Court Would Focus on Drug Abuse Cases

Ventura County prosecutors and defense attorneys, adversaries for years when it came to dealing with drug offenders, have teamed up in a push to completely change how these cases are treated by the criminal justice system.

Their plan calls for the establishment of a specialized drug court, where justice is meted out swiftly but mercy also is available for drug users who want to put their lives in order.

For prosecutors, it means abandoning a long-standing emphasis on punishment in favor of viewing substance abuse as a disease. For defense attorneys, the plan calls for their clients to accept greater responsibility for their actions and their recovery.

Faced with such obstacles as a lack of funding, prosecutors and defense attorneys nonetheless remain undaunted.

“This has to occur,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Ronald C. Janes said. “The other things (that have been tried) don’t work.”

Janes and Deputy Public Defender Christina Briles, who have worked for months to formulate the plan, say they are motivated by a realization that drug or alcohol use influences as much as 90% of all crime in Ventura County.

Furthermore, they say, a special diversion program for first-time drug offenders has such a high failure rate that many substance abusers find themselves back in court and off to jail, the beginning of a cycle that costs the county both in terms of money spent and crimes committed.

“If we can increase the number of individuals who successfully accept treatment and rid themselves of addiction, we will reduce overall criminality in the county,” Janes and Briles wrote in a memo to presiding Municipal Judge Bruce A. Clark.

The drug court concept--modeled after a successful program in Alameda County--calls for a specially trained judge and court staff to deal with a drug offender within a day or two after arrest, when the individual is in crisis and is most motivated to change his life.

The arrestee is offered an opportunity to avoid a criminal conviction by immediately entering a treatment program chosen by a trained drug evaluator. The drug offender signs a contract that offers rewards and punishments based on compliance with the rules of the program, and both successes and problems are brought swiftly to the judge’s attention, to be dealt with in open court.

Initially, those eligible for the program will be first-time offenders who are arrested for being under the influence of a drug or possessing a controlled substance for personal use. Eventually, repeat offenders may be included, Briles said.

Major differences between the proposed plan and the current program are speed, approach to treatment and supervision. First-time drug offenders now can be diverted from criminal conviction, but it takes at least 35 days to start the program and by then many drug users are no longer in a panic and willing to change, officials said.

Consequently, many of those who are accepted into the diversion program never follow through with it, said Dennis Giroux, whose company runs the program for the county.

Although accurate statistics are difficult to obtain, it is estimated that more than 900 first-time drug offenders were considered for diversion in 1992. Giroux said 30% to 40% of those never made it to the program.

Another problem with the current program is that it emphasizes education and counseling, which falls far short of the intensive treatment needed by many substance abusers, Giroux said. The program is designed for “the naive, inexperienced, first-time offender,” but in reality most of the participants have been drug addicts for half of their lives, he said.

Briles said when people now fail to comply with diversion, they are taken out of the program and sent to jail, often for six months or a year. In the new program it would be understood that “relapse is part of the rehabilitation process,” she said.

“We’re seeing a gradual change in approach, to the philosophy that this is a health problem, not a moral problem,” Briles said. “These are not throw-away people.”

Finally, under the proposal all drug offenders will be closely supervised by a probation officer. This contrasts sharply with the current situation, where probation officers meet infrequently with those in the diversion program.

But the cost of that supervision remains a problem. Close supervision costs money, and the county Probation Department estimates it would take anywhere from $397,000 to just over $1 million--depending on the extent of the program--to implement it.

“We do support the idea,” said Cal Remington, division manager of court services for the Probation Department. “Coming up with adequate resources to make it work like it should is really the trick.”

Briles said she hopes to tap into the $5.3 million allocated to the county Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs to help pay for the drug court. Stephen G. Kaplan, director of the department, said that may be impossible because most of his funding comes from the federal government, which specifies how it must be spent.

“I don’t see right now how we can do that,” Kaplan said. “On the other hand, I would never put a damper on this thing because we don’t have the money right now.”

Alameda County officials, who implemented the program in January, 1991, boast of significant savings in law enforcement costs because drug offenders are spending less time in custody and being arrested fewer times.

Ventura County officials say they likewise hope to save money with the program once it is implemented. Janes said his office is looking into possible funding sources outside the county to start the program.

The plan, regardless of its popularity with attorneys, will never be implemented without the approval of the court. Clark said he favors the concept, but he and fellow judges agreed that “it made no sense to us at this time to proceed any further . . . if there is no money to pay the additional probation officers.”

Even if that money can be found, Clark said, another major hurdle is finding out who will pay for the treatment that many of the drug users will need.

Still, county departments that would be affected by the change are expecting the drug court to become a reality. They also say they welcome the change, since there are so many flaws with the current system.

“I think that the climate is such that it will happen,” said Remington of the Probation Department. “The question is when.”