Sentencing Panel Mulls Alternatives to Prison

October 21, 2008

Published October 12, 2008 The Washington Post By Darryl Fears http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/11/AR2008101102051.html

The U.S. Sentencing Commission is considering endorsing options including treatment programs for nonviolent users of drugs such as crack. (By Damian Dovarganes -- Associated Press)

 

 

As the nation’s inmate population climbs toward 2.5 million, the U.S. Sentencing Commission is considering alternatives to prison for some offenders, including treatment programs for nonviolent drug users and employment training for minor parole violators.

The commission’s consideration of alternatives to incarceration reflects its determination to persuade Congress to ease federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws that contributed to explosive growth in the prison population. The laws were enacted in the mid-1980s, principally to address a crime epidemic related to crack cocaine. But in recent years, federal judges, public defenders and probation officials have argued that mandatory sentences imprison first-time offenders unnecessarily and disproportionately affect minorities.

If the commission moves ahead with recommending alternatives to Congress, it would send a strong signal to state sentencing commissions and legislatures, and could pave the way for a major expansion of drug courts and adult developmental programs for parolees, advocates said.

“We are leading the world in incarcerating adults, and that’s something Americans need to understand,” said Beryl Howell, one of six members of the commission, which drafts federal sentencing guidelines and advises the House and Senate on prison policy. “People should be aware that every tough-on-crime act comes with a price. The average cost [of incarceration] across the country is $24,000 a year per inmate. . . . It’s going up far faster than state budgets can keep up.”

About 2,000 drug courts nationwide spend between $1,500 and $11,000 per offender, according to the National Drug Court Institute. Those scattered courts handle only a small fraction of the 1.5 million nonviolent drug offenders who are arrested and charged with a crime, said C. West Huddleston, chief executive of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals.

The courts operate under similar principles: At sentencing, a judge gives a nonviolent offender the option of going to prison or committing to a rigorous treatment program, where he or she submits to frequent tests and supervision. The aim is to reduce the 67 percent recidivism rate of addicted offenders.

The government has established a discretionary grant program, operated by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, which is distributing $13 million to drug court programs this year.

“Drug courts are the most successful strategy in terms of reducing crime, but they’re tremendously underutilized,” Huddleston said. “I think a Sentencing Commission recommendation to U.S. courts would create momentum. It’ll wake up state legislatures. It’s a conversation that should have been had years ago.”

The commission held a symposium to discuss alternatives to incarceration in July after a study this year by the nonpartisan Pew Center on the States revealed that more than one in 100 American adults are in jail or prison. That study was followed by a Bureau of Justice Statistics report in June that showed that a record 7.2 million people are under supervision in the criminal justice system. The cost, about $45 billion a year, has forced states such as California to export inmates to private prisons as far away as Tennessee.

Jeffrey L. Sedgwick, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s office of justice programs, said the burgeoning prison population might be worth the cost. Research has shown that crime rates decline as the incarceration rate rises, he said. “In other words, as the number of people under correctional supervision goes up, crime goes down.”

Sedgwick said the cost of housing prisoners should be weighed against other factors, such as the cost for victims of violent crimes to piece their lives back together. He said conservative estimates put the cost of violent crime at about $17 billion.

But the Justice Department is open to discussing options that might reduce prison overcrowding and costs, and is waiting to see what the commission recommends, Sedgwick said. “We’re not necessarily going to oppose it out of hand, but we say be real careful, we recommend more study,” he said.

Howell said maintaining a prison population equal to the size of a major U.S. city “is inconsistent with what Congress had in mind with the Sentencing Reform Act” of 1984, which created the commission.

“Our purpose is not just to issue guidelines setting forth the severity of punishment, but to provide guidelines to judges for the form of that punishment,” Howell said. “The commission has spent most of its time on the severity. It is somewhat new for us to look at the form of the punishment, and that’s where alternatives come in.”

The commission’s consideration of alternatives comes the year after it defied the Bush administration by relaxing tough sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine offenders and making its decision retroactive, so that thousands already in prison could seek release before the end of their terms. About 4,000 mostly nonviolent offenders have taken advantage of the policy so far, according to members of the commission and the federal Bureau of Prisons.

The Justice Department, U.S. attorneys and the National District Attorneys Association strongly opposed easing the guidelines for crack cocaine offenders and making them retroactive. But the reaction to possible prison alternatives has not been as pronounced.

“My experience tells me that if the drug court is properly constituted and has the buy-in of judges, prosecutors and parole officials, they are very effective,” said Tom Sneddon, interim executive director of the district attorneys group and a former Santa Barbara, Calif., prosecutor who helped establish a drug court there.

“But there are some courts that are shadow programs that they use to cycle people back into society and not send them to prison, and have no real substance at all,” Sneddon said.

Another program under consideration would allow judges to develop rehabilitation programs for parolees based on their needs — such as employment, education or drug treatment. Parolees could join the program upon their release from prison or after committing a minor parole violation, such as failing to update an address or a telephone number.

Texas criminal district court Judge John Creuzot said drug courts have worked in his state. He said he established a program after Texas got tough on minor drug offenders, jailing them for two years.

“Well, that thing started to break down by the late 1990s,” he said, “. . . because then we had so many people in penitentiaries that we were actually letting murderers and rapists out to make room for these small violators, low-risk violators. And so we started rethinking what we were doing.”

The 18-month program accepts low-level drug offenders with no felony records or histories of violence. “We did a study of that program, and we have a 68 percent reduction of recidivism in that program,” Creuzot said. “It’s a phenomenally successful program.”

For parolees, job training is seen as the chief remedy to repeated incarceration, said Judge Robert Holmes Bell, chief U.S. district judge for the Western District of Michigan. “In the old days, the warden of the prison used to give the person a bus ticket and $20 and say, ‘Godspeed to you,’ and away they went.”

The Sentencing Commission’s staff is drafting a proposal amending its guidelines that the panel could submit for public comment in late December. The commission could make a final decision by May 1. Congress would then have 180 days to reverse the decision.

 

Longtime Cobb Judge Extols Success of County’s Drug Court

Cobb’s Judge George Kreeger is proud of program’s 240 graduates since 2002

By Katheryn Hayes Tucker, Staff Reporter

(Zachary D. Porter/Daily Report)

In 30 years on the bench, Cobb County Superior Court Judge George H. Kreeger has heard every kind of case and sentenced people to life imprisonment and even death. He is stern, serious and a man of few words. Yet he says his most satisfying work has been in a role akin to a cheerleader, giving support and encouragement.That would be in his work as presiding judge of the Cobb County Drug Treatment Court, an 18-month pre- and post-adjudication program for nonviolent, first-time felony drug offenders similar to others around the state.

