Drug Court Survey Report, 1997, Volume II: Justice Agency Perspectives; Prosecution, Defense, Law Enforcement and Corrections

• NCJ Number: 168282
• Author(s): C S Cooper; S R Bartlett; M A Shaw; K K Yang
• Date Published: 1997
• Length: 155 pages
• Grant Number(s): 95-DC-MX-K002
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice
• Corporate Author: American University's Drug Court
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: DCC. For other volumes of this report, see NCJ-168280-81 and NCJ-168283-84.

Annotation

This second volume of a four-volume report on the findings of the 1997 Drug Court Survey provides information on the drug court activities and perspectives of prosecutors, public defenders, law enforcement officials, and correctional agency administrators involved with drug courts in their jurisdictions.

Abstract

Regarding program effectiveness, the prosecutors provide information on the criteria used to assess drug court effectiveness, the impact of the drug court on the prosecutor's office's ability to handle criminal cases and functions, the benefits prosecutors have derived from the drug court program, the relationship of the drug court program with community prosecution activities, and drug caseload activity trends since the drug court was initiated. Prosecutors also comment on the costs for the drug court program as well as program implementation and operational issues. Defense counsel also comment on the criteria for measuring court effectiveness as well as the defense office's ability to handle criminal caseloads and functions. Benefits derived from the court are also addressed. Defense counsel perspectives on costs to the indigent defense office for the drug court and program implementation and operational issues are included. Similar perspectives are provided for law enforcement officials, with attention to such issues as the program's impact on arrest policies and procedures, officer training, community relations, and community policing activities. Changes in drug-related arrests since the drug court began are also considered. The perspectives of corrections agencies also encompass criteria for assessing effectiveness, the court's impact on its operations, costs, and program implementation and planning issues. The latter issues for all respondent categories address problems encountered and their resolution, most significant benefits, unanticipated issues, suggestions for improvement, and advice to agencies in other jurisdictions.