Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Drug Courts

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

  • 175 Accesses

Overview

Drug courts are the oldest, most prolific, and most studied of the major alternative court models, which also include domestic violence, mental health, community, and reentry courts. Similar to these other models, drug courts organize their cases on a separate court calendar, presided over by a specially trained judge. What distinguishes drug courts is their focus on cases involving an underlying drug addiction. To treat the addiction, drug courts employ a combination of treatment and judicial oversight, generally for 1 year or longer. Judicial oversight generally involves regular drug testing, meetings with court-affiliated case managers, and status hearings before the judge. At these hearings, the judge and participant directly converse, while the attorneys often remain silent. The judge typically responds to progress with verbal praise or tangible incentives (e.g., certificates, journals, or gift cards) and to noncompliance with interim sanctions (e.g., more frequent status...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 4,350.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 4,999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Recommended Reading and References

  • Drug Policy Alliance (2011) Drug courts are not the answer: toward a health-centered approach to drug use. Drug Policy Alliance, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews DA, Bonta J (2006) The psychology of criminal conduct, 4th edn. LexisNexis, Newark

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnoski R, Aos S (2003) Washington state’s drug courts for adult defendants: outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis. Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Olympia

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhati A, Roman J, Chalfin A (2008) To treat or not to treat: evidence on the prospects of expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Justice Assistance (1997) Defining drug courts: the key components. Bureau of Justice Assistance, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Justice Statistics (2012) Correctional populations: key facts at a glance. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/corr2tab.cfm

  • Carey SM, Crumpton D, Finigan MW, Waller MS (2005) California drug courts: a methodology for determining costs and benefits, phase II: testing the methodology: final report. NPC Research, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Deschenes E, Turner S, Greenwood P (1995) Drug court or probation? An experimental evaluation of Maricopa County’s drug court. Justice Syst J 18:55–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Farole DJ, Rempel M, Byrne F, Chang Y (2008) Problem-solving and the American bench: a national survey of trial court judges. Center for Court Innovation, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding JE, Tye G, Ogawa P, Imam IJ, Long AM (2002) Los Angeles county drug court programs: initial results. J Subst Abuse Treat 23:217–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsche S, Bryan J, Kralstein D, Farley E (2011) The Bronx family treatment court 2005–2010: impact on family court outcomes and participant experiences and perceptions. Center for Court Innovation, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldkamp J, White MD, Robinson JB (2002) An honest chance perspective on drug courts: findings from drug court participant focus groups in Brooklyn, Las Vegas, Miami, Portland, San bernadino, and Seattle. Crime and Justice Research Institute, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson DC, Kearley B, Najaka SS, Rocha CM (2005) The Baltimore city drug treatment court: 3-year outcome study. Eval Rev 29(1):42–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson DC, Kearley B, Najaka SS, Rocha CM (2006) Long-term effects of participation in the Baltimore city drug treatment court: results from an experimental study. J Exp Criminol 2(1):67–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson DC, Kearley B, Najaka SS, Rocha CM (2007) How drug treatment courts work: an analysis of mediators. J Res Crime Delinq 4(3):3–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Green BL, Furrer CJ, Worcel SD, Burrus SWM, Finigan MW (2009) Building the evidence base for family drug treatment courts: results from recent outcome studies. Drug Court Review VI(2):53–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutierrez L, Bourgon G (2009) Drug treatment courts: a quantitative review of study and treatment quality. Retrieved 30 Sept 2011 from the Public Safety Canada Web site: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/2009-04-dtc-eng.aspx

  • Hoffman MB (2000) The drug court scandal. North Carolina Law Rev 78:1439–1533

    Google Scholar 

  • Hora PF, Schma WD, Rosenthal JTH (1999) Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug treatment court movement: revolutionalizing the criminal justice system’s response to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review 74:439–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Huddleston W, Marlowe DB (2011) Painting the current picture: a national report on drug courts and other problem-solving court programs in the United States. National Drug Court Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey MW, Landenberger NA, Wilson SJ (2007) Effects of cognitive-behavioral programs for criminal offenders. The Campbell Collaboration, Oslow

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutze FE, van Wormer JG (2007) The nexus between drug and alcohol treatment program integrity and drug court effectiveness: policy recommendations for pursuing success. Crim Just Pol Rev 18(3):226–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe D (2012) Alternative tracks in adult drug courts: Matching your program to the needs of your clients: Part two of a two-part series. Alexandria: National Drug Court Institute

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe DB, Kirby KC (1999) Effective use of sanctions in drug courts: lessons from behavior research. Natl Drug Court Inst Rev 2(1):1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe DB, Festinger DS, Lee PA, Schepise MM, Hazzard JER, Merrill JC, Mulvaney FD, McLellan AT (2003) Are judicial status hearings a key component of drug court? During-treatment data from a randomized trial. Crim Justice Behav 30:141–162

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoy C (2003) The politics of problem-solving: an overview of the origins and development of therapeutic courts. Am Crim Law Rev 40:1513–1544

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell O, Wilson DB, Eggers E, MacKenzie DL (2012) Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: a meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts. J Crim Just 40:60–71

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NADCL) (2009) America’s problem-solving courts: the criminal costs of treatment and the case for reform. National Association of Defense Lawyers, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Justice Programs (2012) Seven program design features: adult drug court principles, research, and practice. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, National Institute of Justice, and National Center for State Courts. http://research2practice.org/resources/

  • Ostrom B, Kauder N (1999) Examining the work of state courts, 1998: a national perspective from the court statistics project. National Center for State Courts, Alexandria

    Google Scholar 

  • Rempel M, DeStefano CD (2001) Predictors of engagement in court-mandated treatment: findings at the Brooklyn treatment court, 1996–2000. J Offender Rehabil 33(4):87–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Rempel M, Fox-Kralstein D, Cissner A, Cohen R, Labriola M, Farole D, Bader A, Magnani M (2003) The New York state adult drug court evaluation: policies, participants, and impacts. Center for Court Innovation, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossman SB, Roman JK, Zweig JM, Rempel M, Lindquist CH (eds) (2011) The multi-site adult drug court evaluation. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvatore C, Henderson MA, Hiller ML, White E, Samuelson B (2010) An observational study of team meetings and status hearings in a juvenile drug court. Drug Court Review 7(1):95–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer CM, Henggeler SW, Chapman JE, Halliday-Boykins CA, Cunningham PB, Randall J, Shapiro SB (2010) Mechanisms of effectiveness in juvenile drug court: altering risk processes associated with delinquency and substance abuse. Drug Court Review 7(1):57–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer DK (2011) Looking inside the black box of drug courts: a meta-analytic review. Justice Quart 28(3):493–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler TR, Huo YJ (2002) Trust in the law. Russell Sage, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wexler DB (1993) Therapeutic jurisprudence and the criminal courts. Wm Mary L Rev 35:279–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Young D, Belenko S (2002) Program retention and perceived coercion in three models of mandatory drug treatment. J Drug Issues 22(2):297–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang A (2003) Drug and alcohol use and related matters among arrestees 2003. National Opinion Research Center, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Drug Courts, Criminal Justice Intervention, Center for Court Innovation, 520 8th Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY, 10018, USA

    Michael Rempel

Authors
  1. Michael Rempel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Rempel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Gerben Bruinsma

  2. VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Gerben Bruinsma

  3. Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

    David Weisburd

  4. Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel

    David Weisburd

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Rempel, M. (2014). Drug Courts. In: Bruinsma, G., Weisburd, D. (eds) Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_200

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_200

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5689-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5690-2

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation