Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
News (Media Awareness Project) - US MD: Circuit Court Judge Pushes For Drug Court Expansion
Title:US MD: Circuit Court Judge Pushes For Drug Court Expansion
Published On:2005-03-27
Source:Capital, The (MD)
Fetched On:2008-01-16 19:38:42
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE PUSHES FOR DRUG COURT EXPANSION

Sitting through an average day's criminal court docket, Circuit Court Judge
Michael E. Loney can see the pattern in a second.

Burglaries, thefts, robberies - whatever the specific crime, one problem is
usually at the root: drugs. That's something that's obvious to almost
everyone who works in the court system, but solutions haven't been as clear.

Judges say they know they're not getting at the root of the problem when
they sentence addicts to jail, but they have few other options.

Now Judge Loney is leading the county's effort to set up a new "drug
court," a program under which convicts get intensive addiction treatment
and constant monitoring by a judge rather than being sent to jail.

Too often, he said, it's African Americans coming through those courtrooms
and being sentenced.

"I'm tired of sending black kids to jail," Judge Loney said. "There are
some days when my job is just to send young black men to jail...

"We can do better."

There's already a drug court in District Court that treats about 130 people
a year and another for juveniles that has served 60 since 2002. The new
one, for adults facing more serious charges in Circuit Court, would treat
about 60 people initially.

There's no shortage of candidates, with more than 2,000 drug arrests
annually in the county, according to a study last year.

Proponents say there's no question drug courts work. They've been proven
across the country, said Gray Barton, executive director of the Drug
Treatment Court Commission of Maryland.

A study last year of the District Court program in Anne Arundel County
found graduates were arrested 73 percent less often for violent crimes. And
supporters point to a recidivism rate of 10 to 12 percent since 1997 for
drug court graduates, compared to nearly half for drug offenders nationwide.

"The numbers are overwhelming," Judge Loney said.

In the judge's eyes, the reason drug courts work is a simple one: "coercion."

Defendants who plead guilty, or those already on probation, are offered a
deal - if they are successful in getting drug treatment, usually inpatient,
they don't have to go to jail.

But like any other defendant on probation, if they mess up, they can end up
behind bars. Proponents say it's that carrot-and-stick approach, along with
the constant supervision, that makes drug courts successful.

People on traditional probation sometimes are only getting tested for drugs
every few months.

Baby steps

Miami is widely credited with establishing the first drug court in 1989,
and there are now about 1,200 in the United States.

There are drug courts in 10 Maryland counties and Baltimore, and new
programs planned in eight more counties. Some only have juvenile drug
courts, while others have them for both juveniles and adults.

"I think we have had a lot of impact on individual lives," said Maureen M.
Lamasney, a judge in Prince George's County, which started its adult drug
court in 2002. "I think it could help a lot more people."

Judge Loney has been working to set up a drug court since December, but
it's a long process. Court officials are preparing to apply for a U.S.
Justice Department grant that would give the court system $450,000 for
three years to help start up the program. Organizers hope to kick off the
new Anne Arundel program this fall, though it could take longer.

John Fullmer, coordinator of the juvenile drug court and the effort to set
up the adult one, said several hundred people a year could benefit. Only
those who aren't charged with violent crimes would be eligible.

"Even though we'd like to help thousands and thousands of people ... we've
got to take some baby steps," Judge Loney said. "At some point in time, the
county has to be more involved in support of this."

Drug court proponents said there is reason for optimism. Mr. Barton, who
heads the state's drug court efforts, noted that two years ago, there were
just six programs in the state.

"I think it's just a matter of time before this really takes off," he said.

Changing views

In 1993, State's Attorney Frank R. Weathersbee and then-Public Defender
Alan Friedman helped set up the first "diversion" program to offer drug
treatment to District Court defendants, mostly first-time offenders.

But Mr. Weathersbee - preparing to run for reelection the next year -
didn't publicize it at all, worried he would be labeled soft on drug users.

Now the county's top elected law enforcement official publicly says the
drug court idea should be vastly expanded and criticizes elected officials'
unwillingness to fund drug treatment.

Though many are coming to agree more drug treatment is necessary -
including Republican Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. - the majority of
government resources still go toward arresting and jailing people.

"The state builds prisons, but they don't build treatment facilities," Mr.
Weathersbee said.

The state's attorney would like to see most cases handled in a similar manner.

"It'll take more judges. It'll take more treatment," he said. "Probation
should be there, but there should be constant judicial supervision."

Part of the problem, Mr. Weathersbee said, is that the kind of treatment
offered through drug court is expensive - about $2,100 per defendant in the
District Court program.

"Everybody thinks this is a good project, but everybody is worried about
how much it costs," Judge Loney said.

But Janet Ward, District Court drug court coordinator, pointed to a study
showing $3,651 was saved in court and "victimization" costs for each
participant.

"It's been proven to be cost-effective," Mr. Weathersbee said. "It's been
proven to reduce recidivism."

Circuit Court Judge Paul A. Hackner, who handled drug court cases when he
sat on the District Court bench, said there's still some public resistance
to expanding drug treatment over than jailing offenders.

"It's hard for people to get over the fact that these people are committing
crimes," Judge Hackner said. "It's easier to say, 'This guy broke into my
garage and stole my lawnmower. He should go to jail.' I don't disagree with
that, but what happens after he gets out of jail?"
Member Comments
No member comments available...