The requirements—along with staying sober and substance free—include counseling, group therapy, 12-step meetings, random drug tests and appearances before the judge in weekly Monday morning sessions.“I try to tell them they are doing a good job,” Kreeger said in a conversation in his chambers following the most recent drug court, adding that he tries not to leave out anyone who is sincerely following the rigorous program.

“For a lot of these people, it will be the first time in the world they have ever gotten any praise.”Kreeger said the program has a 70 percent success rate, compared to a 10 percent success rate for most voluntary programs.

Of course, drug court has the motivational advantage of sending people to jail when they fail to meet the requirements.Those who meet the requirements, including getting a job and paying back $2,400 in costs, graduate after 18 months—or longer if they have a setback and have to start over.

The rewards—in addition to getting off drugs—include having a clean record with no criminal charges, a fresh start.

Since starting in 2002, the drug court has graduated 240 participants.Graduations are held the first Monday of each month. The graduates, and sometimes their families, speak to the group about the difference the program has made in their lives and offer encouragement to the others. The program currently has 120 participants.

“The graduations are very moving. I cry every time,” said Kreeger’s longtime judicial assistant, Babe Atkins-Byrne, who he has known since grammar school in Cobb County.

Her support of the program was crucial because her husband, Bill Byrne, secured its initial funding when he was chairman of the Cobb County Commission.

“You can tell who the boss is,” Kreeger said. “She runs things.”

Kreeger is the second-most senior judge in Cobb County Superior Court, after Judge Dorothy A. Robinson, and he is “two weeks senior to Babe,” he said, noting that Atkins-Byrne had to work out a two-week notice at her law firm job before joining him in his judicial office.

Kreeger became a judge in Cobb County State Court in January 1979, appointed by Gov. George Busbee. In 1984, Gov. Joe Frank Harris appointed him to an open position on the superior court.Kreeger also served in the state House of Representatives from 1969 to 1976. Kreeger served in the House as a Democrat, but said he “hasn’t voted in a Democratic primary since 1983.”

He practiced law in Marietta for 13 years prior to his judicial appointment, following graduation from the University of Georgia Law School.

During his years on the bench, Kreeger has been involved in a number of high-profile cases. He tried the trigger man, Curtis Rower, in the notorious 1992 murder of Sara Tokars, an East Cobb suburban mom who was shot in her Toyota 4-Runner in front of her two small sons, then 4 and 6. Rower got life. Her husband, criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Frederic W. Tokars, also was convicted for her murder, along with racketeering, money laundering and drug charges, for which he received consecutive life sentences.

Kreeger recalled that the only defendant he sentenced to death—Jack Potts, for murder and kidnapping—died of cancer in prison before he could be executed.

Asked what his toughest cases have been, Kreeger replied, “custody.” Those are tough because it’s so difficult and so crucial to the children, he said. He once tried a custody case involving a baby girl that established precedent for not allowing a father to claim rights after having surrendered them. The girl grew up with her adoptive parents. Their attorney recently wrote the judge to say she had graduated from college.

Asked for his advice to lawyers appearing in his courtroom, Kreeger replied, “be on time.” He added, “and be prepared.”

He summed up his courtroom management philosophy: “I try to be calm and easygoing and let people try their cases with a professional demeanor.”

He said he believes going to court “needs to be a positive experience. People shouldn’t have to fear coming to a courtroom.”

Then he added, “I mean the attorneys. Criminals doggone better fear it.”

Staff Reporter Katheryn Hayes Tucker can be reached at Katheryn.Tucker@IncisiveMedia.com

Supporters: Drug Court Does Work

By Stephen Gurr
sgurr@gainesvilletimes.com

POSTED Oct. 2, 2009 11:30 p.m.

A national organization’s critical report on drug courts has supporters defending a system they say has reduced repeat offenses and improved lives by making substance abuse treatment a part of the judicial process.

This week the 11,000-member National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers issued “America’s Problem-Solving Courts: The Criminal Costs of Treatment and the Case for Reform,” a report that studied some of the nation’s 2,100-plus drug, DUI and mental health courts. Hall County operates four treatment courts that require participants to get ongoing court-monitored treatment for substance abuse or mental health issues. All but DUI court are voluntary.

The report criticizes drug courts that require participants to plead guilty to the underlying charge before treatment begins. In Hall County’s felony drug court, the criminal charge is dismissed and the conviction erased if a participant successfully completes the intensive two-year program.

The report claims that the system “results in dismissals for relatively few defendants.”

But in Hall County drug court, 91 percent of the people who have entered the program have successfully completed it and had their charges dropped, with 313 graduates since the program started in 2000. Only 4.9 percent of those who have completed the program have gone on to commit new offenses, a far lower recidivism rate than typical felony cases, according to Debbie Mott, Hall County’s director of treatment services.

Superior Court Judge Jason Deal, who oversees felony drug court in Hall and Dawson counties, disagrees with the report’s contention that drug courts should be operated without requiring a participant to first plead guilty.

Deal said one of the keys to the effectiveness of drug courts is that participants know if they don’t complete the requirements and are terminated from the program, the felony conviction stays.

“It gives willpower to folks whose willpower has been undermined by their addictions,” Deal said. Voluntary substance abuse treatment is less successful because “they can just walk away from private treatment,” Deal said. “They can’t walk away from drug court.”

The report faults treatment courts for operating with little input from the defense bar and claims most defendants aren’t adequately counseled on their rights.

Deal notes that local defense attorneys had equal input when the criteria and policies were first set for Hall County’s drug court under the leadership of Senior Judge John Girardeau. The drug court team includes a defense attorney on staff, and private attorneys can also advocate on behalf of their clients in court, Deal said.

Drug court participants meet at least twice with a defense attorney before making a decision on entering the program and are counseled extensively on their rights before pleading guilty, the judge said.

The report is critical of drug courts that have strict entry requirements and don’t accept high-risk repeat offenders, which it says are often those most in need of treatment.

In Hall County, participants in the felony court can only have one prior felony conviction and cannot have any convictions for violent crimes.

Federal requirements made when the court was started with Justice Department grants are part of the reason violent offenders are not allowed into the program, Deal said. But it’s also a safety precaution for drug court staffers who are not law enforcement officers, he said.

Also, high-risk offenders could not be mixed in with low-risk offenders and the latter still be successful, Deal said. Prosecutors who answer to the public also may be reluctant to dismiss charges against a person with multiple prior convictions, he said.

“This has to be something that all the different parties are willing to participate in,” Deal said. “It’s a collaboration between the defense, the prosecution and the courts.”

Advocates of drug courts take the biggest issue with what they say is an overtly political slant to the National Association of Defense Lawyer’s report. The report recommends decriminalizing low-level drug use and asserts that drugs should be a public health concern, not a criminal justice issue.

