T
The420Guy
Guest
A law intended to divert nonviolent drug offenders into treatment programs
instead of prison is reaching fewer people overall and more hard-core
substance abusers than intended, according to a report released Tuesday.
Enacted in July 2001, Proposition 36 requires that people convicted of
possession, use or transportation of drugs for personal use be offered
drug treatment rather than jail. It does not apply to those convicted of
drug sales or to anyone with a prior violent felony conviction. The
measure was intended to save taxpayer money.
The report released Tuesday by the county found that 8,329 people were
sentenced to treatment under Proposition 36 in the first 12 months since
its enactment, nearly 7,000 fewer than projected. Of those, nearly 20%
failed to report for treatment.
Still, the report called the measure a success. It is "working really
well" in terms of diverting thousands of people from prison and into
treatment, said Patrick L. Ogawa, director of the county's Alcohol and
Drug Program Administration, which compiled the report.
> From July 2001 through June 2002, the report tracked defendants sentenced
under Proposition 36 at several stages, beginning with their sentencing.
The next monitored stage was assessment, in which the severity of a
defendant's addiction was determined, followed by placement with a
treatment center.
The report indicated a substantial drop in participation at each stage.
The result was an overall decline of nearly 50% from the number of those
sentenced to the number of those in treatment as of June 30, 2002.
Michael A. Tynan, a judge who supervises all county drug court programs,
said the law needs to be modified to ensure that defendants complete
treatment programs or face incarceration. Currently, the defendants are
given several chances to complete the program before they face jail.
"Proposition 36 was sold to voters as a way to keep true first and second
offenders out of prison," Tynan said. "I think we're wasting an awful lot
of money on people who can't benefit from such a lightweight program."
Nearly 70% of the defendants in treatment were convicted of felony crimes,
mostly felony drug possession. According to the report, "the level of
addiction [in Los Angeles County] has been more serious than initially
anticipated," meaning that although fewer people than expected are sent to
treatment, they tend to require more services than casual drug users.
"We're talking about a hard-core population overall," said Ana Maria Luna,
a judge who heads a county task force on implementing Proposition 36.
"People that are coming into the system have a higher level of acuity in
terms of their substance abuse problems."
Luna said Proposition 36 has been successful "in terms of moving large
numbers of people into treatment ... given the large geographic area that
L.A. County serves."
More than 60 people have completed drug treatment programs and had their
cases dismissed by a court. But Luna said that, since the program was
designed to last 18 months, the fact that 60 people have finished early is
a good sign.
Pubdate: Wednesday, November 27, 2002
Author: Daren Briscoe, Times Staff Writer
Source: Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: Los Angeles Times
instead of prison is reaching fewer people overall and more hard-core
substance abusers than intended, according to a report released Tuesday.
Enacted in July 2001, Proposition 36 requires that people convicted of
possession, use or transportation of drugs for personal use be offered
drug treatment rather than jail. It does not apply to those convicted of
drug sales or to anyone with a prior violent felony conviction. The
measure was intended to save taxpayer money.
The report released Tuesday by the county found that 8,329 people were
sentenced to treatment under Proposition 36 in the first 12 months since
its enactment, nearly 7,000 fewer than projected. Of those, nearly 20%
failed to report for treatment.
Still, the report called the measure a success. It is "working really
well" in terms of diverting thousands of people from prison and into
treatment, said Patrick L. Ogawa, director of the county's Alcohol and
Drug Program Administration, which compiled the report.
> From July 2001 through June 2002, the report tracked defendants sentenced
under Proposition 36 at several stages, beginning with their sentencing.
The next monitored stage was assessment, in which the severity of a
defendant's addiction was determined, followed by placement with a
treatment center.
The report indicated a substantial drop in participation at each stage.
The result was an overall decline of nearly 50% from the number of those
sentenced to the number of those in treatment as of June 30, 2002.
Michael A. Tynan, a judge who supervises all county drug court programs,
said the law needs to be modified to ensure that defendants complete
treatment programs or face incarceration. Currently, the defendants are
given several chances to complete the program before they face jail.
"Proposition 36 was sold to voters as a way to keep true first and second
offenders out of prison," Tynan said. "I think we're wasting an awful lot
of money on people who can't benefit from such a lightweight program."
Nearly 70% of the defendants in treatment were convicted of felony crimes,
mostly felony drug possession. According to the report, "the level of
addiction [in Los Angeles County] has been more serious than initially
anticipated," meaning that although fewer people than expected are sent to
treatment, they tend to require more services than casual drug users.
"We're talking about a hard-core population overall," said Ana Maria Luna,
a judge who heads a county task force on implementing Proposition 36.
"People that are coming into the system have a higher level of acuity in
terms of their substance abuse problems."
Luna said Proposition 36 has been successful "in terms of moving large
numbers of people into treatment ... given the large geographic area that
L.A. County serves."
More than 60 people have completed drug treatment programs and had their
cases dismissed by a court. But Luna said that, since the program was
designed to last 18 months, the fact that 60 people have finished early is
a good sign.
Pubdate: Wednesday, November 27, 2002
Author: Daren Briscoe, Times Staff Writer
Source: Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: Los Angeles Times