Close Menu
Berlin, Ocean Pines News Worcester County Bayside Gazette Logo Berlin, Ocean Pines News Worcester County Bayside Gazette

410-723-6397

Drug courts provide alternative to prison

(Jan. 12, 2017) The first drug court in the United States was established in Florida in the late 1980’s, as prisons were becoming overcrowded with nonviolent drug offenders during the height of the crack-cocaine craze. By 2014, all 50 states and Washington, D.C. had their own versions in place.
Locally, Worcester County established its drug court in December 2005 as an alternative to traditional court, provided an offender met the criteria of committing a nonviolent offense and having a clinical substance abuse disorder.
According to Tracy Simpson, the drug court coordinator for the Worcester County Circuit and District Courts, the service is available “post-plea” or “post-disposition,” meaning an adult would have to plead guilty, or a juvenile would have to plead “involved” and agree to participate as a condition of their probation.
“In the adult system the person is given an opportunity to complete the [drug court] program in lieu of the full period of incarceration they are facing,” she said. “The person must meet our eligibility criteria … and then they will have a larger suspended portion of their sentence than they would if they went the traditional route.”
During the current opioid epidemic, Simpson said instances of burglary have risen sharply, and that particular crime is a good example of an offense where drug court can be a useful option.
“Persons addicted cannot afford to maintain their habit and they often will break into unoccupied residences, or sometimes their place of employment, and steal various items that can easily be pawned for cash,” she said. “This offense is a felony and typically provides a sentence that would be served in the Maryland penitentiary system – not our county jail.”
With the drug court alternative, a person that commits a low-level nonviolent crime motivated by drug addiction would face a split sentence, spending some period of time in a local detention facility with a larger suspended sentence that remains outstanding and that can be reactivated if they fail to satisfactorily complete the probation requirements.
“We have numerous participants in this situation, where but for this program they have would have been sent automatically to prison,” Simpson said. “The program has to balance both public safety and the treatment needs of the clients, so both the defendant and the prosecution feel the resolution is fair.
“Also, in some limited circumstances, if a person has no criminal record prior to the crime in which is being referred to the program, they may be afforded an opportunity to have their record expunged after successful completion of their probation and the program,” she added. “We have several young adult participants who have engaged in acts of CDS distribution while purchasing opioids for their own habit and then sharing or selling off some excess to their friends.
“After successfully completing the probation and program they have a modification hearing to strike the finding of guilt in the case,” Simpson said. “Then, after a period of time following that procedure, they can file for an expungement. Many of these young adults do not realize the totality of the impact that a felony as such will have on their ability to find employment, so having this opportunity has such a positive impact on their future.”
Adult programs last a minimum of one year, with review hearings scheduled twice per month during the first two phases, and once a month during the final two phases.
Each phase has an extensive series of requirements before a person can move onto the next one. For instance, phase one requires an addictions assessment by the Worcester County Health Department, participation in a substance abuse treatment program, housing through the Drug Treatment Court Program, compliance with probation requirements, compliance with case managers including weekly contact with a case manager, obtaining approved employment within 30 days, attending at least two judicial hearings per month, performing at least four hours of community service, submitting to two-to-six random drug tests per month, complying with curfew requirements and completing 21 consecutive days of “clean time.”
Simpson said the majority of participants in the program have charges related to controlled dangerous substance possession or distribution, as well as burglary and theft. She said 85 people were in the program during the last fiscal year, and she expected that number to remain about the same during the current period.  
The youth version of the program requires a minimum of 10 months and uses the same four-phase approach and requirements. Simpson said there are about 10 such cases each year.
Notably, she said drug court participants are “about 95 [percent] opioid addicted.”
“When we became operational most of the participants were addicted to cocaine, and then we began to see opioid addiction around 2007/2008,” she said. “By 2009/2010 we really began to see the shift and most of clients at that time (65-70 percent) were opioid dependent. And then by 2012 we hit the 95 percent mark and have remained there. Property crimes and burglary crimes have increased during this period … it is a financial habit that cannot be maintained.”
Drug court, Simpson said, is not for everyone, although it is one of the only alternatives courts have to offer someone struggling with addiction that allows them to “remain in the community while getting treatment and having enhanced supervision,” as opposed to serving outright jail time.
“The programs are developed based on a best-practices national model and then modified to fit jurisdictional nuances/constraints, to provide a year of community-based treatment while being highly supervised,” Simpson said. “The team effort really enhances both the quality of the services provided as well as the monitoring of compliance. Having the same clinicians, probation agent, case management staff, judicial staff and ancillary service providers meet every two weeks to discuss a person’s progress and make changes to their treatment regimen is unique to these types of programs.”
She said monitoring is “quite intensive” during the early stages of treatment, although that lessens during the latter phases.
“Nationwide recidivism rates show much better outcomes than traditional case processing, and we have about a 50 percent program-graduation rate, which is on par with the national average,” Simpson said. “Locally, we have improved our outcomes with opioid-dependent clients with increased access to medication-assisted treatment programs now being readily available (methadone, Suboxone and Vivitrol). When the shift toward opioid dependency began our area did not have these types of programs readily available and meeting community-based treatment needs was difficult.
“Drug courts work with a subset population of those struggling with addiction – those which have found themselves interfaced with the criminal justice system,” she added. “It is a form of coercive treatment, meaning they are choosing the program to avoid some greater consequence (typically a prison sentence). These programs are very successful for those persons who find a source of intrinsic motivation along the way and the coercive nature of how they began the program is no longer their driving force.”