This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Listwan, S. J. Articles by Latessa, E. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Effect of Drug Court Programming on Recidivism: the Cincinnati Experience

Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nevada Las Vegas

Jody L. Sundt

Center for the Study of Crime, Delinquency, and Corrections, Southern Illinois University

Alexander M. Holsinger

Department of Sociology/Criminal Justice and Criminology, University of Missouri–Kansas City

Edward J. Latessa

Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati

The impetus of the drug court movement can be traced to a number of factors, such as the social and organizational costs of imprisonment and the literature surrounding the effectiveness of community-based treatment. Regardless of its origins, however, drug courts have altered the way in which court systems process drug cases and respond to drug-dependent offenders. Evaluations of U.S. drug courts are beginning to emerge, and although the outcome results are encouraging, not all courts are showing a reduction in rearrest rates. Despite the rapid expansion of drug courts, their growing prevalence, and popularity, little is known about the drug court model's ability to achieve its objectives in a variety of circumstances. This research adds to the literature on drug courts by examining the effect of drug court programming on multiple indicators of recidivism. Results of the study are mixed; however, the drug court treatment group did perform better when examining arrest for a drug-related offense.

Key Words: drug courts • treatment • recidivism

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 49, No. 3, 389-411 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128703049003003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. J. Listwan, D. K. Shaffer, and J. L. Hartman Combating Methamphetamine Use in the Community: The Efficacy of the Drug Court Model Crime Delinquency, October 1, 2009; 55(4): 627 - 644. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. D. Warner and J. H. Kramer Closing the Revolving Door?: Substance Abuse Treatment as an Alternative to Traditional Sentencing for Drug-Dependent Offenders Criminal Justice and Behavior, January 1, 2009; 36(1): 89 - 109. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. F. Garrity, S. H. Prewitt, M. Joosen, M. S. Tindall, J. M. Webster, and C. G. Leukefeld Baseline Subjective Stress Predicts 1-Year Outcomes Among Drug Court Clients Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, June 1, 2008; 52(3): 346 - 357. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. E. Lutze and J. G. van Wormer The Nexus Between Drug and Alcohol Treatment Program Integrity and Drug Court Effectiveness: Policy Recommendations for Pursuing Success Criminal Justice Policy Review, September 1, 2007; 18(3): 226 - 245. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. S. Sanford and B. A. Arrigo Lifting the Cover on Drug Courts: Evaluation Findings and Policy Concerns Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, June 1, 2005; 49(3): 239 - 259. [Abstract] [PDF]