Impaired Driving Case Essentials Honorable Michael

DWI COURTS

Impaired Driving Case Essentials

Honorable Michael Barrasse

Honorable Peggy Fulton Hora

Rhinestone Cowboy at .20

“Down and Out in Beverly Hills”

“Rock Bottom” at .17

Brave(?) Mouth at .12 with prior

“Baby Love” at .20

Objectives Overview of NCDC/DWI Drug Court

Model

Federally funded DWI Courts

Discuss Unique Attributes of DWI

cases

Discuss “Ideal Participants” for DWI

Courts

Consider DWI Court workings

Don’t drink and make signs

Problem Solving Courts

Problem Solving Courts a.k.a Collaborative Justice, Solution-Focused Courts

Problem Solving Focus

Team Approach to Decision Making

Integration of ancillary services

Judicial Supervision of Treatment Process and Proactive Role of Judge In and Out of Court

Direct Interaction between Participants and Judge

Community Outreach

~2,500 Drug Tx Courts in U.S.

Federal

District

Campus

Tribal

Reentry

DWI

Family

Juvenile

Adult

Drug Tx

Courts

500

1,157 Problem-Solving Courts

P-S

Courts

Re-

entry Gun

Community

Mental

Health

DV

Prosti-

tution Parole

Vio.

Home

less

Veteran

Integrated

Tx

Truancy

Child

Supp

Gambling

International Perspective

on Problem-Solving Courts

Australia Bermuda

England Jamaica

Canada Mauritius

Scotland Wales

Ireland Northern Ireland

New Zealand Guam

Cayman Islands N. Marianas

Belgium Guam

Netherlands Mexico

Georgia Surinam

Macedonia Israel

Brazil Norway

Problem Solving

Considerations

Changing Traditional Attitudes of

Judges and other team members

Changing Role Orientations of

Judges and other team members

Resource Constraints

Time Constraints

Judicial Leadership is a MUST!

Judicial Problem Solving Mindset

Do you have it?

Have more questions

(in individual cases)?

Care to seek more

information?

Willing to explore

broader solution

range?

Wish for a positive

experience?

Direct Interaction with

Participants

Prerequisite for Behavior

Modification

Motivates Participants for Success

Finds Crucial Needs of Participants

Lays backbone for Positive Solutions

Ongoing Judicial Supervision

Participants reports back (usually

weekly, bi-weekly or monthly)

Minimum is every 2 weeks for best

results

Team members update Court

regularly

Sentence adapted as participant

progresses or regresses

Barriers to Problem Solving

Courts

Time

Resources

Judicial Role

Personality

Education

Training

Show Me the Money

• Dept. of Transportation (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

• 23 CFR Part 1313 (implements 23 U.S.C. 410) effective 6/20/06

• States receive Incentive Grants (called Section 410 Grants)

• Alcohol-impaired driving prevention programs

DWI Court Grant Qualification

Must abide by Ten Guiding Principles

Established by NCDC (National Center for DWI

Courts)

State must have one court initially

Increases one court each year of compliance

(four year grants)

States with four or more DWI Courts compliant

Hybrid Drug Courts (include DWI) compliant

DWI Facts A “first time” DUI defendant has driven

400 times under the influence before

being caught.

Average BAC .15

Who’s Drinking Alcohol?

36% don’t drink

2006 = 74% had

drink last week;

1996 = 54%

8% drink 2/3 sold

5% consume 50%

1.5 million DWI arrests/year

"First"

Prior

500,000

1,000,000

Repeat offenders

There are >2 million drivers with

three or more DWI convictions

400,000 with five or more

½ fatal alcohol related crashes

were .15 or > OR a repeat offender

with a drunk driving arrest or

conviction in the last ten years

Why Should You Care? Many traditional responses are not

effective

Reduces recidivism

Combines punishment with treatment AND supervision

Oversight by Court

Dramatic Cost Savings to Jurisdiction and State

$20,000 to incarcerate one year

$2500 to $3500 per year for drug court

Reduced recidivism

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kootenai ID

Lansing MI

Bernalillo

DWI Court

BAU

15.5% 28.5% after 2 years

13% 33% after 5 years

4% 25% after 2 years

DWI re-arrest rates

Michigan DWI/Drug Court

Outcome Evaluation 2007

DWI Ct.

BAU0

5

10

15

20

25

Year 1Year 2

Year 3

DWI Ct.

BAU

D

W

I

A

L

L

15.2% 24.2%

4.3% 7.7%

.07%

13.6%

Georgia DUI Court Study 2011

Three site study in GA over 4 years

Re-arrest rate 9% for graduates vs.

