Introduction: Problem‐Solving Courts

Problem‐solving courts have become a significant feature of the U.S. justice system, and their popularity appears to be growing internationally with courts under way or in development in countries such as Australia and Great Britain. Drug courts are the most visible type of problem‐solving court, but other varieties are beginning to take hold. Mental health courts, domestic violence courts, and community‐based courts among others are beginning to handle a considerable portion of the legal workload in many jurisdictions. Criminal law violations as well as neighborhood conflicts and interpersonal disputes are increasingly being referred to problem‐solving courts rather than to traditional criminal or civil courts.     

An Examination of the Denver Drug Court: The Impact of a Treatment‐Oriented Drug‐Offender System

This paper reports on a retrospective study of the Denver Drug Court that was conducted to assess the court's impact on court processing, treatment matching, and offender recidivism. A sample of 300 offenders from the Denver Drug Court and drug offenders from two previous years prior to the drug court was obtained. Quasi‐experimental procedures were used to examine differences in measured variables across each offender cohort. Data for this study were collected from court records as well as through on‐line arrest records. This paper begins with an exploration of the organizational framework of the Denver Drug Court and the court's related treatment options. It also examines the extant literature on the effectiveness of drug courts. Analysis of the data indicates that the Denver Drug Court has reduced case processing time and it has slightly reduced the amount of time offenders spend in presentence confinement. Unlike previous studies of drug courts, this study attempted to examine the court's ability to match offenders to treatment needs. Analysis of the available data, although limited, suggests that offenders are being matched to appropriate levels of treatment. Finally, data analysis indicates no significant differences in revocation or rearrest rates. This article concludes with a discussion of the controversial nature of drug courts. Directions for future research are offered.     

Implementing the Key Components of Specialized Drug Treatment Courts: Practice and Policy Considerations

The perceived need for specialized drug courts emerged from the most recent "war on drugs." Courts were no longer able to handle such cases effectively because of an overwhelming volume of drug arrests and prosecutions. The increased emphasis on drug enforcement also revealed that many of the most serious criminally involved drug‐using offenders were undeterred by threats of incarceration, but were amenable to substance abuse treatment. Drug court professionals have identified several "key components" that must be in place for these courts to achieve their goals of reducing drug use and crime. Through the lens of these key drug court components, we examine the development and initiation of specialized drug treatment courts in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois. By exploring and documenting Cook County's experiences, we elucidate several of the basic policy and organizational issues surrounding the implementation and operations of specialized drug treatment courts in the United States.     

Socializing Distrust of the Justice System through the Family in Juvenile Delinquency Court

Juvenile delinquency courts in the United States generally require parents to attend all court hearings, but little is known about how parents' experiences in the court process affect their discussions of the justice system with their court‐involved children. Using multiperspectival and longitudinal data combining observations with interviews of parents and youth in two courts, this research finds that many parents discuss the legal process in negative terms with their children when parents are outside the presence of legal authorities. This research adds to the literature on legal socialization by examining how parents' perceptions of law and their experiences with the court become part of the socializing content provided by parents to their court‐involved children. Creating a more meaningful role for parents in the juvenile justice process may potentially lead to more positive discussions of the court process between parents and juvenile defendants.     

Ethical Advocacy for Immigrant Survivors of Family Crisis

The involvement of family courts in the lives of youth and families creates significant opportunities for advocates to assist their clients with immigration‐related issues. Informed and effective advocacy on these issues in family court can make life‐changing, and even life‐saving, differences for immigrants. More specifically, immigration issues are germane to family court because certain vital avenues of immigration relief available to survivors of abuse, neglect, abandonment, and other forms of family crisis explicitly depend on findings, orders, and certifications that are issued in the context of family court proceedings. After describing these forms of relief, and the family court's role in immigrants’ access to them, this essay analyzes how ethical mandates related to client counseling, representational goals, and competence affirmatively require family court practitioners to provide advice and advocacy related to these collateral benefits to family court proceedings.

