skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 237609 Find in a Library
Title: Implementing a Diversion-to-Treatment Law in California: Orange County's Experience
Journal: Federal Probation  Volume:75  Issue:3  Dated:December 2011  Pages:25-30
Author(s): Christine Gardiner
Date Published: December 2011
Page Count: 6
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 2007-IJ-CX-0031
Publisher: https://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/AdministrativeOffice.aspx 
Type: Program/Project Description
Format: Article
Language: English; French
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study examined the experiences of criminal justice practitioners of Orange County, CA, as they implemented Proposition 36, one of the largest and most comprehensive diversion-to-treatment laws in the United States.
Abstract: On July 1, 2001, Proposition 36 completely changed how California deals with minor drug offenders, moving from a crime-control model to an addiction treatment model. The groups that opposed the law, mostly organizations of criminal justice practitioners, represented the agencies required to implement it. Specifically, Proposition 36, also known as the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) of 2000, mandates that adults in California convicted of nonviolent drug possession offenses, and not disqualified by concurrent offenses or previous criminal history, be offered probation with drug treatment in the community in lieu of traditional sentencing (30-90 days in jail followed by probation). It prohibits the use of incarceration even for probation violations. A core group of six people were essentially drafted by default to orchestrate the implementation of SACPA in Orange County. This core group included one to two representatives from Orange County’s Health Care Agency (HCA), Probation Department, District Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, and Superior Court. These same agencies are involved in drug court in the county. A pilot study was conducted prior to the official implementation of SACPA, in order to identify issues that must be addressed and to move eligible offenders through the system. As part of the pilot study, district attorneys and public defenders identified eligible offenders using criteria specified in SACPA. They then offered eligible offenders a sentence of probation with a condition of drug treatment. Much can be learned by examining how the core group worked together despite its differences in order to overcome hurdles and implement a radical change in criminal justice policy. 13 references
Main Term(s): Correctional reform
Index Term(s): California; Diversion programs; Drug law offenses; Drug laws; Drug offenders; Drug Policy; Drug treatment; Interagency cooperation; Law reform; NIJ grant-related documents; Nonviolent behavior
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=259641

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.