DUI  COURTS  WEB  SITE 

Comparison of DUI and Drug Courts

Reduced to their common denominators, the population of a drug court can be defined as persons who have a drug problem, are charged with a drug offense or another offense motivated by a drug problem, and are nonviolent.  The DUI court population can be defined as persons charged with a DUI offense and who have indicators of a serious alcohol problem (e.g., prior alcohol arrests or convictions, or high BAC at the time of arrest).

Offenders in both groups share some common personal characteristics.  Each offender has a substance abuse problem that is taking control of his or her life.  Each requires comprehensive treatment, a strong support system, and the ability to come to terms with his or her problem before real change can occur.

The personal characteristics typical of the two classes of offender differ in some ways.  DUI offenders tend to be employed, and to have emotional resources that are helpful to recovery, such as family, education, or religion.  Drug offenders are often out of work and unable to support themselves.  With the exception of social assistance, they have little in the way of financial or emotional support.  DUI offenders have a "legal orientation," and drug court offenders an "illegal orientation."  That is, because alcohol is legal, DUI offenders see themselves as being on the "right side" of the law, even though they use alcohol in an illegal way.    Drug offenders ingest an illegal substance, and have few illusions about the side of the law on which they stand.

The DUI offender who is likely to be a candidate for a DUI court program is a repeat offender - arrested two, three, or more times for an alcohol-related traffic offense.  Repeat offenders account for about one-third of the arrests made annually; they are considered good candidates in part because limited resources translate into a limited number of seats in DUI/Drug Court, but also because serious DUI offenders are more likely to be in need of a DUI/Drug Court program.  Conversely, a typical drug court defendant (charged with a drug-related offense) may not be facing his or her first offense, but is less likely to be considered a serious offender.

DUI offenders are predominantly male (78 percent) and tend to be slightly older (25-44) than drug offenders (18-44).  In fact, while the DUI arrest rates for all age groups have declined in recent years, the declines for persons aged 35-44 are much smaller than those for other groups.  For instance, from 1990 to 1996 DUI arrest rates declined 23.5 percent for drivers at age 23 and 18.5 percent for driver's age 50 or older.  Rates for drivers in the 35-39 and 40-44 age groups went down only 7.6 percent and 6.7 percent respectively (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998).

Finally, DUI offender are often in a state of denial about their substance abuse.  Their drug-using counterparts, about half of whom are male and half female, tend to have a more realistic perception of their addiction.

DUI Courts Defined: The Key Components

In 1997, the Drug Court Standards Committee of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, with the support of the Drug Courts Program Office, designated the ten key components of drug courts (NADCP, 1997) and established these components as benchmarks for performance describing "the very best practices, designs, and operations of drug courts."  In their effort to define DUI courts, the DUI/Drug Court Advisory Panel explored the goals of DUI court proponents and the state of DUI courts operation today, and compared them to drug courts in terms of the ten key components.  They identified a number of similarities between DUI and drug courts in terms of goals and populations served.  Across the board, they also cited numerous differences.  In some cases, the differences are necessary responses to distinctions between the two populations.  In other cases, the differences point to needs of the DUI court community that can be met by collaborating with the drug court community.

The principal findings follow.

Drug Court Component 1: Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing.
Treatment is a critical factor in reducing recidivism among both drug and DUI offenders, and so is accountability for crimes committed.  The diversion and post-plea programs found in drug courts do not free offenders from taking responsibility for their actions, but they do enable offenders to enter treatment programs with minimal delay.  Sentencing laws and public perceptions make these programs workable for drug cases.  Timely admission to a DUI/Drug Court program for DUI offenders can be more of a challenge, where mandatory sentencing, a lack of pre-adjudication options, and public perceptions may prove to be obstacles.

Drug Court Component 2: Using a nonadversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants' due process rights.
All drug court practitioners - judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, treatment specialist, probation officer - work together toward the common goals of reducing recidivism and rehabilitating offenders.  It is this collaborative environment that underlies the success of drug court programs.  Maintaining a nonadversarial approach can be more challenging in DUI cases, where there is increases pressure to imprison offenders.  Defense attorneys in DUI cases often resort to delay tactics in order to keep their clients out of jail.  One unfortunate outcome of this tactic is that they are also kept out of treatment.

Drug Court Component 3: Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court program.
Prompt placement in a drug court program and a quick start on treatment are key drug court principles.  Drug courts typically offer incentives to encourage offenders to enter a drug court program, e.g., reduced or suspended jail time.  In many cases, the ability to make such and offer to a DUI offender has been legislated out of a judge's hands (i.e., mandatory jail time).  Incentives are available in DUI cases in some jurisdictions, however, including early driver's license reinstatement and pre-sentence release from jail on the offender's own recognizance.