Key Points for Family Court Community:
• The involvement of family courts in the lives of youth and families creates significant opportunities for advocates to assist their clients with immigration‐related issues
• Certain vital avenues of immigration relief available to survivors of abuse, neglect, abandonment, and other forms of family crisis explicitly depend on findings, orders, and certifications that are issued in the context of family court proceedings
• The substance of immigration‐related findings in family court, and their ultimate affect on family stability, are consistent with the core family court goal of supporting safety, well‐being, and permanency for children and families
• Ethical mandates related to client counseling, representational goals, and competence affirmatively require family court practitioners to provide advice and advocacy related to these collateral benefits to family court proceedings

     

Assessing the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency: An Evaluation of a Court‐Based Delinquency Prevention Program

In 2002, the State of Ohio mandated juvenile courts to provide prevention for at‐risk youth. This study examined official court records to evaluate the effectiveness of a prevention program administered by the Greene County Juvenile Court. A sample of 362 youth referred to the program for the years 2002 to 2009 by concerned caretakers, teachers, and police was analyzed. Consistent with intake goals, 81.7% of clients were referred for at‐risk but not actually delinquent behaviors. Completion of the prevention program did not predict future court referrals, but neither did seriousness of referral behavior. Children with two biological parents were significantly more likely to complete the program, whereas referrals to Strengthening Families Program and substance abuse screening significantly predicted program noncompletion. Implications for policy and research are discussed.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• This article highlights efforts by county juvenile court to implement a secondary prevention program for at‐risk but not officially court‐referred youth.
• Delinquency prevention research depends on good juvenile court data and adequate comparison groups.
• Evidence‐based predelinquent interventions with external process and outcome evaluations should be the standard.

     

Military Socialization: A Motivating Factor for Seeking Treatment in a Veterans’ Treatment Court

The veterans’ treatment court movement is just beyond the nascent period, and given the rapid proliferation of these courts in recent years it is imperative that the scientific community understand their operational procedures and assess whether they are meeting a unique need beyond those addressed by other problem-solving courts. This paper provides an in-depth examination of veteran culture and how it helps to distinguish veterans’ treatment courts from other courts that focus on similar populations (e.g., drug, DWI, and mental health courts). Using in-depth semi-structured interviews and focus group data collected from veteran participants, veteran mentors, and court team members in Pennsylvania, we employ content analysis to explore the veteran culture as a motivator for participants to enroll in a veterans’ treatment court and engage with others throughout participation in treatment. The results of this exploratory study suggest that a shared culture serves to motivate justice-involved veterans to seek out the veterans’ treatment court over other treatment options and remain engaged in this problem-solving court, while inspiring a sense of obligation to do well in treatment for them and their fellow veterans. The shared experiences of military service and across-the-board support for fellow service members suggest that the veterans’ treatment court creates a unique environment for pursuing treatment.     

Changing How the System Responds to Status Offenders: Connecticut's Families with Service Needs Initiative

Concerned by the number of status offenders in secure detention and the processing of noncriminal behavior through the juvenile and family courts, Connecticut began efforts to reform their approach to troubled and troublesome youth in 2005 (Weithorn, 2005). Between 2005 and 2007, Connecticut enacted a series of legislative changes to both improve services for troubled youth and Families with Service Needs (FWSN), and achieve systematic reforms for processing status offenses. At a systems level, the reforms sought to divert non‐criminal behaviors from formal court processing and prevent secure confinement for status offenders who violated court orders related to their behavior. Connecticut's attempt at second‐order, or system change, is the focus of this outcome evaluation.     

