STRATEGIES FOR COURTS TO COPE WITH THE CASELOAD PRESSURES OF DRUG CASES

• NCJ Number: 144034
• Author(s): B E Smith; R C Davis; S R Goretsky
• Date Published: 1991
• Length: 16 pages
• Grant Number(s): SJI-90-11K-040
• Sponsoring Agency: State Justice Institute
• Corporate Author: American Bar Assoc.
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Report (Technical Assistance)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This executive summary assesses the drug caseload management practices of four urban courts: Cook County (Chicago), Dade County (Miami), Milwaukee, and Philadelphia.

Abstract

All the courts exemplified particular and differing approaches to dealing with their drug caseload: segregating narcotics cases by establishing specialized courtrooms (Chicago, Milwaukee); applying sound case management principles to drug caseload management (Philadelphia); and emphasizing treatment over punishment (Miami). In each court, the researchers studied four samples of at least 100 cases. From their studies of the Chicago, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia courts, whose primary goal was the quicker disposition of drug cases, they drew four conclusions: 1) processing drug cases faster is possible using sound management strategies with segregating drug cases, 2) segregating drug cases and incorporating management techniques helps speed their disposition, 3) giving more lenient sentences are often associated with quicker dispositions, and 4) giving special priority to drug cases can be done without slighting the disposition of nondrug cases. The fifth conclusion, based on the research in Dade County, is that treatment for drug offenders is minimally effective in reducing recidivism.