What is Drug Court Based on a National Model Non- Integration of - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

What is Drug Court Based on a National Model Non- Integration of Adversarial Substance Drug Court team Abuse Treatment approach 10 Key Components

Meet Jane First arrested at age 14 Convicted of possession almost four years ago Sentenced to probation three different times Unemployed for the year before entering into drug court 3 children; none in her custody because of her drug use

Meet Jane Continued Victim of physical abuse Diagnosed with bipolar but not taking medication Injecting meth for the past 14 years 3 times a day Previously served a year in prison for other convictions Currently facing another probation revocation

Key Component #3: Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court • Jane’s PO identifies her as a candidate for drug court as her use increases and she is non- compliant with treatment • PO submits a motion to revoke her probation • Defense attorney talks to Jane about the pros and cons of entering into drug court

What’s the Difference Standard Court Drug Court Process Event Process oriented oriented Offense- Behavior- specific specific

Role of the Defense Attorney Is present during drug court Represents client during criminal hearings as part of treatment proceedings team Advices client before entering into Acts as a partisan advocate for the program about the benefits and client’s interest drawbacks Considers treatment needs of Protect the client’s interest client Maintain strict secrecy about Client shares information directly information learned from/about with the judge and treatment client team

Key Component #1: Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case • Jane reluctantly decides to try drug court • Enters a guilty plea to the probation revocation • Sentenced to drug court • Meets treatment provider at sentencing hearing and sets appointment for substance abuse evaluation • Meets drug court PO and schedules first office visit

Determination of guilt and sentencing is the end of the criminal The beginning law process Extensive post of the process adjudication is the monitoring determination Post adjudication and treatment of dependency monitoring done by probation and only brought back to court if there are violations

The defendant is central to the Process is designed to be identical for all equally accused persons process Punishment is mandated to be Treatment is individualized based on the crime Defendant’s family is considered The defendant's family is rarely considered in this process in treatment decisions

Key Component #4: Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, and other related treatment and rehabilitation services • Jane’s substance evaluation indicates she needs: – Enhanced outpatient treatment – A mental health and medication eval to address previous bi-polar diagnosis – Treatment to address past trauma • Given referrals and resources to follow up with recommendations

Role of Treatment Provider Provide substance Little or no Provide abuse direct substance treatment interaction abuse between treatment courts and provider Direct Integral role interaction Peripheral role on with the in court treatment courts on a process team weekly basis

Role of the Probation Officer Meets with client initially to Meets with client initially to explain explain terms and conditions of program probation Communicates almost daily with treatment providers Refers to any court ordered treatment Meets with client weekly to monitor compliance Meets with client monthly to monitor compliance Makes recommendations for sanctions and incentives Imposes sanctions/Incentives or revokes client based on non- Part of treatment team compliance

Key Component #5: Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing • Jane must comply with random drug testing – Urinalysis up to 3 times a week – Calls daily to UA hotline – Could require other types of monitoring such as hair follicle testing, SCRAM or breathalyzers

Key Component #7: Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential • Jane starts treatment and is compliant first couple weeks but misses some appointments • Still using but is showing up to all appointments and appears in court for her review hearing

Role of the Judge Judicial Judicial interaction is with interaction exists representatives of directly with the the parties only defendant. The judge is an The judge is active participant in neutral agent a partnership with among various the defendant and competitors treatment team

Key Component #2: Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights • Defense Council and Prosecutor are members of the drug court team • Work together to reduce litigation • Prosecutor balances need for community safety with the recovery process • Defense attorney balances protecting individual rights with the recovery process

Role of Prosecuting Attorney Act on behalf Consi sider p public s c safety y when looki king of public good at treati ting individuals i s in the community ty and public safety Is a a m memb mber of the t treatme ment Makes s the i initi tial d deci cisi sion to pursu sue prose secuti tion of a case se team te Respon sponsi sibl ble f e for presen senting Will not u t use se sta statements in eviden dence a e against st a a court t t to pursu sue crimin inal prose secuti tion defen enda dant

Key Component #6: A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants’ compliance Sanctions Incentives Based on the Science of Behavior Modification Honesty and Imposed attendance at immediately all required or shortly services are after a ALWAYS targeted expected behavior

Ten Key Components: Program Components • Key Component #8: Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals to gauge effectiveness • Key Component #9: Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and operations • Key Component #10: Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community- based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court effectiveness

Why a Drug Court?  Dr Drug offenders make up up abo bout 20% 20% of the inmate Number po popu pulation in Co Colorado¹ of 5000 inmates  More pe peopl ple ar are serving 4000 prison terms for dr pr drug offens enses es than n any other type pe 3000 of crime me¹  In 198 987 7 19 192 dr drug offend nders 2000 we were in pr prison on in n Co Colorado do compa pared t d to 4, 4,000 000 in 1000 2008.¹ 2008. 0 1987 1997 2006 1Przybylski, Roger. (2008 February) What Works: Effective Recidivism Reduction and Risk-Focused Prevention Programs, prepared for the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice and the Colorado Department of Public Safety

Mental Health Courts • What are Mental Health Courts? – A “Mental Heath Court” is a program based in a court room and lead by a judge that brings together members of the criminal justice system and the behavioral health system, among others, to work with individuals with mental illnesses who face criminal charges. • Why a Mental Health Court? – Over representation in jails and prisons – Poor Performance under correctional supervision – Those with a mental health diagnosis tend to stay incarcerated for longer periods of time compared to other similar individuals with similar charges – Higher risk for committing new crimes

Why Drug Courts Make Sense: The Use of Drugs is Involved in… 60-80% of More than Child 50% of Abuse and Violent Neglect Crimes Cases 50-70% of 75% of Theft and Drug Property Dealing Crimes Belenko and Peugh, 1998; National Institute of Justice, 1999.

Why a Drug Court? 65% of prison inmates meet diagnostic criteria for chemical dependence ₁ 60 to 80 percent of substance abusers commit a new crime after being released from prison.² 1 National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (2010). Behind Bars II 2 Rhodes, W., King, R., & Shively, M. (2006) Suffolk County Court Evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.

Mental Illness in detention

Research on MHC’s Fewer bookings into jail • • Greater number of treatment episodes • Greater number of treatment services • Significantly less likely to incur new charges or be arrested • Improved their independent functioning and decreased their substance use • Spent fewer days in jail • Reported more favorable interactions with the Judge and they were treated with greater fairness