Context and Change: The Evolution of Pioneering Drug Courts in Portland and Las Vegas (1991–1998)

Drug courts in the United States are still relatively young, but they have proliferated dramatically since the first innovation in Miami in 1989. Research focusing on drug courts is now beginning to gain momentum, though it still lags considerably behind the growth of the movement itself. This article describes findings from a first "longitudinal" examination of two of the nation's first and longest operating courts in Portland and Las Vegas, focusing on the dynamic nature of the evolution of the model as adapted in each site. In particular, the research considers the impact of contextual factors – laws, administrative policies, and federal court orders – on the growth of drug court models in each jurisdiction as measured through their screening and enrolling mechanisms over time. The time series analyses suggest that several contextual factors played an important role in shaping these courts and affecting their impact on the target populations and the results they produced. The longitudinal findings illustrate the importance of context in making sense of "normal" evaluation findings and emphasize the dynamic nature of the change process in implementing innovative policy in the criminal courts.     

论审判解释

司法权的特性和一般运作规则决定了司法权仅指裁判权 ,司法解释应当仅指审判解释 ,审判解释具有必然性。审判解释具有稳定的价值目标结构 ,在解释体制上 ,应建立“一元 (法院解释法律 )、二级 (最高法院和省高级法院的规范性解释 )、三层次 (法官解释为中心 )”审判解释体制     

Juvenile Court Clinical Services: A National Description

There have been few studies of the manner in which juvenile courts obtain clinical evaluations and consultation by juvenile court clinicians in order to identify and respond to youths with mental health problems. This study involved a telephone survey of professionals associated with juvenile court clinic (JCC) services in 87 of the largest juvenile court jurisdictions nationwide, providing data on their professional staff, functions, procedures, organizational and financial structures, and methods for providing evaluations to juvenile courts. We identified three models of JCC service delivery systems. Differences between the JCC service models offer hypotheses pertaining to potential differences in efficiency and quality of services and service delivery.     

Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Practice: Changes in Family Treatment Court Norms Over Time

Family treatment court (FTC) is an example of an increasing number of problem‐centered courts currently operating in the United States. Problem‐centered courts such as FTC encompass the ideas of therapeutic jurisprudence but operate within the broader court system. Presented are the results of an FTC case study that seeks to understand the evolution of courtroom norms and practice over time. Observations of courtroom interactions and interviews with courtroom personnel show that initial observations are consistent with the ideals of therapeutic jurisprudence. However, over time, daily demands and pressures on the courtroom undermine the therapeutic approach.     

Diverting and Abdicating Judicial Discretion: Cultural, Political, and Procedural Dynamics in California Juvenile Justice

Although tensions between substantive and formal rationality in the adult criminal justice system have received a great deal of attention, the existence of these tensions in the juvenile justice system has received little scholarly consideration. I seek to remedy this gap by exploring how punitive policies associated with the war on crime impact the formal and informal process of justice, the court community and work group, and the exercise of discretion in the juvenile courts. Drawing on qualitative data collected in three juvenile courts in Southern California, I identify the mechanisms by which prosecutors divert judicial discretion from the traditional rehabilitation-oriented bench officers to bench officers who are more accepting of the criminalization of juveniles. In addition, I investigate how and why rehabilitation-oriented bench officers at times abdicate their decisionmaking authority and make rulings that contradict their own assessments. My findings suggest that as the war on crime is extended to youth, the juvenile courts increasingly share the criminal courts' emphasis on offense rather than offender, enhanced prosecutorial power, and adversarial relationships within the court.     

基层法院裁判过程的法社会学分析——以离婚案件中的子女抚养问题切入

离婚案件几乎是基层人民所受理的民事案件中数量最多的一类案件,这类案件的裁判也因此具有很大的典型性和代表性,能够部分地反映基层人民法院的司法生态.透过法院的裁判文书,并结合所在地的社会情境,我们发现的是一个模糊的基层人民法院司法群像——冲突的身份,混合的功能.显然基层人民法院能做什么,做不了什么,这都是需反思的.我国基层法院的现有结构及运行模式都需进行调整.     

