This project is designed to take an in-depth look at drug court, the most common form of specialized courts. This project will further elaborate our understanding of team decision-making. The fact that the drug court is collaborative rather than adversarial has been hailed as one of the key innovations that makes drug court better able to respond to addiction than the traditional criminal justice system. So far, very little work has been done on how the team members work together in the court. I will show that, among team members, there is ambivalence over how to understand addiction and what to expect from clients. In addition to this conflict at the organizational-level, I will also show that staff members experience conflict with each other over why and how punishment should be used. I conducted a four-month case study of a drug court located in a medium-sized city in the southwestern United States. I supplemented this case study with observations at a second drug court located in small city in the same state. Based on this research, I will show that the drug court staff experiences conflict over how to treat addiction effectively. I will then argue that the drug court staff’s conflicting expectations of clients actually encourages lying about rule-breaking behavior. Finally, I will focus on negotiations between the judge and counselors as they respond to troubled clients. By focusing here on the tensions that arise in the daily work of drug court, I will show that there are some essential problems in drug court design that still need to be worked out at ideological and practical levels. By shining light on these conflicts, I hope to help drug court practitioners to think about how we can improve on the program. / text

Thesis (M.J.S.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2006. / "December, 2006." Includes bibliographical references. Online version available on the World Wide Web. Library also has microfilm. Ann Arbor, Mich. : ProQuest Information and Learning Company, [2006]. 1 microfilm reel ; 35 mm.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2008. / "May, 2008." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-77). Library also has microfilm. Ann Arbor, Mich. : ProQuest Information and Learning Company, [2009]. 1 microfilm reel ; 35 mm. Online version available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2008. / Title from file title page. James Emshoff, committee chair; Gabriel Kuperminc, Marci Culley, committee members. Electronic text (79 p.) : digital, PDF file. Description based on contents viewed June 9, 2008. Includes bibliographical references (p. 45-68).

Thesis (M. P. A.)--Texas State University-San Marcos, 2009. / "Spring 2009." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 66-70).

The proliferation of drug courts throughout the world over the last two decades presents an opportunity and a challenge. The drug court approach involves a combination of treatment and judicial supervision which is a diversion from incarceration and/or ‘traditional’ criminal justice supervision. Despite widespread study of drug courts, there is much that researchers still do not know and there is still controversy as to how and why drug courts work. This research study is an examination of secondary data from an urban, mid-Atlantic drug court to attempt to correlate factors that contribute to success (as defined by graduation) in drug court. This study examines drug courts using Life Course Theory, Social Capital Theory and Recovery Capital Theory as a theoretical foundation for understanding the influences of drug courts on participants. Findings from the Discriminant Function Analysis employed in this study demonstrate low to moderate ability to predict drug court graduation and program attrition based on a combination of demographic information and drug court program requirements. Among the factors found to contribute to drug court success were participants having children, their employment status, 30-day abstinence, age, and race. Additional implications for social workers practicing in drug courts are discussed as well as suggestions for future research directions in the study of drug courts.

This dissertation is an empirical study of the actors and organizations working in criminal and drug courts. Specifically, the dissertation examines the structure (as defined by the interactions and relationships of players) of a criminal court and a drug court operating under a state trial court system in the United States. Recent reforms to trial courts indicate that the organizational structure of a typical trial court has changed in many states. Separately, specialty courts which help coordinate treatment for offenders like drug users and mental patients in many jurisdictions have changed the structure, process, and the nature of trial courts.The study is an inductive study using a case method research strategy to build new theory from past findings of organizational studies of criminal courts and from the little we know about drug courts as organizations. The method of inquiry in the study is a triangular research strategy that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. The qualitative data collection methods include primarily participant observations of drug team meetings and court proceedings, and semi-structured interviews with actors representing organizations participating in both criminal and drug courtrooms. The study uses network analysis as the primary method for analyzing quantitative data. The research site is the Arizona Superior Court in Pima County, located in Tucson, Arizona.I found that the most important central actors across all phases of the criminal court case disposition process are judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys, and that measuring core workgroup actors across all phases give a more accurate picture of the criminal court case disposition process. I also found that defense attorneys may be less familiar with other court actors than prosecutors because they may enter the criminal justice system from many different sponsoring organizations. As for the drug court case disposition process, the study shows that the most central player is not always the judge. In addition, the study reveals that drug courts, as court reforms, have little overall connection to overall criminal court organization. Important policy implications and theory inferences, as well as recommendations for future court studies, are discussed.

Thesis (M.A.)--Carleton University, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 125-134). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Juvenile drug use in the country has grown exponentially in recent years. As such, a large percentage of those juveniles currently charged, retained, or on probation for their crimes have committed these crimes while under the influence of drugs. Many of these juveniles come from drug afflicted childhoods, families, and neighborhoods. The rate of recidivism for juveniles is very high and often leads to adult incarceration. The theory of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, utilized through the drug court process, attempts to rehabilitate juveniles into healthy drug-free adults. This study is devoted to exploring the theory of Therapeutic Jurisprudence through juvenile drug courts and the drug court movement. It also investigates whether or not an universal implementation of drug courts into all Florida juvenile systems would have an affect on these juveniles in relation to rates of recidivism and overall health of these juveniles.

The subject of this thesis is criminal justice sentencing policy. The thesis examines the role of the Drug Court in diverting drug dependent offenders from the conventional Criminal Justice System. A large percentage of convicted offenders have a drug addiction problem and such offenders impose staggering burdens on an already overwhelmed Criminal Justice System. Diversion programs offer a practicable alternative to the traditional court system, and this thesis will investigate the feasibility of a Drug Court in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. In examining the advantages and disadvantages of this method of sentencing, the thesis assesses the value of compulsory treatment and determines whether criminal justice sanctions should incorporate compulsory treatment initiatives. To aid in this analysis, additional diversion programs for drug addicted offenders are examined. The Drug Court is assessed through a comparison of the court with traditional sentencing principles. This thesis analyses the success of the Drug Court in other jurisdictions and looks at how the Drug Court deals with the sociological and environmental factors linked to drug abuse and criminality. In determining whether a Drug Court is a feasible option for Vancouver, the thesis examines these external crimogenic factors and the strategies undertaken by the City to combat drug-related crime. It is argued that the conventional criminal justice system provides little, if any, progressive and pro-active drug abuse intervention. This thesis concludes that Vancouver should implement a Drug Court to divert offenders from the traditional court system, and argues that the Drug Court diversion program should be available for drug-dependent property offenders. It identifies how the court can operate alongside pre-existing community services to ensure that post-release environmental conditions are conducive to drug abstinence and legitimate activity. In recommending adoption of the drug court program, the thesis stresses the importance of making this diversion scheme part of a community-based, long-term, holistic intervention strategy. The thesis ends with practical suggestions for implementation of a Drug Court program in Vancouver.