Effectiveness of Drug Courts
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The prototype for drug courts was developed in Dade County, Florida, in 1989. The drug court is a unique effort that uses the occasion of a drug-offence arrest as an intervention opportunity for drug offenders. Despite historical problems in criminal justice diversion and referral programs, the Dade County success rates have shown that these problems can be overcome through unique collaborative relationships, innovative treatment design, and the elimination of conventional gaps in the referral- treatment-monitoring process. It is the purpose of this paper to explore the concept that drug courts are a far more effective method of punishment for drug offenders than the traditional route of incarceration. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 provided a potential one billions dollars for the subsequent five years to set up drug courts. As jurisdictions move forward in the establishment of such courts, it is essential to consider the conceptual and clinical elements that have made drug courts successful in drug rehabilitation and crime prevention û far more than incarcerations. The first drug court in Dade County, Florida, created in 1989, was the prototype. The three-phase Miami program for first and second cocaine offenders begins with arrest and overnight incarceration in the Dade County Stockade, and appearance the following morning before the drug court judge. The program was developed under the direction of Dade County Superior Court Judge
. . .
y decisively overcame these problems and obstacles. After two years of the drug court's operation, 4296 felony drug possession arrestees had been diverted to the program. Of these, 1600 had graduated the three-phase program with a 3% re-arrest rate; 1153 were still in the program with a 7% re-arrest rate; 500 had their charges dismissed after program entry; and 1043 failed to comply with the program.
Also, 90% of the arrestees who were offered the program accepted the program (the other 10% were arraigned in regular Supreme Court); no screening for "treatment-readiness" was conducted, meaning that this was a non-selected, typical group of cocaine addicted offenders; 60% of the program graduates required at least a brief in-patient stay during their treatment; most of the "failure to comply" drop-out group left the program in the first three weeks of participation; 30% of the drop-out group later returned to the program (either voluntarily, by summons, or by repeat minor arrest). The cost was given at $750 per client, per year. Clients pay mandated fees for the program, and the program is partially funded by a special fine levied on a certain class of traffic offense. When the program began, seized assets were used for part of t
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Supreme Court, York Indeed, HIV/AIDS TB, Dade County, County Florida, Enforcement Act, drug court, County Stockade, drug courts, treatment program, criminal justice, urine testing, dade county, drug offenders, mandated treatment, , substance abuse, justice system, Herbert Klein, success drug courts, arrest intervention opportunity, drug court program, criminal justice system, intervention opportunity drug,
Approximate Word count = 2411
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Effectiveness of Drug Courts
|