Why Juvenile Courts Should Address Family Violence: Promising Practices to Improve Intervention Outcomes

The prevalence of domestic violence in juvenile court cases justifies modifying our interventions to reflect this unfortunate reality. This article focuses primarily on juvenile victimization of parents and the model programs emerging in juvenile courts to address it. Part I examines family violence's prevalence in the juvenile court caseloads, despite its lack of consideration in most dispositions. Part II begins with a comparative analysis of the drug court trend and discusses the trend's applicability for specialized family violence applications in the Juvenile Court. The King County (Wash.) Juvenile Court's Step‐Up Program is introduced, which directly addresses family violence with intervention programs for youth perpetrators and abused parents, followed by the Santa Clara County (Calif.) Juvenile Court's Family Violence program, shown as a model worthy of replication. Part III details the process by which the Travis County (Texas) Juvenile Court is implementing a program similar to these models. Part IV concludes that juvenile courts must address family violence as an overt or underlying issue in many cases and must identify and address the danger to our troubled youths, whether offender or victim. I argue that the domestic violence community's treatment expertise must inform our juvenile courts' interventions with violent, often insular, families. In Travis County, we are committed to learning as much as possible about youth resilience–to identify and treat battered and battering teens to prevent the inter‐generational cycle from repeating itself while making our homes, communities, and schools safe.     

Mental Health Services for Incarcerated Youth: Report from a Statewide Survey

The need for mental health care has been steadily increasing for youth coming into contact with the juvenile probation system. This paper presents the results of a statewide survey of juvenile probation departments and associated mental health, health care, court, and education personnel in California. The intent of the survey was to better understand the costs and associated contexts of caring for youth with suspected mental disorders in juvenile detention facilities. The burden of caring for these youth on detention facilities and their staffs is substantial. Implications for courts, policy planning, training, and further research are discussed.     

Variables influencing sentencing severity: Intercourt differences in Connecticut

Studies of criminal-court dispositions have traditionally aggregated courts along political and geographic boundaries. This article suggests that courts should be analyzed individually, even within the same jurisdiction, as a means of increasing the explanatory capacity of the variables involved. Further, it is contended that intercourt differences are a result of organizational influences operating within each court.     

Juvenile Shackling Reform: The Judicial Role in Ensuring Trauma‐Informed Courts and Why States Are Rethinking Restraints

In juvenile courts around the country, youth are routinely shackled, without any evidence that these young people are a danger to anyone or likely to attempt flight. A number of states are moving away from this practice. Shackling reform initiatives are motivated by constitutional issues, emerging science around adolescent development, and a growing recognition of the need for trauma‐informed, evidence‐based courts. Judges are ultimately responsible for safeguarding the rights of the young people who appear in court, and must uphold the dignity of the courtroom. A review of jurisdictions that have adopted limits on juvenile shackling shows that these policies have not resulted in breaches of safety.     

Drug courts for DWI offenders? The effectiveness of two hybrid drug courts on DWI offenders

The effectiveness of drug courts for illegal drug-involved offenders has been well documented (Belenko, 1998, 2001; Wilson, Mitchell, & MacKenzie, 2006), however, few studies had examined whether they work for repeat “driving while intoxicated” (DWI) or “driving under the influence” (DUI) offenders. The current study examined sixty-six offenders who had completed one of two hybrid DUI/drug courts (compared to eighty-six similar parolees) operating in two small cities in a single midwestern state. Results suggested that among non-DUI offenders, completion of the drug court program reduced recidivism, as might be expected; however, among the subsample of chronic DUI offenders no significant recidivism reduction was noted. These results add to the small, but growing literature suggesting that DUI courts (as they are currently being implemented) may not be an effective way to reduce the occurrence of repeat DUI offenses. Suggestions for DUI court implementation and future research are presented.     

Judicial Perspectives on Family Drug Treatment Courts

Family Drug Treatment Courts are a specialized calendar or docket that operates within the juvenile dependency court. These courts provide the setting for a collaborative effort by the court and all the participants in the child protection system to come together in a non‐adversarial setting to determine the individual treatment needs of substance‐abusing parents whose children are under the jurisdiction of the dependency court. This article is intended to give judges and others a judicial perspective on FDTCs, and to offer some assistance for those who are operating or who are considering creating one.