Drug Court Component 4: Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol, drug and other related treatment and rehabilitation services.
In many respects, access to a continuum of treatment and related services is as available to DUI offenders as it is to drug offenders, although DUI offenders (who are accustomed to driving their own vehicles but who have lost driving privileges) may find it more difficult to get to treatment sites.  In one respect, DUI offenders may have an advantage over drug court offenders in that they have an additional "rehabilitation service," i.e., the opportunity to listen to victim-impact panels and use what they hear to better understand the severity of their actions.

Drug Court Component 5: Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing.
Urine testing is by no means a perfect technology, but its relative simplicity and accuracy give practitioners working with abusers of drugs other than alcohol a clear advantage.  Administered weekly or twice weekly, urine testing will often detect a drug relapse, but where most drugs can remain in a user's system for several days, alcohol can be undetectable within a few hours after ingestion.  Furthermore, the use of alcohol by a DUI offender poses a threat of immediate danger to the public.  Therefore, the monitoring of DUI offenders calls for greater coordination, more frequent testing, more innovative technologies, and a high level of personal communication.

Testing technologies employed in DUI courts around the country include state-of-the-art voice recognition and testing (i.e., testing devices that can detect alcohol use via telephone), interlock devices on automobiles, and hand-held testers.  Testing is usually random and frequent; some jurisdictions require offenders to call in daily and to submit to testing on demand.

The advantages of personal relationships between practitioners and offenders take on increases meaning when working with alcohol offenders, especially in low-population areas where residents tend to know each other by sight.  Court practitioners and law enforcement officers develop an awareness of who is in their programs; they visit with offenders often, and observe their activities both in homes and around town.

Drug Court Component 6: A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants' compliance.
Even the best treatment programs take time to work, and drug courts recognize that an early relapse is only a slip - it does not signify program failure.  Nevertheless, continued use of alcohol or other drugs cannot be condoned, and drug courts utilize a system of sanctions and incentives to foster program compliance.

The law and public opinion narrow the list of sanctions and incentives that can be used in DUI cases and give a judge less flexibility in imposing them.  Quicker imposition and the use of more severe sanctions are often mandated by law or demanded by the community.  Incentives are also limited.  Case dismissal may not be an option, and close supervision and testing are essential for public safety.  One effective incentive that can sometimes be utilized is the lessening of driver's license restrictions.

Drug Court Component 7: Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential.
Judicial interaction with offenders is equally important to the success of both drug and DUI programs.  In either program, the judge is the focus in both the courtroom and the community, and a direct relationship between judge and offender is central to program success.

In some courts, the judge may have less discretion in levying sanctions and incentives on DUI offenders than he or she would have when working with drug cases.  In other courts, the rules of the court leave the judge little discretion in these matters regardless of the offense.

Drug Court Component 8: Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness.
Coordinated management, monitoring, and evaluation systems are fundamental to the effective operation of drug courts, whether the cases before it are drug-related or DUI offenses.  In either case, periodic evaluation is necessary in order to validate a program's effectiveness and improve it over time.

At this time, DUI courts patterned after or resembling the drug court model touch only a fraction of all DUI cases.  Most cases are heard in courts where comprehensive treatment and close supervision are not part of the program.  Adequate evaluation systems and accurate documentation of evaluation efforts are necessary if the influence of the drug court model on DUI offenders is to be expanded.

Drug Court Component 9: Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and operations.
Professional education is as important to DUI court practitioners as it is for those who work with drug offenders, but the state of education for DUI courts is far less developed.  No national training or national conference mechanism is in place.  Publications that disseminate information to the field do not exist, and cross-training is only in the beginning stages.  In addition, no standards have been developed for the field.

Drug Court Component 10: Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court program effectiveness.
Drug courts are making significant inroads in engaging the community and gaining public support.  Becoming a community-based institution is a goal of equal importance to DUI courts, but a greater challenge because DUI cases can garner little "public sympathy."  In addition, a single DUI offender relapse could result in a traffic crash and death (and disastrous consequences for a DUI program) while a drug offender's relapse will more likely go unnoticed.  Gaining substantial community support for DUI courts and for drug courts that hear DUI cases calls for a higher level of organizational support, different educational approaches, and greater deference to social concerns.

Home Page    DUI Courts News    Why DUI Courts?    DUI Court Mission
Drug Court Model    Comparison    Challenges    Strategy
 Butte County Revia Project    DUI Court Links

This web page was created by the American Council on Alcoholism 
to serve as a resource for information about DUI courts.

This page was last updated on 4-30-2003.