“The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers favors legalization of drugs, including methamphetamine, heroin and crack cocaine,” Chris Deutch, a spokesman for the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, said in a statement. “Therefore, it is not surprising that it chooses to attack our nation’s most successful justice intervention for substance-abusing offenders: drug courts.”

Deal said the scientific data backs up drug courts. But some of their benefits to society are “incalculable,” he said.

People who were once a drain on the system become employed, taxpaying and responsible parents, Deal said.

Said Mott, “It’s just kind of hard to dispute when you see folks return to their families and becoming productive members of society.”

Said Deal, “I’ve got a box full of letters in my office and every one says, ‘Drug court saved my life; if it weren’t for drug court I’d be dead or in prison, I wouldn’t have stopped.’ So, it’s hard to argue with that data.”

Lawyer Has Strong Sense of Social Justice

By Jackie Ricciardi/Staff

Published September 14, 2009

Chronicle.Augusta.com

Tanya Jeffords wanted more control of her time and career, so she decided to take matters into her own hands.

In 2008, the lawyer opened her own law office, Tanya Jeffords & Associates PC, at 418 Greene St. She wanted the flexibility to spend time with her family and have more time trying cases in the courtroom.

Mrs. Jeffords, 39, handles cases in criminal law, personal injury, family law, civil litigation, and employment and labor law. Criminal law makes up 50 percent of her practice. She is licensed in Georgia and South Carolina.

“I’m the first lawyer in my whole family,” she said. ”I think the law is a great profession. It allows you to be continuously challenged. I never get bored.

”My nickname is The Tiger.”

She said she was given that nickname by a client in her first murder case. He told her that she was aggressive in the courtroom. In her office, she displays a vase with a picture of a tiger on the front.

Throughout Mrs. Jeffords’ office are items representing the people and things that mean the most to her: faith, family and the law. Lining her desk and tables are photos of her husband, William Jeffords III, and her young son, William IV.

On the wall near her desk is a large poster that reads “World’s Greatest Mother Award” from her son. Being a mother is an important part of her life, she said.

Her Christian faith also plays a central role, as symbolized by biblical Scriptures and a colorful picture of several women dressed in church attire that hangs across from her desk. There are countless law books lining her bookshelf, in addition to the iconic symbol of the law: the scales of justice.

Lawyer Jacque Hawk has known Mrs. Jeffords since she was a college student. Today, she shares office space with him. Mr. Hawk said she is an “excellent attorney.”

“She’s already very, very good and has the potential to be unbelievable,” he said. “I consider her my protégé, and she considers herself my protégé. The thing about Tanya, Tanya is very smart. When you teach her anything, that’s it. She’s got it.”

When Mrs. Jeffords was starting at the public defender’s office, she went to Mr. Hawk’s office for advice on his trial techniques.

“I spent about two hours, and she utilized it in the next four or five trials and won every trial,” Mr. Hawk said. “I could do that with 50 other lawyers, and maybe one or two would get it as quick as she did and be able to do that.

”She was able to take what I taught her in a couple of hours, apply it immediately and get great results, which is rare.”

He would prefer that Mrs. Jeffords worked for him, he said, but he’s pleased that she has branched out on her own.

“I think it’s great for her,” Mr. Hawk said. “There’s some attorneys, you see them go out on their own and you know that’s a disaster. With her, she’s going to be fine because she’s very good with people, and she understands the legal process and the trial process extremely well.

“Those two things will make you successful, and she’s got those two things going for her.”

Faithful decisions

Mrs. Jeffords also has her faith to rely on, said the Rev. Sam Davis, her pastor at Beulah Grove Baptist Church. He has known Mrs. Jeffords for more than 10 years.

“On a scale of one to 10, let’s give her a 12,” the Rev. Davis said. “It’s just her personality and her commitment to people. Tanya has an unusual love for people. That has really impressed me over the years.”

Another commitment she makes is to Bible study, which she attends noon Wednesday despite her busy schedule.

“She’s always kept prayer in the midst of all of her decisions,” the Rev. Davis said. “She talks about the struggles, but Tanya seems to move right through them because of her personality and her commitment to the Lord.”

He has seen Mrs. Jeffords in action with her son and her “adopted son,” Tavarus Patterson, 20.

“Tanya loves children, and the little child they have now, he’s the center of their life. The love that she has for her children just overflows into love for other children,” the Rev. Davis said. “In addition, … Tanya is a family-focused person. She loves family. It’s such a beautiful sight to see a young person with such a fantastic career in front of them that loves the Lord as much as she does.”

The pastor said that he can count on Mrs. Jeffords’ legal expertise “whenever there is need at the church.”

“Tanya is always the first person that I look for. She has given me free consultation ever since she has been a part of the church. That speaks volumes,” he said.

Hard work

Mrs. Jeffords grew up in Milpitas, Calif., the youngest child. In her close-knit family, she had four sisters and one brother, and a foster child also lived in the home. Her mother, Arnetta Flowers, was the head of the household.

“Family is very important to me because of that. We didn’t have much money, so actually I went to work at 14 years old so that I could help my mom,” Mrs. Jeffords said. “I tried to be as independent as I could at a young age so that my mom wouldn’t have to worry. She worked seven days a week and three jobs.”

Mrs. Jeffords’ first job was working as a store clerk at a convenience store, TGNY, which is similar to Family Dollar. Mrs. Jeffords said that she learned about work at an early age.

“You have to work hard. That’s what it takes to get where you want to go,” she said.

In high school, she knew that she wanted to be either a lawyer or a fashion designer.

“Somebody told me that it was 11 years to become a lawyer, and I just was not going to school that long. I was always designing clothes and sewing, so I went to design school right out of high school,” Mrs. Jeffords said.

She attended the Fashion Institute of Design & Merchandising in San Francisco. After completing her studies, she moved to Los Angeles and worked for several years in the design industry.

“It was wonderful,” she said. “I had a good time.”

In 1992, Mrs. Jeffords moved to the South to earn a business degree. Her mother and stepfather lived in the Augusta area, and she wanted to be closer to her stepfather because he was ill.

“I ended up deciding to go to law school instead (of getting a business degree). I changed my whole career path,” she said.

Mrs. Jeffords enrolled in classes at Augusta State University and earned a bachelor of arts degree in political science and sociology. She graduated from law school at Mercer University in 2001 and passed the bar exams in Georgia and South Carolina.

“I got married the same week that I graduated from law school,” Mrs. Jeffords said. “I got married on Thursday and I graduated from law school on Saturday. Right on the Savannah River.

”I wanted to make a commitment to my family first and my career second, and that’s why I did that.”

She has been married for eight years.

After graduation, she worked for two years as a federal judicial law clerk for Judge Louis Sands in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia in Albany.

“I didn’t like doing the criminal law at that point, and it’s so funny that’s what I do now,” she said.

In 2003, she returned to Augusta and got a job at Fulcher Hagler LLP, where she concentrated on personal injury defense and railroad litigation defense.

