Drug Courts And The Criminal Justice System

Drug courts are problem solving courts that take a public health approach using a specialized model in which the judiciary, prosecution, defense bar, probation, law enforcement, mental health, social service, and treatment communities work together to help addicted offenders into long-term recovery. Drug courts began in 1989 in Florida, because it was assumed that people that had first time offenses with drugs, or low-level drug users could resist future drug use by this intervention than sending them to get locked up without any treatment. It was also assumed that the quicker treatments began after the initial arrest, the less time

Drug courts, and other recovery programs hold promise for retaining offenders involved with drugs in treatment services (SAMHSA, 2014, p.131-132). The first drug court formed in 1989 in Southern Florida. The change in the criminal justice system came when, tired of seeing the same offenders appear before the court under the same or similar charges. The group of professionals in Miami-Dade County combined drug treatment programs with criminal justice structure and authority of the judicial system (Franco, C. 2010). Since then, over 2,000 drug court programs have been adopted in communities across the country, though each court houses its own eligibility requirements, making it somewhat difficult to account for the success of drug courts as a

The sixth key component requires that sanctions and rewards be coordinated into the programs to govern responses to participant’s compliance and non-compliance (NADCP, 1997). Some rewards could be praise from the judge, reduced supervision, reduced fines and etc. while some sanctions could be fines, community service, or even jail confinement. The seventh key component focuses on the importance of judicial interaction throughout the program, which can sometimes occur on a weekly basis. Key component number eight explains how imperative monitoring and evaluation is to measure the achievement of program goals and measure effectiveness. It is imperative for drug courts to display some sort of positive outcome by “gathering and managing information due to them monitoring daily activities, evaluating the quality of services provided, and producing longitudinal evaluations” (Mackin et al., 2012). The ninth and tenth components promote the importance of interdisciplinary education and forging partnerships with other agencies and community-based organizations. Education and training are important to maintain a specific level of professionalism and expanding collaborations would be helpful to provide a continuum of services for drug court participants.

Drug Courts came about as a result of a backlogged court system and a steady, rapidly increasing prison population. Drug courts are a form of diversion that helps the offender through rehabilitation and the community through an increased sense of protection, which serves the best interest of everyone. Drug Courts are community based intermediate sanctions that incorporate treatment principles into the Criminal Justice System and divert drug offenders from traditional punishments of probation and prison. The objective of drug courts programs is to treat the underlying problems of addiction among drug offenders and eliminate participants’ future drug use and crime.

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

Florida started the national drug court movement in 1989 by creating the first drug court in the United States in Miami-Dade County. In the years since Florida pioneered the drug court concept, numerous studies have confirmed that drug courts significantly reduce crime, provide better treatment outcomes, and produce better cost benefits than other criminal justice strategies. Drug Court offers individuals facing criminal charges for drug use and possession an opportunity to enter a substance abuse recovery program in lieu of straight jail time. The requirements of Drug Court are strict because the road to recovery is not easy. A candidate is tested frequently, must attend substance abuse recovery meetings and make regular court appearances in order to abide by the requirements of Drug

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

Since the origination of drug treatment courts, there has been countless numbers of offenders who have successfully completed the program and fought their way past drug abuse. There are also a handful of offenders who may have struggled to change their drug abuse or addiction, and fell short of completing the program. In this second part of my report, I will be determining whether drug treatment court programs actually work. To accomplish this task, I will be reviewing three empirical studies to evaluate how effective the program truly is.

Drug addiction has increased drastically across America in the last fifty years. Non-violent drug offenders fill our jails and prisons. Taxpayer dollars are put into a prison system that is proving to be counter-productive. Recidivism rates are high. Drug Court is an alternative to incarceration that offers rehabilitation to criminal offenders. In drug court, the traditional functions of the U.S. justice system are profoundly altered. The judge is the leader of a treatment team. The judge makes all final decisions and holds a range of discretion unprecedented in the courtroom, including the type of treatment mandated and how to address

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)

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

The federal prison population has increased dramatically over the past two decades with drug offenders carrying mandatory minimum sentences, playing a significant role attributing to its increase population (Saris, 2013). The twin attack on drug offenses due to the creation of Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 led to the largest and fastest growing category in prison populations. Many of the drug offenders incarcerated were nonviolent offenders with 21 percent admitted in 1991 were reported to not having a single incidence of criminal violence in their background (Murphy, 1997; Webster, 2015). With the lack of discretion judges had in sentencing non-violent drug offenders based off a restricted guideline grid, many across the states began devising an alternative. In 1989, States Attorney of Dade County in Florida, Janet Reno and Judge Stanley Goldstein established the first ever drug court in Dade County in an effort to address the revolving door of reoffending (Murphy, 1997;

While sitting in the court proceedings, the observer noticed the abundance of support resources available to offenders if needed. The difference between the success and failure cases is truly how devoted and involved the offender is in rehabilitation. Dye (2015) emphasizes the well-known punishment versus rehabilitation debate with greater award being in the community alternatives to incarceration. These specialty courts affirm a strong sense of community involvement with court supervision as well as foster the ability to heal in

Currently, drug courts have been proven to be successful at reducing recidivism of offenders. In the United States there are about 120,000 people receiving help in order to rehabilitate them and to try to reduce the chances of recidivism (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2011). These programs require individuals to participate in the programs for a minimum of one year. During this year the individuals are required to appear in court and be drug tested at