OUR VERDICT: DRUG COURT IS WRONG TARGET

Our position: Adding another drug court judge is not the best fix for
clogged dockets.

At first glance, there are plenty of reasons why adding a judge to
split the caseload of the Marion County Superior Court's drug
felonies court appears to be a good idea.

The drug court, after all, accounted for 37 percent of the superior
court's open caseload of major felonies last year -- three times more
cases than the next largest court. Each drug court judge averaged 422
open cases, more than the total caseload for Court 6. And the court
has more inmates than any other awaiting trial in the Marion County Jail.

As envisioned by Presiding Judge Cale Bradford, handing off half the
docket to another drug court, to be staffed by one of three elected
judges who will be added this year, would help reduce the workload.
In turn, cases would move through the system faster and jail
overcrowding ultimately would be reduced. For Judge William Young,
who presides over the drug court along with decisions on emergency
jail releases, the move would calm criticism he's received recently
for taking a monthlong vacation.

But a closer look shows that the plan won't necessarily unclog
dockets or reduce the jail population.

The drug court's docket of open cases fell 12 percent between 2003
and 2005, a sign that it's already moving cases faster. The average
case is completed between 130 and 180 days, according to Young,
meeting American Bar Association standards.

A strategy to get prosecutors and public defenders to plead down
cases seems to be working. About 29 percent of the 500 or so cases
currently on the docket have been set for guilty pleas. Young expects
another 200 cases to be plea bargained by the end of August.

The need for judges is greater in other areas. One urgent gap is in
the courts handling low-level D-felonies, such as weapons and cocaine
possession. Many of the accused felons from those courts are released
early from the jail to stem overcrowding.

Dockets for two D-felony courts, 14 and 15, grew by 45 percent and 36
percent respectively between 2003 and 2005. Yet there are no plans to
increase their capacity.

The juvenile court is shaking off a legacy of mismanagement, even as
its dockets of delinquency, child welfare and parental rights
termination cases are exploding.

The superior court can't afford to wait to address those issues until
2008, when it will add another judge along with four magistrates.
Adding another D-felony court and addressing the juvenile court make
better sense for now.

Expanding the drug court isn't the highest priority. It's better to
find another role for the badly needed judge.