26% for non-participants after 4

years

DUI Courts prevented 47-112

repeat arrests over 4 years

Fell, et al., “An Evauation of the Three Georgia DUI Courts,” NHTSA (March 2011)

Efficacy

DWI Courts reduce re-arrest 19x’s

greater than business as usual

10 Guiding Principles

• 1. Determining the Population

• 2. Performing a Clinical Assessment

• 3. Develop the Treatment Plan

• 4. Supervise the Offender

• 5. Forge Agency, Organization and Community Partnerships

• 6. Take a Judicial Leadership Role

• 7. Develop Case Management Strategies

• 8. Address Transportation Issues

• 9. Evaluate the Program

• 10. Ensure a Sustainable Program

Guiding Principle #1

Determining the Population

Targeting-process of identifying

subset of DWI offender

population for inclusion

Accept only one type of offender

Person who drives while

impaired by alcohol or other

drugs

Determining Target Population

Collaborate with Community

Law enforcement, Prosecutors, Victims groups (e.g., MADD), civic clubs, defense counsel, treatment community, faith-based

Sufficient size for community impact

Modest enough to provide quality services

Consider First Time Offenders

Focus on Repeat Offenders

Unique Target Population for your community

Guiding Principle #2

Perform a Clinical Assessment

Clinically competent, objective

assessment

Alcohol Use Severity (ASI)

Drug Involvement

Level of Needed Care

Medical and Mental Health Status

Social Support Systems

Individual Motivation to Change

Other Clinical Considerations

Psychiatric Status

Employment and Financial

Status

Alcohol Triggers and Cognitions

Family and Social Status

Level of Care Placement

Guiding Principle #3

Develop the Treatment Plan

Must address multiple problem areas

Alcoholism

Drug Dependency

Mental Health Issues

Individually treatment services

Prescribed

Most likely to bring about change

Guiding Principle #4

Supervise the Offender

Community Supervision

Drug Court Coordinator and Case

Specialist

Constant Monitoring, Testing and

Supervision

Compliance with Court Orders

Recommendations to the Judge

Guiding Principle #5

Forge Agency, Organization &

Community Partnerships

Essential to Success of Program

Enhance Credibility

Bolster Support

Broaden Available Resources

Teamwork essential in and out of

Court

Partnerships in Your

Jurisdiction

What are some of

the partnerships

that you would

consider essential

to have a

successful DWI

Court in your

community?

Guiding Principle #6

Take a Judicial Leadership

Role • Judge is vital to success

• Must possess leadership skills

• Must motivate team members and participants

• Must sell the program to the community

• Judge is backbone of Drug Court Team

Considerations for Judge

Level of need within community

Sufficiency of Resources

Team member level of interest

Cohesiveness of team members

Administer DWI Court within statutory

mandates

Develop Appropriate Sanctions and

Incentives

Deal with Positive and Negative

Guiding Principle #7

Develop Case Management

Strategies

1. Assessment

2. Planning

3. Linking

4. Monitoring

5. Advocacy

Guiding Principle #8

Address Transportation Issues

Participant needs a ride!

Participant must attend counselling, court, drug testing, Adult Education, maintain employment . .

State suspend driving privilege for DWI Conviction?

Transportation likely your largest obstacle

Hardship Licenses might be crucial

Guiding Principle #9

Evaluate the Program

Evaluation maps programs success or failure

Determines which clients have best outcome

Which interventions produce improved outcomes

Which clients have better outcomes when exposed

to specific interventions

Evaluations usually done by Agency (e.g. State

University)

Guiding Principle #10

Ensure a Sustainable Program

State and/or Federal Funding

Medicaid and Managed Care

Counties and Municipalities

Client Fees

Affiliations with Non-Profit Organizations

Foundations, Service Organizations and

Private Business

Other Sustainability

Considerations

Law Enforcement and Probation

Treatment Partners

Media Partners

Community Organizations

Funding

Useful Methods for Handling

DWI Cases

Consider resources, both presently

available and unavailable, to your court

Consider resources within the constraints

of your statutes and regulations

Consider how these resources can be

applied in both DWI Court and non-DWI

Court setting

“If drinking is interfering with your

work, you’re probably a heavy

drinker. If work is interfering with

your drinking, you’re probably an

alcoholic.”

