Effectiveness of Georgia DUI Courts: Legal and Treatment Perspectives

This report provides an overview of Georgia's approach to managing repeat DUI offenders through specialized DUI courts. It examines the court model, which involves frequent judicial supervision, treatment programs, and drug testing. The report discusses the legal implications of the model, including accountability, plea bargaining options, and potential challenges related to rights. It details the five-phase treatment approaches, including assessment, active treatment, relapse prevention, and continuum of care. The report also highlights the use of sanctions and positive reinforcement within the program. Furthermore, it summarizes the findings of a study that demonstrates a significant reduction in recidivism among DUI court participants compared to traditional programs. The report concludes by referencing relevant research and the operational processes of the DUI courts in Georgia, from arrest to graduation.

Running head: MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
Managing Repeat DUI Offenders
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
Examine the model utilized to address repeat DUI offenders in GEORGIA.
Following the model in relation to the drug court, the three Georgia Driving-Under-the-
Influence courts had been established for addressing the underlying problem of alcohol with
respect to repeat DUI offenders through frequent and judicially supervised treatments, drug and
alcohol testing, use of graduated sanctions as along with other forms of rehabilitative services. A
team consisting of a court personnel, judge, probation officer and treatment providers regularly
meet to assess the progress of the offenders and for the purpose of reporting their progress meet
bi-weekly with the judge (Aslam et al., 2015).
The drug courts consists the coordination of probation, judiciary, probation, defensive
bar, social services, mental health, the treatment community and the law enforcement for the
purpose of indulging with common offenders and breaking the sequence of case management,
substance abuse treatment, probation supervision, consistent monitoring and drug testing. Based
on six drug courts in the state of New York it has been provided that the court reduced offender
recidivism by 29 percent over a three year post arrest period as compared to those offenders who
received standard treatment.
Based on the high degree of effectiveness provided by the drug court model, Driving-
While-Intoxicated (DWI) Courts or Driving-Under-the-Influence (DUI) have been designed to
provide continuous supervision of the offenders by judges along with other officials of the court
who closely monitor and administer compliance with court order sanctions along with treatment.
DWI/DUI courts involve in general frequent interactions of the offenders with the judges,
intensive supervision of probation officers, random alcohol and other drug testing, intensive

2
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
treatment, lifestyle changes, community service, positive reinforcement for successfully
performing the program and jail sentences in relation to non compliance.
The Georgia Governor’s Office of Highway Safety, in the year 2003 provided a federal
grant in relation to funding from national Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to
Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts (GAOC) for the purpose of establish three DUI
courts for managing and treating cases of those offenders who have been convicted of driving
under influence of alcohol on several instances. Each of the DUI court which have been
established under the grant include a judge, a case management clerk and a DUI court
coordinator. In addition a DUI Court program manager has the duty of coordinating grant
activities for GOAC in Atlanta. All the three DUI Courts operate in an independent manner
following a uniform process which is coordinated by GAOC.
Fell, Tippetts and Langston (2011) initiated an impact or outcome evaluation through the
use of matched comparison design when longitudinal data was made available as enough court
participants graduated for the purpose of determining the effectiveness if DUI courts in
addressing recidivism. The fundamental design for evaluating the impact was to gather and
collect on three groups. These groups included a group of DUI court offenders, a retrospective
group of similar offenders who had been sanctioned in the country before the court had been
established and a group of offenders who were arrested in those countries which do not have
DUI courts. The study through the use of Cox Regression models found that there was a
significant 38.2% improvement in reducing recidivism in relation to the DUI court program as
compared to the other groups. Thus the DUI courts in Georgia work as expected and were found
to reduce recidivism in relation to the repeat DUI offenders compared to other traditional
programs.

