Public Notice Detail

MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. (July 6, 1999) – Today, Hennepin County District Court Judge Kevin Burke released three separate reports on the effectiveness of Drug Court. The reports were released during a forum at Lucille’s Kitchen in North Minneapolis.

“Two years ago we launched Drug Court as a bold experiment,” said Judge Burke.  “Today, we have proof that it is working and worth continuing.”

Hennepin County Drug Court began in January 1997 as a direct response to the increased number of drug-abusing offenders in Minneapolis.  It is designed to move felony drug cases through the courts more quickly and to link offenders with needed services, like treatment, probation, housing, employment and training. 

Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Kathleen A. Blatz said, “Drug Court is an innovative and responsive way to deal with one of the most disturbing trends in criminal justice.  Substance abuse is now a significant factor in eight out of ten criminal cases entering our courts each year.”

The goals of the court are as follows: require full-time employment and/or treatment; shorten the time from arrest to first appearance; resolve each case with fewer appearances; shorten the time it takes to dispose of cases; provide early and intensive intervention; reduce the recidivism rate; and hold drug defendants accountable by requiring them to regularly appear in court.  The three reports measure Drug Court’s progress in meeting these goals.

A summary of report findings indicates that Drug Court has met most of its goals. 

1.  Hennepin County Drug Court Second Year Activity Report – Drug Court processes significantly more cases than courts in previous years.  The number of new drug felony cases increased 54% in the first two years of Drug Court, handling 3,350 cases.  Conviction rates have remained stable when compared to years prior to Drug Court.  However, imposed incarceration rates have increased a full 20% when comparing 1998 to 1996, before Drug Court.  Drug Court also demonstrates a higher rate of imprisonment for the most serious felony drug convictions than Minnesota as a whole.  The amount of time between the date of the offense and the case resolution has decreased by a factor of five.

2.  Hennepin County Drug Court Participant Survey – Conducted by the Minnesota Supreme Court, this report confidentially surveyed 293 drug court participants during a two-week period in November 1998.  Overall, participants viewed drug court as an effective means of curbing their drug addition.  Two-thirds of respondents cited periodic meetings with judges as the feature of Drug Court that “worked most” in keeping them off drugs.  Random drug testing was the next most important factor in maintaining sobriety. 

Of those that had finished their drug treatment program, 82% claimed it was “very helpful” in getting them off drugs.  While most feel that Drug Court was working well or no improvements were needed, some suggested additional night court or more rehabilitation programs. 

3.  Citizens Council Drug Court Evaluation – The Minnesota Citizens Council on Crime and Justice is an independent, non-partisan organization contracted by Hennepin County to evaluate the process and outcomes of Drug Court.  Unlike the Drug Court Activity Report, which utilized data from 1996 through 1998, the Citizens Council primarily analyzed data from portions of the first year of Drug Court, 1997, and compared it to data from 1996.

The Citizen Council concluded that Drug Court had met all but one of its process goals in reducing the time from booking to first appearance, in reducing the total number of court appearances and increasing the rate of treatment completion for offenders.  Drug Court fell just short of its intent to decrease the average case length to three weeks, but did reduce the average time from over four months in 1996, to four weeks in 1997.  The Council also determined that Drug Court reduced offenders’ use of drugs and improved judicial efficiency by handling 31% of all felony cases filed in Hennepin County.  However, they found a statistically similar rate of recidivism and recommended substantially improved record keeping.

“We have made a concerted effort to improve our tracking of Drug Court cases and hope to have the resources to continually upgrade in the future,” Judge Burke responded.  “Regarding recidivism, we know that crime and substance abuse are deeply interwoven behaviors.  In fact, the average drug court offender nationally has a decade-long problem with drugs.  In that context, a two-year analysis may not be the final word,” he added.

Judge Burke also stressed that improvements will continue to be made in the future.  “Today’s Drug Court is a different and better system than what we had in 1997 and in 1998,” he said.  “The ability to change and respond so we achieve better outcomes is the very essence of our success.” 

As drug courts nationally have become a more mainstream approach to effectively handling substance offenders, the Hennepin County Drug Court has become a model for other states.  “I am very impressed with Hennepin County’s court,” said Jeff Tauber, Executive Director of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals.  “They have accepted one of the toughest challenges by involving all offenders in their program, instead of a small, select group.  In terms of a comprehensive approach, Hennepin County is one of the top five drug court systems in the nation,” Tauber added.