NCJ Number
200749
Journal
On Good Authority Volume: 6 Issue: 6 Dated: February 2003 Pages: 1-4
Date Published
February 2003
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This article assesses the impact of multi-jurisdictional drug task forces and metropolitan enforcement groups in Illinois.
Abstract
Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces and metropolitan enforcement groups formed during the early 1970’s to help local and Federal law enforcement in the fight against drug trafficking and drug related crimes. Scant research has been focused on measuring the success of these task forces. As such, through a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, researchers identified five multi-jurisdictional drug units in Illinois that served both urban and rural areas. Researchers reviewed demographic data and criminal histories of individuals arrested by the five task forces in 1998 and compared them with the criminal histories of a sample of drug related arrestees from local police departments. Researchers wanted to ascertain whether there were differences between the arrestees of the drug task forces and the arrestees of local law enforcement in terms of criminal histories, whether there were differences in the outcomes for the arrestees, and whether there were differences in the nature of the drug arrests that were made. Results indicated that those individuals arrested by the multi-jurisdictional task forces tended to be for violations of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, and more often involved cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine. Arrestees of local law enforcement were more likely arrested for violations of the Illinois Cannabis Control Act. Other differences were noted in the types of drug arrests made; approximately 80 percent of the task force arrests were made for drug sale/delivery, a felony offense, compared to the 20 percent of felony arrests made by the local law enforcement agencies. Finally, arrests made by the task forces were more likely to involve multiple charges when compared to local law enforcement arrests. Other comparisons included the fact that 90 percent of both drug task force arrestees and local law enforcement arrestees were prosecuted by county state’s attorneys. Although, the arrestees of the task forces were more likely to be convicted of their crimes than the local law enforcement arrestees. Interestingly, those arrested by the drug task forces tended to have less extensive criminal histories than those arrested by the local law enforcement agency. The article cautions that the study was limited by incomplete criminal histories.