Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marlowe, D. B.
Right arrow Articles by McLellan, A. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Are Judicial Status Hearings A Key Component Of Drug Court? During-Treatment Data From a Randomized Trial

Douglas B. Marlowe

David S. Festinger

Patricia A. Lee

Maria M. Schepise

Julie E. R. Hazzard

Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania

Jeffrey C. Merrill

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

Francis D. Mulvaney

Philadelphia Veteran’s Administration Medical Center

A. Thomas McLellan

Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania

This article reports during-treatment outcomes from a randomized, controlled evaluation of different schedules of judicial status hearings in a misdemeanor drug court. Contrary to expectations, more frequent status hearings with the drug court judge were not associated with more favorable outcomes for participants during the first 14 weeks of drug court in terms of counseling attendance, urinalysis-confirmed abstinence, self-reported substance use, or illegal activity. More frequent hearings were, however, associated with greater detection of infractions by the drug court judge and more remedial interventions with participants. Future research will address 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up outcomes for these individuals and will examine the generalizability of the findings across several adult drug courts.

Key Words: drug court • drug abuse • substance abuse • antisocial personality disorder

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 30, No. 2, 141-162 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854802250997
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eval RevHome page
E. L. C. Merrall and S. M. Bird
A Statistical Perspective on the Design of Drug-Court Studies
Eval Rev, June 1, 2009; 33(3): 257 - 280.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Violence Against WomenHome page
M. Rempel, M. Labriola, and R. C. Davis
Does Judicial Monitoring Deter Domestic Violence Recidivism?: Results of a Quasi-Experimental Comparison in the Bronx
Violence Against Women, February 1, 2008; 14(2): 185 - 207.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
D. B. Marlowe, D. S. Festinger, P. A. Lee, K. L. Dugosh, and K. M. Benasutti
Matching Judicial Supervision to Clients' Risk Status in Drug Court.
Crime Delinquency, January 1, 2006; 52(1): 52 - 76.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Offender Ther Comp CriminolHome page
J. S. Sanford and B. A. Arrigo
Lifting the Cover on Drug Courts: Evaluation Findings and Policy Concerns
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, June 1, 2005; 49(3): 239 - 259.
[Abstract] [PDF]