Still, Mrs. Jeffords wanted to get more trial experience and to help people, so she decided to take a position at the public defender’s office in 2005. She worked there for three years.

“I was able to try numerous serious felony cases, including murders, armed robberies,” she said.

Art Davison, a lawyer at Fulcher Hagler, worked with Mrs. Jeffords for several years.

“Tanya had always wanted to spend a lot of time in the courtroom,” Mr. Davison said. “She’s certainly a very bright and delightful person. We knew she would do well.

“Tanya is a person who’s always looking for challenges, and she’s been successful in meeting those challenges. She’s a pleasure to work with.”

In business

In March 2008, Mrs. Jeffords decided to go into private practice. Her son had been born in 2007, and she wanted to spend more time with him.

“The whole purpose of going into private practice was that I did not want my son to be raised by the day care,” she said. “I wanted to be there and have the flexibility. …

“Plus, I wanted to get back into the civil arena because I was doing all criminal. I like the balance now between the civil litigation and the criminal work.”

Mrs. Jeffords loves her job.

“I enjoy practicing law,” she said. “I love to try cases. That is the most challenging and best experience for me, and I like helping people.

”That’s what you do as a lawyer. You’re helping people with their problems. You’re the person going with them through a tough time.”

Being her own boss, Mrs. Jeffords has the freedom to pursue areas of law that she finds interesting. She is now the defense attorney for drug court.

“That’s one of the things that I enjoy most about being in private practice,” Mrs. Jeffords said. “I have a contract to work with drug court and people who are trying to get their lives on track, but they’ve been charged with felonies.”

She goes out to interview indigent clients and acts as their advocate to get into drug court if they can’t afford an attorney, she said. She attends court every Thursday. Mrs. Jeffords also sits on the drug court team, which creates the process for getting into drug court, she said.

“I wouldn’t be able to do that if I weren’t in private practice,” she said.

During her last year in college, Mrs. Jeffords worked with Mr. Hawk as his bookkeeper and paralegal. When she was about to leave for law school, he bought her a framed picture of the first black senator and representatives and said that she was going to be the next senator.

When she started her own practice, she sought Mr. Hawk’s expertise. She says he is one of the best criminal defense lawyers in town. She frequently asks him questions so that she can continually improve as a lawyer, she said.

The biggest challenge is being a business owner.

“I personally would like to just try cases, but you have to do both,” she said.

In June, Mrs. Jeffords argued her first case before the Supreme Court of Georgia. It was an appeal for a murder trial, the State of Georgia v. Richard Gonnella. She’s still waiting for the results.

Mrs. Jeffords has a busy schedule, so she relies on “preparation and the power of prayer.”

“I just take it day by day and week by week, but my first priority is to my husband, my child, my business and then helping kids to achieve their dreams,” Mrs. Jeffords said. “The best part of the day is my son’s smile and kiss. It’s pretty awesome.

“It’s hard being a mom, wife and a trial lawyer. A lot of the successful women, particularly African-American women, they’re not married.

“I try to be cognizant of what’s around me and do what I can to do it differently, by keeping my family as the center. I feel lucky to be pursuing my passion and my purpose in my life in every area, including my work.”

Building dreams

One of Mrs. Jeffords’ passions is helping young people. She is the president of Dream Builders of America’s Youth Inc., a nonprofit organization that she helped start in Albany in 2002.

“The reason we started was that I had a mentee who was living with me, and I realized that she just didn’t have a lot of confidence,” Mrs. Jeffords said. “She talked herself out of everything she could possibly achieve in life before she even made one step forward. I realized a lot of young people lack confidence.”

Dream Builders is launching a program called the Frederick Douglass Mobile Reading Room.

“Our goal is to work with pre-K to develop in them a love for reading. If the kids don’t know how to read, they’re the ones most likely to drop out of school and commit crimes,” Mrs. Jeffords said.

Dream Builders has a group of 25 student ambassadors from the Augusta area. The organization takes them on a college tour and helps them prepare for SAT and ACT. They go on a tour of the State Bar of Georgia and other activities.

The organization is starting a 12-week program at Murphey Middle School.

Two years ago, when Tavarus Patterson didn’t have anywhere else to go, he went to live with Mrs. Jeffords during his senior year in high school.

Today, Mr. Patterson is a sophomore chemistry/pre-pharmacy major at the University of South Carolina Aiken. He hopes to be accepted into pharmacy school next year.

He earned excellent grades before he met Mrs. Jeffords, but he said she has been a good role model.

“I call her my mom. She’s really, really sweet. She’s really good and caring. She tries to help people out as much as she can, and she doesn’t think of herself,” he said.

In the next 10 years, Mrs. Jeffords wants her private practice to allow her to “be there for the important events in her son’s life.” She wants to try to win as many cases as possible, both criminal and civil.

Mrs. Jeffords hopes to add to her family.

“I would love to adopt a baby and become foster parents in the future for young children,” she said.

Reach LaTina Emerson at (706) 823-3227 or latina.emerson@augustachronicle.com.

Juvenile Court Program Provides Troubled Parents with Tools for Recovery

By Jan Skutch

Published September 20, 2009

SavannahNow.com

FEW THOUGHT MS. Q COULD PULL THIS OFF.

The 27-year-old mother of three was battling a long-term cocaine abuse problem that threatened to take away her family – throwing three children into the already over-taxed foster-care program. But on this day, Chatham County Juvenile Court Judge Patricia Stone and her Family Dependency Treatment Court team are celebrating the mother’s apparent victory over her substance abuse and the return of her children “with conditions.” She has been clean of drugs for 483 days and counting.

“There were times when I begged and pleaded with you,” Stone told Ms. Q. “But look at you now.”

She has been pro-active in getting her children to the eye doctor, working with credit counselors, completing glossy-looking schedules for her children’s activities and preparing a resume and cover letter for a future employer.

“That’s what good moms do,” Stone said. “I’m so proud of you and all that you have accomplished.”

Because these discussions involve deprivation hearings, which by law are closed to the public, Stone closely guards the confidentiality of the participants. The Savannah Morning News will do likewise to protect confidentiality of them and their children by identifying participants only by an initial.

Read essays written by two graduates of the Family Dependency Treatment Court

Hard work

Ms. Q was one of the doubtful cases the court faces. Her lengthy substance abuse history – including several failed past treatment regimens – along with a history of bad associates, domestic abuse victimization and almost zero parenting skills made her a likely candidate to fail.

She is, however, an example of success in a court that prides itself on taking only the tough cases.

Stone started the court in January as a civil forum that only deals with volunteers – those who want to overcome drug and/or alcohol use and keep their children.

Stone and her team combine cheerleading with intensive support programs while keeping the possibility of consequences, including sanctions, to re-establish limits to behavior.

Many of these parents have never received a pat on the back, something the court tries to correct.

Since January, 18 parents have been enrolled – representing 63 children and grandchildren, said court coordinator Jean Newton-Cottier.

Five have graduated and seven more are working toward graduation, she said.

Team members work with participants to deal with hurdles and to produce stable, clean and healthy parents.

“Our goal is permanency for children …what’s best for that child,” Stone said.

Once in, Stone said, “I won’t let them drop out.”

“If you cannot do it in this program, with all of the extensive services and support, then you probably are not able to parent your children.”

A model program

The numbers are chilling.

In cases of child deprivation, initial reports show that at least 54 percent resulted from the substance abuse of the parent or caregiver.

An additional 15 percent are found to involve substance abuse.

Stone said she and her team think as many as 95 percent of deprivation cases are related to substance abuse.

The court offers an intensive program to break the cycle of addiction in the families.

It is a drug-court model, one of eight in Georgia.

It is a 12- to 18-month program in which a team of experts and volunteers work closely with participants to achieve weekly specific goals designed to beat the abuse and instill needed life and parenting skills.

Stone as a cheerleader

“I want you to ask questions, to be proactive,” Stone encourages participants during court sessions. “Take control of your life. It has to be a lifetime, forever change.”

Lee Hooper, a retired businessman who serves as community advocate for the team, urges participants to think positively when they prepare required resumes. “When you put a resume together, think where you want to be, not where you have been,” Hooper urges a participant during a session. “You’ve got a lot of attributes.”

Dealing with past or continuing substance abuse problems is constant for the group, but individual participants may often face problems surrounding relationships with boyfriends, drug relapses or financial crises.

Often participants face problems in other courts, some criminal, and some in neighboring counties.

Standing firm

Stone often must assume a mother-figure role.

Ms. K has been doing well, staying clean from drugs for 144 days. But her husband is incarcerated, and she must be making decisions for when he is released.

“What are you going to do when your husband gets out?” Stone asks.

“How are you going to handle yourself? Your daughters deserve to have at least one clean and sober person, and that’s going to be you.”

Another, Ms. S, a 25-year-old mother of three, is having issues with her son.

“Don’t be a big push over,” Stone tells her. “(Your son) doesn’t need a friend. He needs a mom… Just say no.”

Team input encouraged

Stone meets with her team members each Tuesday in a conference room at the court. Exchanges between team member are at times spirited when discussing the progress of individuals who will appear before them in Stone’s courtroom later in the day.

Stone encourages team members to give their input, but she will be the final word.

In court, participants come with a white, loose-leaf binder – the FDTC Handbook.

It will accompany them through their journeys, providing schedules and other materials needed to meet the court’s requirements.

Success in small bites
Not all cases end well.

Ms. N, 30, is the mother of six. All but the youngest suffer from the effects of her use of cocaine, marijuana and alcohol.

She has been a particular challenge to Stone and her team members.

This day, she enters the courtroom from the front, dressed in shackles and Chatham County jail greens.

Attorney Leo Beckmann Jr., a special assistant attorney general representing the Department of Family & Children Services in the court, can be quite direct during pre-court staffing sessions.

This day, he brings his concerns into the courtroom.

“I am disappointed with the way you’ve been conducting yourself,” Beckmann tells Ms. N. “It’s put your children in a real tenuous situation. We are all just really disappointed in you, and your family’s disappointed in you.”

He explains she is only asked to obey a few simple rules.

“It’s the fact you’ve got to do it … It’s responsibility.”

The woman quickly retorts, “I raised my kids. Can’t nobody take that away from me.”

“I’m putting you on notice if you don’t change, your kids are not coming back to you,” Beckmann replies. “You need to start following the rules, but you can’t parent children if you’re sitting here in shackles.”

Stone has watched the exchange and has had enough.

“Regardless of what happened in the past, you get to choose whether you get your children back,” she admonishes.

“I’m done talking to you (today). I know what I’m going to do, go back (to jail) with the deputy. … I’ll see you next week. You better have a different attitude.”

By the following week, Ms. N has again fallen short of the mark, Stone informs her team during staffing.

She has failed to own up to a failure to make payments in Magistrate’s Court on some checks. Department of Family & Children Services officials have filed a motion to grant custody of one of her children to another family member until age 18.

That becomes the case several weeks later, with Stone calling it a “sad day, a very sad day” even as she assures the new parent of the court’s support if needed.

“I am very disappointed that you didn’t do it, but you made your decisions,” Stone tells Ms. N.

What would seem like a glaring defeat has a silver lining. Stone points out that the court program allowed them to keep Ms. N “Clean (from drugs) long enough to have a clean baby” – the first of her six to be born clean.

Excuses don’t work

Other participants fall somewhere between Ms. Q and Ms. N.

Ms. A, 36 and the mother of seven, has tested positive for a banned substance during a home visit by Deputy Sheriff Ron Robinson and his team.

“She absolutely denies the use,” attorney J. Michael Love, who represents the participants in the court, tells Stone.

The judge warns the woman she faces double sanctions if her use is proven.

“I haven’t done anything,” Ms. A tells the court. “I know I’ve made a lot of mistakes, but I love my son.”

Her behavior convinces the team Ms. A needs more, not fewer, treatment sessions, citing what they call “relapse behavior.”

Another participant, Ms. D, got caught selling her food stamps for $11, a sale she said was motivated by her attempt to help someone else.

But the mother of two who is battling cocaine and marijuana abuse concedes she did not want to appear empty-handed at her 1-year-old son’s birthday party and used the money to buy a cheap toy for the occasion.

“There is no excuse for bad behavior,” a stern Stone tells her. “You have to make good choices all the time.”

Ms. A is working through problems, including a custody battle in a neighboring county.

But Stone is impressed with her efforts.

“What I’m impressed with is how much, by your demeanor, you want the children with you,” Stone said, urging her not to give up.

“I know what I have to do, and I’m going to do it,” comes the reply.

Family Dependency Treatment Court team members

– Jean Newton-Cottier, court coordinator and Chatham County Juvenile Court Judge Patricia Stone’s right-hand in the court.

– Attorney J. Michael Love, a private practitioner who represents parents in the program.

– Attorney Leo G. Beckmann Jr., a private practitioner serving as a special assistant attorney general representing the Department of Family & Children Services.

– Charlotte Rehmert, director of the Court Appointed Special Advocates, and Lysbeth Cook, advocacy coordinator, who represent the rights of children in the court.

– Yolanda Parker, Tamika Williams and Ed Hines, Department of Family & Children Services case workers

– Brook Newberry and Leslie Backus, who are with Recovery Place Inc., a substance abuse treatment provider.

– Herb Smith with the Chatham-Savannah Authority for the Homeless.

– Chatham County Sheriff’s Deputy Ron Robinson, who oversees the community policing team that conducts home inspections for the court.

–Community advocate Lee Hooper, a retired businessman who volunteers to give the court a community perspective and serves as Judicial Citizen’s Review Panel liaison.

– Rose Grant-Robinson, community outreach for Savannah Area Family Emergency Shelter Inc.

– Lori Loncon, Stone’s staff attorney

– Mary Tyson, Stone’s administrative assistant

Dougherty Mental Health Court a National Model

Published July 21, 2009
Calton Fletcher, Metro Editor
www.AlbanyHerald.com
http://www.albanyherald.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=4447

ALBANY – In a morning session of the Dougherty County Superior Court’s Mental Health Court, Judge Stephen S. Goss admonishes a defendant about taking her medication.

He warns another that he must let the court’s probation officer know when he moves. Goss tells an individual she must be screened for illegal substances twice a week and must attend a support meeting every day. He also sets a probation revocation hearing for a young man who is already housed in the Dougherty County Jail.

Without the trappings of typical Superior Court sessions, Goss converses freely with each person sitting in the defendant’s chair, rebukes only mildly and offers an explanation of the proceedings without the use of legalese.

“If you get out (of a state facility) and get in trouble again, you’re going to force my hand,” he tells one. “We’re getting to the point where your options are (stay at the facility) or (go to) jail.”

Goss took time to briefly explain the particulars of each case to four visitors who intently watched the proceedings Monday morning. Judge Steven S. Unpingco, Mental Health Court Coordinator William J. Brandshagen, Clinical/Forensic Psychologist James J. Kiffer and Court Management Officer Antonette S. Padua, all officials with the Judiciary of Guam, were on hand to learn the particulars of the Dougherty County Mental Health and Substance Abuse Court program, the first of its kind in Georgia.

Developed in 2002 by Goss, Dr. John Burns with the Albany Area Community Service Board and Annette Bowling with the Albany Advocacy Resource Center, the Mental Health/Substance Abuse Division of Dougherty Superior Court is a response to the court system’s continued cycling of people with mental illness and substance abuse problems through the local court system.

“I kept seeing the same faces come through the system, so what we were doing with these people who had mental illnesses obviously wasn’t working,” Goss said after Monday’s court session. “In addition to the court system, local law enforcement and mental health organizations were also dealing with this same core group of people.

“We got together and came up with a plan to address these people’s special needs in the court system.”

At the time, there was a similar court functioning in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and another that dealt with what Goss called “more quality-of-life cases” in San Bernardino, Calif., and Albany officials studied these courts’ programs as theirs developed.

But for the most part, local officials were on their own.

“We learned what others were doing in similar programs, but there were no guidelines at the time,” Goss said. “It was trial and error, mostly. Every court system is different, and we had to decide what worked best for ours.”

The Dougherty Mental Health Court program consists of a presiding judge, two assistant district attorneys, two assistant public defenders, a program coordinator and two case managers. Staff determines which candidates in the court system are eligible for the mental health/substance abuse program’s treatment and monitoring elements. They then separate them into three different tracks: mental health, substance abuse and co-occurring disorders.

“About 75 percent of the people we deal with are co-occurring,” Goss said. “With the volatile mix of alcohol and drugs, the patient’s mental state decompensates.”

The Guam officials, whose court system recently received a Bureau of Justice Assistance grant that will allow it to create its own mental health court, said the experience of visiting the Albany court has proved invaluable.

“It has been very informational seeing the integration of services here,” Unpingco said. “Our court system deals with very similar problems to the ones we’ve seen here, and what we’ve seen is the kind of court we’d like to develop in Guam.

“We looked at the background of Judge Goss and his court, and we were very impressed.”

Kiffer said the Dougherty court offers the kind of assistance to its clients that would benefit the North Pacific Ocean island territory.

“Guam has a very stable population,” he said. “We know the clients who will benefit from this program; they’ve been through our system. There are about 80-90 of them that we’ve identified, and a program like this would certainly benefit those individuals.”

While the Dougherty Mental Health/Substance Abuse court was the first of its kind in Georgia, the concept has quickly caught on. Eleven more have been developed or are in the planning stages in the state, while there are around 205 nationally.

In 2004-05, the Bureau of Justice Assistance decided to delegate a number of national courts as mentoring sites. Dougherty court officials applied, and their program was one of 12 finalists selected for further scrutiny. After evaluations, courts in Dougherty; Washoe County, Nev.; Akron, Ohio; Bonneville County, Idaho; and Bronx County, N.Y., were selected as national teaching sites.

“The Dougherty court is the closest match to ours,” Brandshagen said. “We visited the Bronx site for the multicultural aspect, and it was a bit overwhelming. The court here is more like our own, it’s a more rural setting.

“After visiting Albany and watching a court session, we feel our mental health court should have a similar structure. I think it will best suit our needs.”

Since the mental health/substance abuse court concept is so new, no empirical data have yet been collected and studied to determine the impact of the program.

“The first study that was conducted found that the average participant in our program went from spending 120 days a year in jail to spending 27 days a year,” Goss said. “Certainly that’s not perfection, but it’s a lot better.

“What we want most to do, though, is widen the time frame from episode to episode with our folks. And we want to lessen the severity.”

Near the end of Monday’s court session, a lady in the drug awareness program tells Goss about her improvement since her last court visit. Counselors and other officials vouch for her assessment.

“I’m healing,” she tells Goss.

“You used the right phrase; heal ‘i-n-g’,” Goss says. “Not ‘healed,’ healing. It’s a process, but in your case the process is working.

“You’ve struggled with this; you know it’s day-by-day. I’m real proud of you, proud of your progress.”

Augusta’s Drug Court celebrates addicts commitment to stay clean

Published May 21, 2009

ABCAugusta.com

http://www.nbcaugusta.com/news/local/45787887.html

AUGUSTA, Ga. – Nearly 50 drug addicts are celebrating their commitment to come clean. As part of National Drug Court Month, Augusta’s program honored its participants on Thursday.

Each week, The Augusta Judicial Circuit Drug Court recruits drug addicts who want to turn over a new leaf.

“It’s a system of checks and balances. We see them every day and we screen them on a regular basis each week,” said Judge James Blanchard, Drug Court.

A system that’s helped one addict turn his life around.

“It’s much harder for me now that I’ve relapsed, but I’m peaking over the whole. I’m getting over it. It’s something that I want with all my heart and soul,” said a participant.

Judge James Blanchard helped start drug court last August as a way to help addicts become clean and stay out of the prison system. Participants are given strict rules to follow during the two year period.

It includes a curfew, drug testing several times a week, counseling every day and a visit with the Judge every week; rules that have serious consequences if broken.

This mom says it took a few trips to jail before her son realized he had reached rock bottom.

“It was the fact that he was facing at least 20 years, and he was taking a good hard look at himself,” said a mom.

Her son’s only been in the program for a month, but she says it’s already making a difference.

“He’s getting his life together. I have good hopes that after the two years he’ll be on his way to being a productive citizen,” said a mom.

Judge Blanchard says drug court has a 70 percent success rate. Once participants complete the program, their charges are dropped. Then, they’re required to get background checks every year for five years to make sure they haven’t been arrested.

State Cuts Funds to Drug Courts

Published August 19, 2008 The Courier Herald Online http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_v2.cfm?pnpid=909&show=archivedetails&ArchiveID=1379274&om=1

The funding cuts that have swept across the board of state agencies have reached the state’s drug courts and the program that touts a recividism rate of less than 10 percent.On Monday, the Dublin Judicial Circuit’s drug court received notification that the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) appropriations for FY 2009, which includes drug court funding, will be reduced by six to 10 percent. In a letter to Georgia’s drug court coordinators, the chairman of the AOC’s Standing Committee on Drug Courts, Judge George H. Kreeger, attributed the cuts to the continued decline in state revenues. On August 7th, Governor Sonny Perdue announced a six percent cut for all state departments in order to shore up a potential state budget deficit of $1.6 billion in FY 2009. The initial announcement hit the state’s superior courts hard. The mandated cuts translates to a 60 percent cut in the courts’ operating budget, since the bulk of the courts’ budgets are salaries set under Georgia code for judges and their staff. As a result, the use of senior judges in the courts has been suspended.      In his letter to the drug courts, Keeger said, “In order to be proactive, the decision has been made to reserve 10 percent of your court’s 2009 grant budget until the state revenue concerns are resolved.” The 10 percent cut translates to about $1,900 – not a large amount in comparison to other department cuts. However the Dublin Judicial Circuit’s four county drug court operates annually on only $19,000. The funding the drug courts receive pays for drug testing kits and mental health evaluations for the program’s participants. “We won’t help less people, we’ll just have to tighten everything we spend,” said Jeannine Lloyd, coordinator of the Dublin Judicial Circuit’s drug court. The Drug Court Objective The original objective of drug courts was to reduce the rate of recidivism (a relapse into criminal behavior) for drug usage. The state’s first operational drug court started in Bibb County in 1994. Five years later the Dublin Judicial Circuit’s drug court began. The AOC introduced the drug courts as an innovative solution to handle the increasing number of felony drug related offenses. Judge William Riley of the Atlanta Community Court had praised the drug court concept when he stated, “traditional sentences may punish offenders, but do not address underlying problems an individual may have.” Rather than sending defendants to jail, drug courts focus on rehabilitating drug and alcohol offenders through treatment. A superior court judge may sentence an offender to drug court treatment and order the offender perform community service. Unlike traditional treatment programs, becoming “clean and sober” is only the first step toward drug court graduation. The 12 month program requires participants to attend two meetings a week and they are drug tested at each meeting. Upon graduation from the program, the drug charges are dismissed. After they have become clean and sober, participants are required to obtain a GED, maintain employment, stay current in all their financial obligations, including drug court fees and they must avoid places and persons of an undesirable nature. Within the year, Lloyd said most gravitate away from their old crowd and aligned with new, more suitable individuals. In 1998, the Department of Justice Technical Assistance Project and the Drug Court Clearinghouse analyzed the effectiveness of drug courts. The report stated: “Incarceration in and of itself does little to break the cycle of illegal drug use and crime, and offenders sentenced to incarceration for substance related offenses exhibit a high rate of recidivism once they are released.”      The report determined drug courts provide four specific areas of appeal: •more effective supervision of offenders in the community; •greater accountability of defendants to comply with the conditions of their release or probation; •greater coordination and accountability of public services, including reducing duplication of services and costs to the taxpayer; •and the creation of more efficient courts systems by removing minor drug offenders from the court systems that are already overloaded with cases. The program’s success rate is undeniable according to those who work in the local drug court. Lloyd calculated the success rate of all those who attended the program between 1999 and 2007. Her records indicate that 40 percent of those who attended drug court successfully graduated. Only 10% of the participants repeated their crimes after graduation, dramatically lower than the recidivism rate for non-drug court offenders. In a 15-state study by the Department of Justice, data showed that without rehabilitation, over two-thirds of released prisoners were rearrested within three years. The highest percentage of repeat offenders was among drug users. The Justice Department study stated, “The outcomes drug courts are achieving go far beyond these original goals: the birth of over 500 drug free babies to drug court participants; the reunification of hundreds of families, as parents regain or are able to retain custody of their children; education and vocational training and job placements for participants, to name a few.” “The program works,” said Lloyd. “We’ll just have to figure out how to do more with less.”

The Verdict Is In- Drug Courts Work!

 

July 9, 2008

The Verdict Is In- Drug Courts Work

 

 

Published July 9, 2008

Dawson News & Advertiser

http://www.dawsonadvertiser.com/news/

Over 500 attendees, from over sixty statewide Drug, DUI and Mental Health Court Teams, will hear the results of new scientific research that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that statewide Drug, DUI, and Mental Health Court Conference, hosted by the Judicial Council of Georgia’s Standing Committee on Drug Courts. The conference, entitled “Foundations for the Future,” will be held at the Wyndham Peachtree Conference Center in Peachtree City, Georgia from June 17-19, 2008.

 

Drug, DUI and Mental Health Courts, also known as Accountability Courts, provide a successful  and cost effective way of dealing with persons with offense related to their drug addiction or mental illness. “These courts have the support of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials around the State because they all know that they work, and they work at a fraction of the cost of incarceration,” said Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears. According to the Georgia Department of Corrections, the average cost of incarceration per offender/per year at close security prisons is $14,476, while the average cost incarceration per offender at close security prisons is $18,332. The cost of Accountability Courts per offender/ per year is $4,935;  proof that these courts save taxpayer dollars.

 

“The Statewide Drug, DUI and Mental Health Court Conference provides an opportunity for professionals, officials and others in the community to come together and share lessons learned in everyday practice,” said Cobb County Superior Court Judge George Kreeger, who also serves as Chair of the Judicial Council Standing Committee on Drug Courts. Those attending will include drug court teams of judges, prosecutors, public defenders, treatment providers, probation and law enforcement officers and other dedicated criminal justice practitioners.

 

Conference highlights include:

 

Tuesday, June 17 at 9:45 a.m. — Drug Court Graduate Panel. A panel of drug court graduates will speak about their experience, what drug court has done for them and their families, and what drug court means to the State of Georgia on Tuesday, June 17.

 

Thursday, June 19 at 8:30 a.m. — Dr. Doug Marlowe, J.D., Ph.D., is a Senior Scientific Consultant, Chief of Science, Policy & Law for the National Association of Drug Court Profession; and Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. Dr. Marlowe will release new scientific research on the effectiveness of drug courts.

