«From Inception to Implementation: How SACPA has affected the Case Processing and Sentencing of Drug Offenders in One California County DISSERTATION ...»
Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. C. (2003). Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
McBride, D., & McCoy, C. B. (1993). The drugs-crime relationship: An Analytic Framework. Prison Journal, 73(3-4), 257-278.
McCleary, R. (1978). Dangerous Men: The Sociology of Parole. Beverly Hills, CA:
McCleary, R., & Hay, R. A. (1980). Applied Time Series Analysis for the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills: Sage.
McDowall, D., McCleary, R., Meidinger, E. E., & Hay, R. A. (1980). Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McVay, D., Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2004). Treatment of Incarceration?
National and State Findings on the Efficacy and Cost Savings of Drug Treatment Versus Imprisonment. Washington DC: Justice Policy Institute.
Meeker, J. W., & Pontell, H. (1985). Court Caseloads, Pleas Bargaining, and Criminal Sanctions: The Effects of Section 17P.C. in California. Criminology, 23(1), 119-143.
Miethe, T. D. (1987). Charging and Plea Bargaining Practices under Determinate Sentencing: An Investigation of the Hydraulic Displacement of Discretion. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 78(1), 155-176.
Miller, L. L., & Eisenstein, J. (2005). The Federal/State Criminal Prosecution Nexus:
A Case Study in Cooperation and Discretion. Law & Social Inquiry, 30(2), 239-268.
Musto, D. (1973). The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
National Drug Intelligence Center. (2007, May 2007). Intelligence Bulletin:
Methamphetamine-Related Identity Theft. Retrieved August 16, 2007, 2007, from www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs22/22972/index.htm National Institute of Justice. (1999). Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.
Office, D. C. P. (1997). Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components. Washington,
Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
Office of Justice Programs Drug Court Clearinghouse and Technical Assistance Project. (2004). Summary of Drug Court Activity by State and County.
Washington, D.C: American University.
Orange County Grand Jury. (2003). A Shortfall in Proposition 36 Support? Santa Ana, CA: Orange County Grand Jury.
Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Percival, G. L. (2004). The Influence of Local Contextual Characteristics on the Implementation of a Statewide Voter Initiative: The Case of California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (Proposition 36). Policy Studies Journal, 32(4), 589-610.
Petersilia, J. (1997). Probation in the United States. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and
Justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 22, pp. 149-200). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Peyton, E. A., & Gossweiler, R. (2001). Treatment Services in Adult Drug Courts:
Report on the 1999 National Drug Court Treatment Survey (No. NCJ 182293).
Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA), US Department of Health and Human Services.
Polcin, D. L. (2001). Drug and alcohol offenders coerced into treatment: A review of modalitites and suggestions for research on social model programs. Substance Use & Misuse, 36, 589-608.
Programs, C. D. o. A. a. D. (1995). Sample Proposition 36 Case Processing Flowchart, pdf.
Riley, K. J., Ebener, P. A., Chiesa, J., Turner, S., & Ringel, J. (2000). Drug offenders and the criminal justice system: Will Proposition 36 treat or create problems?
Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Riley, K. J., Rodriguez, N., Ridgeway, G., Barnes-Proby, D., Fain, T., Griffith Forge, N., et al. (2005). Just Cause or Just Because: Prosecution and PleaBargaining Resulting in Prison Sentences on Low-Level Drug Charges in California and Arizon. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Sauer, M. (2000, October 17, 2000). Dissenting opinion; Judge goes against his colleagues with views on Proposition 36. The San Diego Union-Tribune, p. E1.
Savelsberg, J. J. (1992). Law That Does Not Fit Society: Sentencing Guidelines as a Neoclassical Reaction to the Dilemmas of Substantivized Law. The American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1346-1381.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2001). Experimental and QuasiExperimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Stanford, CT:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Sharif, B. (2003). The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act: Challenges and Promises for Public Health. California Journal of Health Promotion, 1(1), 32Skolnick, J. (1994). Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in a Democratic Society, 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Skolnick, J., & Bayley, D. (1984). The New Blue Line: Police Innovation in Six American Cities. New York: Free Press.
Spiegelman, R., Klein, D., Miller, R., & Noble, A. (2003). Early implementation of Proposition 36: Criminal justice and treatment system issues in eight counties.
Journal of Psychoactive drugs, 35(Suppl 1), 133-141.
Spohn, C., Piper, R. K., Martin, T., & Frenzel, E. D. (2001). Drug courts and recidivism: The results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism. Journal of Drug Issues, 31(1), 149-176.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, (2000).
Tauber, J. (2001). Rational Drug Policy Reform. Alexandria, VA: Center for Problem Solving Courts.
Taxman, F. S., & Bouffard, J. (2002). Treatment inside the drug treatment court: The who, what, where, and how of treatment services. Substance Use & Misuse.Special issue on drug treatment courts, 37(12-13), 1665-1687.
Taxman, F. S., Simpson, S. S., & Piquero, N. L. (2002). Calibrating and measuring theoretical integration in drug treatment programs. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(3), 159-173.
Tonry, M. (2004). Thinking about Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tonry, M., & Wilson, J. Q. (1990). Drugs and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Trojanowicz, R., & Bucqueroux, B. (1990). Community Policing: A Contemporary Perspective. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing.
Turner, S., Greenwood, P., Fain, T., & Deschenes, E. (1999). Perceptions of Drug Court: How Offenders View Ease of Program Completion, Strengths and Weaknesses, and the Impact on Their Lives. National Drug Court Institute Review, II(1), 61-86.
Turner, S., Longshore, D., Wenzel, S., Deschenes, E., Greenwood, P., Fain, T., et al.
(2002). A decade of drug treatment court research. Substance Use & Misuse.Special issue on drug treatment courts, 37(12-13), 1489-1521.
Ulmer, J. T., Kurlychek, M. C., & Kramer, J. H. (2007). Prosecutorial Discretion and the Imposition of Mandatory Minimum Sentences. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44(4), 427-458.
Urada, D., & Longshore, D. (2007). Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime
Prevention Act Final Report (Chapter 2: SACPA Offenders). Los Angeles:
UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
Urada, D., Longshore, D., & Conner, B. T. (2007). Evaluation of the Substance Abuse
and Crime Prevention Act Final Report (Chapter 3: Treatment). Los Angeles:
UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
Urada, D., Longshore, D., & Hawken, A. (2007). Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act Final Report (Chapter 4: Re-Offending). Los Angeles: UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs.
Walker, S. (1992). Origins of the Contemporary Criminal Justice Paradigm: The American Bar Foundation Survey 1953-1969. Justice Quarterly, 9(1), 47-76.
Walker, S. (1993). Taming the System: The Control of Discretion in Criminal Justice, 1950-1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
Walker, S., & Katz, C. M. (1995). Less than Meets the Eye: Police Departments' Bias-Crime Units. American Journal of Police, 1, 29-48.
Wallace, B. (2000, November 9, 2000). Election Results Show U.S. Tiring of War on Drug. San Francisco Chronicle, p. A17.
Wenzel, S., Longshore, D., Turner, S., & Ridgely, M. S. (2001). Drug Courts: A bridge between criminal justice and health services. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 241-253.
Wenzel, S. L., Turner, S. F., & Ridgely, M. S. (2004). Collaborations between drug courts and service providers: Characteristics and Challenges. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 253-263.
Wiley, D., Beattie, M., Nguyen, H., Puckett, K., Banerjee, K., & Poon, W. (2004).
When You Assume... the Reality of Implementing a Legally Mandated Substance Abuse Treatment Program. Journal of psychoactive drugs, SARC Suppl 2, 175-180.
Worrall, J. L., Schram, P., Hays, E., & Newman, M. (2004). An analysis of the relationship between probation caseloads and property crime rates in California counties. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 231-241.
Young, D. (2002). Impacts of perceived legal pressure on retention in drug treatment.
Criminal Justice & Behavior.Special Making people change: The effectiveness of coerced psychological treatment, 29(1), 27-55.
Young, D., & Belenko, S. (2002). Program retention and perceived coercion in three models of mandatory drug treatment. Journal of Drug Issues, 32(1), 297-328.
Zimring, F. E., Hawkins, G., & Kamin, S. (2001). Punishment and Democracy: Three Strikes and You're Out in California. New York: Oxford University Press.
Describe respondent’s background, job title, experience…
1. How many offenders do you arrest, or assist in the arrest of, per month for the following offenses?
Under the influence (11550, 11550(a)): Poss. of Paraphernalia (11364):
Poss. of non-narcotic (11377, Fel. Poss. of narcotic (11350):
Poss of syringe (4140):
1a. Have these numbers changed much since July 2001 (when PC1210 became law)?
If so, how and why?
1b. Arrests for felony dangerous drugs (11377(a), 11378, 11379(a), 11375(b)) skyrocketed from 2000-2002, and 2003-2004. Any ideas what might account for this dramatic increase? (have chart available)
2. Please tell me what you know about Proposition 36. What it is, who it applies to, etc… How do you learn this?
3. Did the department provide any training on the law (ie a training video during briefing)? If so, when did this training occur? (before implementation, 2001/2002, just recently) Can you tell me about the topics which were covered or what you learned?
4. How often do officers (or other agency personnel) discuss the law? When it is discussed, what do officers typically talk about? What types of comments are usually made? (i.e. regarding the offenders, the law itself, effects of the law…)
5. Before Proposition 36 became effective, did you give much thought as to how it might affect your job? If so, what kinds of expectations did you have?
6. What has the actual impact of the law been on your job? How is this different from your expectations?
7. Has Proposition 36 changed the availability of CI’s (Confidential Informants) or your relationship with CI’s?
8. Has Proposition 36 changed how law enforcement officers handle parolees arrested for possession of a controlled substance, such as methamphetamine? (Parole hold = can’t bail out, is this still typical?) What about parolees arrested for being under the influence?
9. How often do you come across an individual with a warrant for violation of PC1210 probation? Do you think the number of probation violation warrants has changed as a result of Proposition 36?
10. Has Proposition 36 changed the way you do your job in other ways? If so, how?
(i.e. has it changed the tactics or strategies you employ to arrest various suspects?)
11. What factors do you consider when you decide whether to arrest an individual for an offense such as under the influence of a controlled substance or possession of a controlled substance (or paraphernalia)?
12. How does Proposition 36 impact your decision to arrest an individual or what crime you charge an individual with?
13. Do you think Proposition 36 could have had an impact on the number of arrests for drug crimes in your city? How? Why?
14. Is there a department/agency policy written about the law? If yes, can you tell me what the policy states? May I have a copy?
15. Unlike drug courts and other diversion programs, Proposition 36 applies universally to all non-violent drug offenders who aren’t disqualified by a current contemporaneous offense or past criminal history. Do you think this impacts what other law enforcement officers feel about the law? Do you think it impacts the actions of other law enforcement officers?
16. What if you saw that treatment was working would l.e. be more favorable to it?
17. Do you recall how you felt about Proposition 36 when it was on the ballot?
17a. Did you vote for it, or against it?
18. What do you think of Proposition 36 as a policy now?
19. Do you think Proposition 36 is working? Why or why not?
20. If you could make changes to Proposition 36 to make it more effective, what changes would you make?
21. Do you know which offenses qualify for Proposition 36 sentencing in Orange County?
21a. Do you know if a drug offender’s past criminal history can disqualify him/her for Proposition 36 sentencing in Orange County? If yes, any idea what would disqualify a person?
21b. Can a drug offender in Orange County be sentenced under Proposition 36 if s/he has had past drug program failures (PC1000, P36, DTC)? If yes, how many past failures are tolerated?
I’m going to read you four vignettes, please tell me what action you would most likely take with the offender today, with Proposition 36 in effect.