“…Shdaimah and Wiechelt (2012) point out that, while diversion programs are often hailed as progressive alternatives to traditional criminal justice approaches to certain crimes, many legal scholars have questioned and critiqued diversion programs on the basis of equity and procedural concern (Orr et al, 2009), efficacy (Bolt, 2010), and constitutional concerns such as double jeopardy (i.e., when prosecution on the original prostitution charge is enacted and a conviction with punishment occurs as a result of an individual being unable to meet the program requirements) and lack of authority (Brown vs. State of Maryland, 2009). Specific critiques and problems with prostitution diversion programs argue that they tend to ''encourage special interest control of criminal courts, foster undesirable police and judicial practices, and fail to meaningfully address societal problems, specifically the criminalization or prostitution'' (Quinn, 2006, p. 145).…”