Seattle University Collaborative Projects - International Academy of ...

Dave Cole, Office of the Arizona Attorney General, Phoenix, USA (drcoleua@gmail.com)Judge Cole was among the first Drug Court Judges at the Maricopa County Superior Court. Hewill contribute to the hypothesis that former problem-solving court judges can contribute to thestudy of TJ and its practical applications through an understanding and sharing of effective TJtechniques. Such techniques may be just as effective in non-specific traditional courts as in theproblem-solving courts. Perhaps the most important technique is that of improvedcommunication skills. For instance, it is important to abandon a paternalistic listening andspeaking style in the court room and to adopt a manner that communicates respect to the litigantsand attorneys; this encourages people to feel comfortable speaking in court, giving voice todefendants, victims, and their families. In all criminal sentencing hearings, the judge can engagein active listening to aid the court in setting fines, restitution, and terms of probation. The uniqueconcepts of the team-approach and review-type hearings can be modified and utilizedsuccessfully in traditional court proceedings.Judging in a Modern Problem-Solving or Specialty Court: The Challenges andthe RewardsKeelan Bodow, Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix, USADrug Courts have been in existence for over twenty (20) years. During those twenty years, theDrug Courts have expanded exponentially, and there are now over 2500 Drug Courts, mainly inthe United States, but many internationally. In addition, other Specialty Courts have developedincluding DUI/DWI Courts, Domestic Violence Courts, Veterans Courts, and many more. Notonly have the number of Specialty Courts increased dramatically, but the number of participantsin these courts also has sky-rocketed. At least one Drug Court in Arizona has seven-hundred(700) participants at any one time. Based on the significant number of participants in DrugCourts and other Specialty Courts, there has been a lot learned about what is effective and whatis not effective in the Problem-Solving Courts. Since there are greater numbers of participants,the data collected can be viewed as even more statistically valid and even more persuasive. Thestatistics nationwide continue to overwhelmingly show that the programs are surprisinglysuccessful in helping participants to become drug-free, and lead productive lives that do notinclude extended incarceration. With the expansion of Problem-Solving Courts, more and morepeople are having access to services that are targeted to the conditions that lead to their negativebehavior. However, challenges still exist. Rapid growth and the sheer volume of participants canadd administrative challenges, and even challenges to the core principles of the Problem-SolvingCourts. Coordination of services becomes more challenging. Having sufficient resources posesroad blocks. Some critics have questioned whether the Specialty Courts are still worth pursuing.But most of the key components of the Specialty Courts are surviving amidst these challenges.This article will look at how Drug Courts have expanded and changed since they were originallyconceived, what has been learned over the years, and investigate whether, and what type, ofchanges may be needed in the future.452