Marijuana Policy Project

Judges, court officials and everyday citizens around Mississippi are figuring out what some jurisdictions have know for almost a decade.

Drug court works.

In fact that was a headline on a Sunday article written for the Jackson Clarion-Ledger by Robert H. Chamberlin, circuit judge for the 17th Circuit Court District, composed of the North Mississippi counties of DeSoto, Panola, Tallahatchie, Tate and Yalobusha.

In the article, Judge Chamberlin correctly notes that the first felony drug court in the state was implemented in 1999 by then 14th District Circuit Judge Keith Starrett of McComb, who now is a U.S. District Court judge.

Since Starrett's ground-breaking initiative, the concept has been rolled out to other courtrooms in Mississippi, including here in Leflore County.

"For those unfamiliar with drug courts," Chamberlin wrote, "they are special courts given the responsibility to handle cases involving drug-using offenders through comprehensive supervision, drug testing, treatment services and immediate sanctions and incentives."

He points out that "drug court is not a resource available to drug dealers, persons with a past conviction or present charge for a violent crime, persons charged with DUI causing injury, persons charged with burglarizing an occupied dwelling, among others. ...

"Drug court is not ... some type of easy alternative for its participants. Quite the contrary, I have had potential participants decline the program because it would be too tough."

In other words, first-time, non-violent offenders who are addicted to drugs or alcohol are given the option of going on probation provided they follow a rigid set of guidelines, including being in a rehabilitation program for addicts, undergoing regular drug tests, paying down their fines and forking up a monthly fee to cover the costs of their participation in drug court. If they mess up, they are sent to prison.

It saves the state and local judicial jurisdictions a lot of money, but more importantly it saves some lives, as many who have graduated from the program can attest.

Admittedly, there are failures, but the success rate is considerably better than the recidivism rate of those sent to prison.

The cost of putting a person through the drug court diversion program is a fraction of what it would be to imprison him. Chamberlin referred in his article to a report released by present Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant, when Bryant was state auditor. The auditor calculated Mississippi could save about $5.4 million dollars annually based upon merely 500 participants going into a statewide drug court system instead of being housed by the state Department of Corrections.

Drug court is beneficial to the state, Chamberlin wrote, "because valuable resources can be used to deal with murderers, rapists, child molesters, drug dealers, et al. rather than punishing the taxpayer by recycling drug addicts in and out of prison with no end in sight."

Obviously, Chamberlin is among a growing number of officials in Mississippi sold on the benefits of drug court.

But noting that state lawmakers recently passed legislation charging the State Drug Court Advisory Committee with developing expansion plans for drug courts across the state, he wrote, "I do not believe a statewide drug court system should be mandatory. Drug courts should only be implemented by judges who believe in their effectiveness."

It's here that we disagree with Chamberlin. Granted only those judges who believe in drug court and who are willing to do the work to see that they succeed should be running them. But every jurisdiction in the state presumably should have such a judge.