3
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
Explain the legal implications of this model.
The DUI court has been designed to attain the utmost amount of accountability from the
individuals. The rules of the court are clear, an individual is not supposed to make any mistakes,
violate any rule or miss any appointment. Mistakes are made by the people when they are
driving, however such mistakes are addressed by the DUI courts from sanctions which range
from classes and community services to time in jail.
In the process of plea bargaining the DUI court may be discussed as an option for individuals as
a possibility for individuals in case they have been charged with multiple offences in relation to
alcohol and drug while driving. The court system does not have the power of forcing someone
into the DUI rather it is a system which is agreed by individuals in relation to a treatment plan a
term of probation.
DUI courts are mostly arranged into a series of phases, where the first stage is the most intensive
and participants gradually move upwards towards the graduation phase. The DUI court program
in Georgia is very intensive. People who fail to comply with the regulations are imposed with
sanctions which include additional community service time and jail sentences.
However the programs imposed by the DUI courts have been criticized by the supports of
right to free movement and right to privacy (Fell, Tippetts & Ciccel, 2011). In addition the
program may be considered against the doctrine of double jeopardy where the offenders are
punished multiple times because of their acts. However it is important to note that the courts
operate well within the sphere of respecting such rights.
List and explain the treatment approaches.

4
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
The DUI of Georgia conducts the treatment process and five phases. The first phase is in
relation to contracting, initial clinical assessment and orientation. The second phase is in relation
to an extended assessment which is for a period of a minimum 8 weeks. This includes two hours
every week in group therapy and attest one individual session with the DUI court treatment
provided two times in a month. The third phase is an active treatment and recovery phase which
is conducted for a duration of 24 weeks. This also includes two hours every week in group
therapy and attest one individual session with the DUI court treatment provided two times in a
month. The fourth phase is in relation to relapse prevention and lasts for a period of minimum
sixteen weeks. This includes three hours every week in group therapy and attest one individual
session with the DUI court treatment provided two times in a month. The fifth phase is in
relation to continuum of care which lasts for 52-104 weeks. Here the requirements are
determined individually based upon the need of the participant. The duration is also determined
by the DUI court every month the offender graduates.
Although sanctions can be recommended by the DUI court team, it is the lone duty of the
DUI judge to put sanctions on a participant. A few sanctions which can be imposed by the judges
include written or verbal reprimand from the bench, mandatory reporting to DUI office, and
increase in frequency of drug and alcohol testing, increased meetings with probation officials,
loss of driving privileges, incarceration, additional hours of community services or other
sanctions which are deemed appropriate by the bench. Any consequence of program violation
may include more case management by treatment provider, more 12-steps meetings, more
treatment attendance and more random alcohol and drug testing (Brock, 2014).
Positive support is provided by the DUI courts to offender participants who
perform well in the treatment program. Thus in form of positive enforcement, the court gives

5
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
importance to the participants special occasions such as birthdays and specific life events
publically to give support to the recovery process of the participant. For the successful
completion of each phase the DUI provided community service credits to the participants.
Offenders are traced through the total DUI court program which ranges from sentencing into the
program components to the stage of graduation. The cases follow normal procedures of arrest,
investigation and prosecution.

6
MANAGING REPEAT DUI OFFENDERS
References
Fell, J. C., Tippetts, A. S., & Langston, E. A. (2011). An evaluation of the three Georgia DUI
courts (No. HS-811 450).
Aslam, S. K., Mehboob, B., Zaheer, S., & Shafique, K. (2015). Background The aim of this
study was to gain information useful to improve traffic safety, concerning the following
aspects for DUI (Driving Under the Influence): frequency, reasons, perceived risk,
drivers' knowledge of the related penalties, perceived likelihood of being punished,
drivers’ perception of the harshness of punitive measures and drivers’ perception of the
probability of behavioral... Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 10(1), 1-
10.
Brock, G. (2014). Make reckless drivers pay.
Fell, J. C., Tippetts, A. S., & Ciccel, J. D. (2011, October). An evaluation of three driving-under-
the-influence courts in Georgia. In Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine/Annual
Scientific Conference (Vol. 55, p. 301). Association for the Advancement of Automotive
Medicine.