THE CASE FOR L.A. DRUG COURTS

Joe Domanick, in his article "High on Justice" [May 15-22], demonstrated
that his instincts are partly accurate: dedicated, knowledgeable,
hard-working judges are essential to have a successful drug court. Moreover,
Domanick's heart is in the right place: "drug addicts should be treated as
people with a disease, not as criminals." However, his limited snapshot view
led to some profoundly erroneous conclusions. Specifically, his statement
that the Los Angeles County drug court judges lack "courage and compassion"
is disturbing as it is entirely untrue.

Drug court judges in Los Angeles County have gotten it right. These judges
have not only shown "courage and compassion," but many have volunteered much
of their own time and money to ensure that the addicted drug court clients
receive the best possible comprehensive treatment services. L.A. judges have
taken a leading role in developing and improving drug courts. Los Angeles
drug courts have been chosen as "mentor" courts by the National Association
of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) and others, helping to improve drug
courts throughout the United States. L.A. judges have served with
distinction as board members and officers of the NADCP and the California
Association of Drug Court Professionals. Many of the L.A. judges have been
employed as faculty members in judicial training programs in California and
other states, conveying best practices in court-based treatment.

Los Angeles County judicial leaders, district attorneys, public defenders,
probation officers, the sheriff and drug treatment providers started
planning for the first drug court in 1992. The first drug court began in May
1994. Los Angeles County now has 12 community drug courts, one sentenced
offender and two juvenile drug courts, more than any other county in the
nation. This has happened because L.A. judges and others have convened
several times each month for over eight years to identify and secure
resources and constantly manage the evolution of our courts to incorporate
the best techniques and latest knowledge, and to maintain the very high
standards of the L.A. drug courts. L.A. judges sit on the State Judicial
Council's Collaborative Justice Court Committee, which provides policy
direction and training statewide for drug courts, mental health treatment
courts, domestic violence courts and Proposition 36 courts.

Los Angeles County has a large, diverse population. In developing its drug
court system, this county has adopted a set of written standards and
practices that insure quality, while providing the flexibility that allows
the local communities to meet the needs of their residents. Representatives
from Los Angeles secured a drug court exemption, preserving pre-guilty plea
diversion when the state law eliminated it for all other situations. Los
Angeles County benefited from this flexibility and currently maintains 12
extremely effective predominantly pre-guilty plea community drug courts
treating in excess of a thousand people every year.

This pre-guilty plea drug court program design has many unique advantages.
Addicts are most amenable to successful intervention when they are in the
crisis of initial arrest and incarceration. To maximize success,
intervention must be immediate and up front. A pre-guilty plea drug court
allows the client to enter treatment immediately and to fully concentrate on
recovery without the distractions of fighting the case. In the critical
first hours after arrest, the client is not placed in the predicament of
asking for the help drug court offers while simultaneously waiving other
important rights granted to an accused. Furthermore, the defense lawyer may
devote the majority of time during the initial interview discussing the
client's need for treatment rather than issues regarding innocence or guilt,
waiver of rights, etc. The pre-guilty aspect of the drug court program can
be used as a "carrot" to convince clients with severe substance abuse or
co-occurring disorders to enter the difficult, intensive treatment regimen
of the drug court instead of applying for a less intensive and less
structured Proposition 36 program (that requires a conviction to obtain
treatment).

Drug courts are dependent upon the creation of a non-adversarial courtroom
atmosphere where a single judge and a dedicated team of court officers,
staff and treatment personnel work toward a common goal of breaking the
cycle of drug abuse and criminal behavior. A pre-plea drug court allows the
judge, defense and prosecution to act based on what is best for the
defendant's recovery, instead of using the court's scarce resources for
litigation. The court team can apply the rewards and sanctions that help
lead to recovery. The public is protected as the clients who graduate from
drug court will become productive citizens, while the individual who does
not make it can still be tried, convicted and punished.

Los Angeles County, as well as the state of California, is home to a large
immigrant population. Efforts to secure permanent resident status or
citizenship could be defeated by a criminal conviction, which may
potentially lead to deportation and the ensuing breakup of families.
Pre-plea drug courts avoid this danger to the immigrant and the family that
relies on them. The successful completion of a recovery program will not
only help the immigrant, but also his or her family and the community. Drug
court participants must either be enrolled in an educational or vocational
program or maintain employment prior to successful completion of the
program.

Criminal convictions make it much harder for all individuals to obtain
meaningful employment. Additionally, conviction can cause the loss of a
professional license or prevent obtaining such license. By allowing recovery
without requiring the entry of a plea, pre-plea programs speed the process
of re-entry into the workforce. It is not uncommon that persons with a
conviction, even if not sentenced, are denied employment.

Since a disproportionate number of our minority communities are impacted by
the judicial system, the availability of pre-plea drug court programs is
essential to the protection of their employment status. The judicial
pioneers in Los Angeles County, in adopting this pre-plea drug court design,
demonstrated uncommon insight and determination to develop a treatment
program that would facilitate the clients re-entering society.

That is why it is so bewildering that Mr. Domanick cites Judge Manley in
Santa Clara as a paradigm for the L.A. judges. Although Judge Manley is a
recognized leader in treatment, in contrast to the L.A. Drug Court judges
Judge Manley insists that in order to obtain treatment those suffering from
the disease of addiction must plead guilty! In fact, Judge Manley is leading
the effort to do away with funding for pre-guilty drug courts. We in Los
Angeles County have learned that one size does not fit all. Los Angeles
County's dedicated judges, district attorneys, public defenders, treatment
counselors and sheriff's personnel have worked as a team to bring success to
the client. The court teams have developed different tactics and strategies
to mandate clients to reach the common goal of producing a productive
citizen.

Mr. Domanick acknowledges some of the specific challenges in Los Angeles
County (large homeless population, many clients with mental health issues,
and underfunding, to name a few). The unqualified success of Los Angeles
County drug court programs, given these circumstances, is remarkable. How
Mr. Domanick concludes that the Los Angeles County judicial bench
unfavorably compares to Santa Clara County flies in the face of reality.

I have attended many drug court graduations and seen first hand the awesome
redemptive power of the L.A. program. Children have told me that because of
drug court, they have a father for the first time. Women previously living
on the streets, engaging in prostitution, have obtained proper shelter and
meaningful employment; many of these women have reunited with their children
after years of addiction. Often these stories have brought me to tears. One
of the most dramatic examples I can think of is a man who was living under a
local freeway overpass when he entered the Los Angeles drug court. When I
last saw him, he was completing his master's program at USC in preparation
for joining their faculty.

The amazing success achieved by our drug courts in Los Angeles County (80
percent success rate for graduates) is unquestionable. I invite anyone who
wishes to experience L.A. drug courts to attend just one of the
approximately 40 graduations in Los Angeles County that occur every year. It
only takes one visit to be convinced.

Michael P. Judge

Public Defender

Vice chairperson, L.A. County Drug Court Oversight Committee