Drug Attorney Research Paper

Drug court is also known to reduce recidivism rates. This was done through participation of the defendants and justice professionals who are involved in the program. The issues defendants have been face with are address when they are sent to drug court. Most defendants that come into the criminal justice system are faced with depression, homelessness, lack of education, lack of employment, medical and mental health issues, poor motivation, lack of family support and community support.

This study on drug courts intends to systematically review quasi-experimental and experimental evaluations of the effectiveness of drug courts. With an emphasis on committing future crimes and continuous drug use. This report focused on the programs associated with the standard in the criminal justice system case processing. This review expresses the effects of recidivism in the long and short-term soundness with the current evidence along with the relationship reduction and effectiveness. Eligibility for drug court applies to a non violent offender, with proof of substance dependency. Drug courts stand on the concept that combines drug treatment with legal and moral authority in the attempts to break the cycle of addiction and the committing

The National Institute of Justice funds a unique Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (Rossman et al., 2011). This evaluation occurs over a five-year period and analyzes the process, impact, and cost evaluation of drug courts from 29 various jurisdictions throughout the United States. Twenty-three drug courts in eight states, Georgia, Florida, and Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina, and Washington, are examined throughout the process. This evaluation only chooses certain drug courts, therefore how resources are being implemented, cost savings, and outcomes are only being examined at those drug courts, but what about the other drug court

Reductions in drug usage and overdose, drug court programs examine defendants for drug usage regularly usually thrice within the month or whenever defendants must appear before the judge. Specialists keep information regarding drug use by defendants under drug court

Since the first drug court was founded, over 3,400 drug courts exist today in every U.S. state and territory (NIJ.gov). The national institute of justice reported that a 33 percent reduction in rearrest rates for drug court graduates compared with other like offenders (Neubauer). The National Association of Drug Court professionals reports that 75 percent of drug court graduates remain arrest-free for at least two years after leaving the program. They also report that drug courts alone reduce crime as much as 45 percent more than other sentencing options (NADCP.org). Not only does drug court benefit the offenders and society, it also benefits taxpayer money. Drug court treatment for the offenders typically cost anywhere between $2,000 to $6,000 annually, depending on the severity of the crime and depending on how long the judge feels the program should last. Instead of wasting taxpayer money and sending them to jail for their addiction, the money is used to treat the offenders and help them so that they don’t end up in prison again as well as beating their addiction along the way. The reason why drug courts have been so successful is because they use therapeutic jurisprudence through the community to help treat their

In 1989, the first drug court came into existence in Miami-Dade County, Florida. They emerged in response to demands for change in the criminal justice system because of the War on Drug. (Listwan, Sundt, Holsinger, & Latessa, 2003) By 2007, drug courts were established in all 50 states. Statistics show that the prison population of women increased because of the War on drug policies. (Shaffer, Hartman, & Listwan, 2009) The drug court model became an alternative to sanctions given to drug offenders. Drug courts address addiction by merging treatment services, judicial monitoring, and probation supervision. (King & Pasquarella, 2009; NADCP, 2005; Shaffer, Hartman, & Listwan, 2009)

This report starts off with an overview of drug courts are, then moves into the overall problem with drug control in the United States. They talk about the history and the rise in drug offenses during the 1980’s causing the prison populations to rise. When comparing the rise of drug offenses, they found it was both state and federal level. The growth of drug offenses became approximately one in every 198 persons was incarcerated. About nine years later, the first drug court was established. Courts, jails, and prisons were seeing a pattern with the number of low level repeat drug offenders and street dealers starting to cause problems with overcrowding . The drug court movement was a shift from law enforcement’s emphasis on reducing drug use.

According to the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP), 1 out of every 100 people in the United States has been incarcerated (“The Facts on Drugs,” n.d.). Substance abuse is partly to blame. Approximately 60 percent of prison inmates had a positive drug test when they were arrested (National Institute of Justice, 1999). A judge supervises community family drug courts and assists non-violent parents with drug related issues while still holding them accountable for their crimes. Drug courts are

Judges and law enforcements were tired of seeing the same people with the same charges all the time so a group of justice professionals decided that the courts system was broken and they needed a way to fix it. They found a solution by combining a drug treatment with the authority of the judge. The Miami-Dade drug court sparked a national revolution that has changed our courts system. 10 years after the first drug court was established, 492 drug courts were created. By June 30, 2012 there were 2,734 drug courts up and running in every U.S. state. Today, drug court movements continue to spread throughout the country and the

Our textbook describes the two general types of drug courts as pretrial diversion, and post adjudication (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015, p 132). Reading the section on drug courts one might conclude drug courts are the greatest thing since sliced bread. However, I attest this is not the truth. I have personally seen the effects of drug courts, and they simply do not work.

Defendants can be charged with state or federal drug crimes. There is a great deal of crossover between the two categories, and a number of factors can determine who will be charged by state or federal prosecutors.

Drug use and abuse is not a new problem for America’s prison system, and is one which speaks to the larger issue corrupting the judicial system as a whole. As of 2013, of those prisoners serving at least a year long sentence, 51 percent (98,200) of them were serving for drug offenses (Carson, 2014). To contrast the incarcerated with those on probation and parole, some 25 percent (977,662) of the 3.9 million people on probation were charged with drug

Just as there are supporters of drug courts who will attest to their success, there are an equal amount of critics who believe that drug courts are ineffective. One of the main factors that has been noted as the reason for the program’s lack of success is that since each state regulates its own program, it’s hard to effectively

Drug court was first started in 1989 in Miami, Florida. Drug court came about due to the link between crime and drug abuse. This drug related crimes caused the jails to become over populated. Drug court became the solution to aid in the recovery of SUD as well as weed out petite drug related crimes and hard criminals. This is in intensive program with court supervision, case management for prosecution and/or incarceration. As well as a team of professional that assist the client in with the court, probation, treatment and police. These professional meet up with the client to discuss the program and how they are doing in it. This is a abstinence base program that help with rapid treatment entry, integrated treatment and court service, drug testing, and a sanctions and reward system (Miller,2015)

The drug court also provides powerful incentives and punishments for it participates. Some may be harsh and others are less harsh. At the state level the recidivism rate has lowered (Fulkerson et al., 2012; Rempel et. Al., 2003; Shaffer, 2011; Wilson, Mitchell, & MacKenzie, 2003). This is due to the defendant’s participation rate. There was a national study done showing a two-year recidivism rate of 28% (Roman, Townsend, & Bhati, 2003).