe: possibilities and limitations on rules enabling confiscation without a criminal conviction. Duncker & Humblot
• Rademacher T (2017) Predictive Policing im deutschen Polizeirecht. Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts 142:366–416
• Robinson PH, Darley JM (2004) Does criminal law deter? A behavioural science investigation. Oxf J Leg Stud 24:173–205
• Rosen LW (2015) International drug control policy: background and U.S. responses. Congressional Research Service, 16 March 2015
• Sacco LN (2014) Drug enforcement in the United States: history, policy, and trends. Congressional Research Service, 2 October 2014
• Sacco LN, Finklea K (2014) State Marijuana legalization initiatives: implications for federal law enforcement. Congressional Research Service, 4 December 2014
• Smith B (1941) Enforcement of criminal law, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Crime U S 217:12–18
• West Huddleston C, Boone DL (2005) Painting the current picture: A national report card on drug courts and other problem solving court programs in the United States, vol 1(2). U.S. DOJ, OJP, BJA, National Drug Court Institute