 

Participation in an Accountability Court program includes at a minimum, substances abuse or  mental health treatment, judicial supervision every two weeks, random drug screens, home visits  and services ranging as long as two years. Team members are quick to emphasize that the Drug, DUI and Mental Health Court programs are not a “soft on crime” alternative to incarceration.

 

The Judicial Council of Georgia has appointed the Standing Committee on Drug Courts to encourage and support the implementation of drug courts in all 49 Georgia Judicial Circuits.  These courts have experienced phenomenal success and tremendous growth by reducing substance abuse, crime and recidivism.

 

For more information about the conference, please visit www.georgiacourts.org and click on “2008 Drug, DUI and Mental Health Conference.”

 

Georgia’s Tough New DUI Law Takes Effect July 1st!

Georgia’s Tough New DUI Law Takes Effect Julty 1st

For Immediate Release

July 1, 2008

For more information:

Jim Shuler, Public Affairs

404-656-6996

jshuler@gohs.ga.gov

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ATLANTA)  This year the July 4^th holiday falls on a Friday.. And for some, it’s just another summer six-pack tradition to kick-off an entire weekend celebrating the consumption of adult beverages. That means July 4th is the second most dangerous night of the year on our highways.  Too many party-people decide to leave their designated drivers behind at the barbeque and a dozen Georgians will die in alcohol-related crashes during the July 4th weekend.

 

But as of July 1^st, Georgia has a tough new DUI law on the books that Georgia’s DUI cops will be enforcing on the roads!  And it’s here just in time to kick-off Georgia’s Operation Zero Tolerance statewide DUI crackdown.

 

During the 2008 legislative session the Georgia House and Senate passed House Bill 336, creating a felony-level DUI charge for those repeat offenders who’ve stacked up four drunk-driving convictions on their ten-year driving record rap-sheets. With this change in Georgia law, multiple DUI arrests can now lead to felony convictions against Georgia’s worst case high-risk violators. 

 

Long-awaited by DUI crash victims and grieving family survivors, HB 336 is truly regarded as lifesaving DUI law for Georgia. “This landmark legislation carries heavier fines, mandatory offender evaluations and jail times, stricter probation, and longer community service penalties,” said Director Bob Dallas of the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS). “It should make any responsible driver think twice before ever climbing behind the wheel while impaired.”

 

For the first time, Georgia’s new DUI Law requires first time offenders to undergo drug and alcohol evaluation. And if that evaluation deems necessary, the offenders must participate in strict, court-supervised substance-abuse treatment to decrease the likelihood of recurring offenses.  (Under the old law, drug and alcohol evaluations were only required for second and subsequent offenses.) But when those DUI offenders have been convicted a fourth time, the law is designed for public safety priorities to kick-in with mandatory felony jail time for violators.

 

Even while it was still pending, this visionary legislation already had the endorsement of GOHS, MADD, and the State District Attorney’s Association.  Bill sponsor, State Rep. Kevin Levitas (D-Atlanta) is himself a former prosecutor who perceived the random fatalities involving drunk drivers as more dangerous to the public and more frequent than the murder rate.  “Sadly in murder cases, victims and perpetrators often know each other. But there is this randomness to DUI deaths where a car just suddenly crosses over lanes of highway and without warning kills someone on their way to church or school,” said Rep. Levitas. 

 

“Until HB 336 was passed, even four-time shoplifting offenders were treated as felons under Georgia law, but  a fourth-time DUI was still just a misdemeanor here,” said MADD-Georgia State Executive Director Denise Thames. “Georgia was one of only five states left with no DUI felony law. Now we have serious consequences for those repeat offenders.  A third time DUI offender needs a tough message and it should include more than just a few days of jail time.”

 

“Few people realize there’s research that shows people drive drunk 87 times before being caught for one DUI,” said Rep. Kevin Levitas.  “Just try to calculate in your head how many times these multiple offenders may have driven drunk before they were caught the fourth time and charged and convicted under the old law.  It’s time we got their attention.”

 

Georgia’s new felony DUI law applies to offenses occurring on or after July 1, 2008.  Under its provisions:

• First and Second DUI Convictions are treated as misdemeanors..
• Third DUI Convictions are treated as high and aggravated misdemeanors..
• Fourth or Subsequent Convictions committed within ten years are treated as felonies..

                                                                                (PAGE TWO)

 

The following is a summary of HB 336 and not meant as a technical interpretation of the law.  For a full reading of the actual statute see the OZT news conference feature on our website at www.gahighwaysafety.org

 

First Time DUI convictions carry these penalties:

• Fines ranging from $300.00 to $1,000.00

A period of imprisonment from ten days to 12 months (judge may probate all but 24 hours of jail time)

• A minimum of 40 hours of Community Service for DUI at .08 BAC or above/

        Or a minimum of 20 hours of Community Service for DUI below .08 BAC

• Completion of a DUI Alcohol or Drug Use Risk Reduction Program
•  A clinical evaluation and completion of any necessary treatment
• 12 months of probation, less any jail time served

 

Second Time DUI convictions carry these penalties:

• Fines ranging from $600.00 to $1,000.00
• A period of imprisonment from 90 days to 12 months (offender must serve 72 hours of actual jail time)
• A minimum of 30 days of Community Service
• Completion of a DUI Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program
• A clinical evaluation and completion of any necessary treatment
• 12 months of probation, less any jail time served

 

Third Time DUI convictions carry these penalties:

• Fines ranging from $1,000.00 to $5,000.00
• Period of imprisonment from 120 days to 12 months (offender must serve 15 days of actual jail time)
• A minimum of 30 days of community service

• Completion of a DUI Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program
• A clinical evaluation and completion of any necessary treatment
• 12 months of probation, less any jail time served

 

Fourth Time or subsequent DUI convictions carry these penalties:

• Fines ranging from $1,000.00 to $5,000.00
• A period of imprisonment from one to five years (offender must serve three months of actual jail time)
• A minimum of 60 days of Community Service
• Completion of a DUI Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program
• A clinical evaluation and completion of any necessary treatment
• 5 years of probation, less any jail time served

 

The Governor’s Office of Highway Safety is issuing this warning to party responsibly this July 4th holiday:  During “OZT” police in Georgia will conduct major waves of concentrated patrols and sobriety checkpoints throughout the state from Friday, June 20, through Sunday, July 6, 2008 to protect innocent motorists and their families from DUI-drivers on our highways. 

 

Whether meeting a few friends after work or traveling the holiday barbeque circuit, friends should never let friends drive drunk.  Remember to designate a sober driver in advance – Before the July 4th festivities begin.  What can you do to protect your family on the highway this holiday weekend? Your best protection against a deadly encounter with a drunk driver.. Is a buckled safety belt.  So Buckle-up. Slow Down. Drive Sober.