Anonymous

September 7, 2007 47

Sentencing Options DWI

Offenders Ignition Interlock Device (IID)

Home Electronic Alcohol Monitoring

(HEMI)

Frequent Alcohol/Drug Testing (breath,

blood, saliva ,hair, liver panels)

Staggered Sentencing/Imprisonment

Home Confinement/Curfews

Home checks

Operation of DWI Court

Discussion of Court Sessions

Forms Utilized by DWI Court

Unique Elements of DWI Cases

What makes a DWI case unique

from any other case?

Getting Our Community

Involved

• Form Steering Committee

• Form Team for Training

• Include Prosecutors, Law Enforcement, Defense Counsel (probably Public Defender), Treatment Community, Judges, Community Supervisor (if possible)

• Attend free NCDC Trainings

Who is our Target Population?

Convicted DWI-multiple offenders

Exceptions for 1st time offenders

Alcohol and/or Drug Use Identified

Community resident

Ability to Complete Program Successfully

Participants congruent with resources

Prognostic Risks Current age <25

Delinquent onset <16

Substance abuse onset <14

Prior rehabilitation failures

History of violence

ASPD (20-25% of those in tx)

Psychopathy (3-5% of those in tx)

Familial hx of crime/addiction

Criminal/substance abuse associates

High risk does not equal violence

or dangerousness

High risk requires greater services

and supervision or will recidivate

Criminogenic Needs

Substance Dependence or Addiction

1. Binge pattern

2. Cravings or compulsions

3. Withdrawal symptoms

Alcoholic = Abstinence is a distal goal

Substance abuse = abstinence is a

proximal goal

Collateral needs

Co-occurring disorders

Chronic medical conditions

Homelessness, chronic un- or

underemployment

Regimen compliance is proximal

TARGET: High risk, high needs

Frequent status hearings

Tx and habilitation

Compliance/attendance is proximal

Restrictive consequences

Positive reinforcement

Medically assisted tx

Pueraria lobata (Kudzu)

“Heavy” drinkers (>26

drinks/week)

Kudzu extract for 7 days

Significant reduction in number

of beers consumed

Lukas, SE, et al., “An extract of the Chinese herbal root kudzu reduces alcohol drinking by heavy drinkers in a naturalistic

setting,” Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research 29:756-762, 2005

Medically Assisted Treatment

Disulfiram (Antabuse®) [new promise for cocaine addiction when combined with buprenorphine]

Naltrexone Hydrochloride (ReVia®) or

Nalmefene (Revex®) [antagonists that reduce craving and blunt the high if alcohol taken; efficacy may have genetic component]

Vivitrol® long-acting Naltrexone once-a-month injection

Acamprosate Calcium (Campral®) [better for liver disease patients] “Strengthens the will to say no”

Fluoxetine (Prozac®) [among the 50 new trials on alcoholism]

http://clinicaltrials.gov

Seeking Clients

• Judge, Prosecutor, Defense Counsel seek participants within Target Population

• Family, friends and community members helpful

• Defendant must agree to participate

• Screening, Criminal Background, ASI completed by Coordinator and Treatment Provider

• Individualized Program Plan completed for participant

• Defendant formally admitted to Program

Could you complete program?

• Three intensive phases to graduate

• Phase I-Most Intensive Phase lasts 3 to 6 months

• Phase II-Educational Period lasts 6 to 9 months

• Phase III-Self-Motivational Phase-3 to 6 months

• Successful participant requires 12 to 18 months

• Graduation then six months Aftercare component

• Up to 2 years for completion!

Other Program Requirements

Drug Court Staff Supervision

Frequent Drug Testing

Counseling Sessions (Treatment)

AA/NA meetings

Employment, Education or Community

Service

Adult Education/Family Learning

Scheduled Court Sessions

Court Sessions

Staff Team Meetings

Discuss Individual Cases

Input from team members

Consensus on Individual case

plan

Judge carries out decision in

courtroom

Personal Satisfaction

Judge witnesses positive change

Participants change physically before your eyes

Families, friends and community are impacted

“You have changed my life”

“If you do nothing else in your life, you’ve changed our community”

Some Useful Resources

• HARDCORE DRUNK DRIVING JUDICIAL

GUIDE, National Association of State

Judicial Educators, www.nasje.org

• National Center for DWI Courts,

www.allrise.org (various publications)

• National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, www.nhtsa.dot.gov

• National Judicial College, www.judges.org

CONCLUSION

DWI Court is Problem Solving Court

Incorporates Punishment, Treatment

& Oversight

DWI Courts save money, reduce

recidivism, increase public safety

Drug Court will change many lives

Especially the Judge’s!