Specialty courts: Who’s in and are they working?

Abstract

The effectiveness of specialty courts has been well established in the literature; however, previous studies have not taken into account referral biases that may exist based on offenders' race, socioeconomic status (SES), attorney status, and so forth. The current study hypothesized that (a) Participants who are racially diverse, of lower SES, and represented by privately retained attorneys would be referred less frequently to specialty courts, and (b) Participants in specialty courts would evidence reductions in missed court appointments and failed urinary analyses (UAs) compared with peers not enrolled in specialty courts. Participants (N = 274) were probationers who were involved in 1 of 3 specialty court programs (i.e., drug, driving while intoxicated [DWI], or reentry courts) or a matched sample of probationers not in specialty court services. Results indicated that, in general and with few exceptions, specialty courts did not have differential referral rates based on offender demographics including race, ethnicity, SES, or attorney status (court appointed vs. privately retained). Results examining the effectiveness of the specialty courts were mixed. Participants in the in-prison treatment program reentry court missed a greater proportion of scheduled court meetings than did their matched sample counterparts; however, the other specialty court programs did not significantly differ from their matched-sample counterparts. Participants in the DWI court had a significantly smaller proportion of UA failures to total UAs than did their matched sample peers; however, the drug court and reentry court programs did not significantly differ from their matched sample counterparts. Implications, future directions, and limitations are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

A Criminological Fly in the Ointment: Specialty Courts and the Generality of Deviance

“…Criminologists are pretty good at being critics, but criticism on its own is ultimately not all that helpful unless it also comes with an alternative way of looking at things. This is particularly true in the present case, since unlike other correctional fads of the past (e.g., boot camp prisons, scared straight programs, or restorative justice programs), specialty courts do not seem to be showing any signs of going away or of even slowing down (Morgan et al, 2016). So in the spirit of what has become known recently as "translational" or "public criminology" (Pesta, Blomberg, Ramos, & Ranson, 2018;Sullivan, Welsh, & Ilchi, 2017), we have some recommendations for specialty courts moving forward so that they might increase their odds of being effective for enhancing public safety.…”

Addressing mass incarceration amid a pandemic: Psychology informing decarceration as a racial justice and public health response.

“…In the last decade, several states have implemented policies that reallocate funds to rehabilitative services, such as mental health and substance abuse treatment programs, reducing recidivism (Grady et al, 2021). Forensic psychologists have been heavily involved in developing and researching diversion programs and specialty courts, including determinations for these programs, to reduce the number of people funneled into the carceral system (Desmarais & Lowder, 2020; Morgan et al, 2016; Rotter & Barber-Rioja, 2015; Steadman et al, 1999). These efforts should continue, and practitioners should also collaborate to research to examine whether racial disparities exist within these programs.…”

Violence risk assessment and psychological treatment in correctional and forensic settings: Advances in research and practice.

“…This array of measures performed in an overall similar manner, with some variations, and the VRAG performed slightly better than did the other measures. Morgan et al (2016) evaluate the assignment of offender types to specialty courts. Building on the successes of drug courts in launching recovery for substance-dependent offenders, Morgan and colleagues examine other specialty courts, such as driving while intoxicated (DWI) courts and prison-based release/reentry courts.…”