Responding to the Community: Principles for Planning and Creating a Community Court

Feinblatt, John; Berman, Greg

doi:10.1037/e527962006-001

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Offenders who meet the community court’s requirements, whether through community service, treatment, or other sanctions, have their case wiped from their public criminal record. 3 Community courts also “bridge the gap between communities and courts” (Feinblatt and Berman, 1997: 4). Some community courts arrange “impact panels” in which offenders, residents, and business owners meet to discuss quality-of-life crimes.…”

Section: Community Courtsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Courting the community: Organizational flexibility and community courts

Zozula

2017

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how a community court in the United States framed its mission to a diverse population of stakeholders. Drawing from 11 months of ethnographic data, I show how community courts' embrace of both punitive and therapeutic goals help the courts appeal to a variety of audiences. I argue that by adopting a flexible mission which allows for both punishment and treatment, community courts are better able to create and maintain organizational legitimacy. This article not only adds to the literature on the flexibility of punishment logics, but it also brings a new focus by considering the organizational utility of mutable penal goals.

show abstract

Section: Community Courtsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Courting the community: Organizational flexibility and community courts

Zozula

2017

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most advocates of restorative justice agree that it involves five basic principles: (1) Crime consists of more than violation of the criminal law and defiance of government authority. (2) Crime involves disruptions in a three-dimensional relationship of victim, community, and offender. (3) Because crime harms the victim and the community, the primary goals should be to repair the harm and heal the victim and the community.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Red Hook Community Justice Center: An Evaluation of a Community Court

Flynn¹

2005

The Journal of Psychiatry & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The archival data base of the Red Hook Community Justice Center was analyzed to describe the defendant population, the nature of the cases, the types of sanctions imposed, and the extent of compliance with sanctions. The data base contained a total of 6,245 cases that came under the jurisdiction of the court between June 2000 and June 2003. As anticipated, the data indicated that the most frequent type of offense was drug related and the most frequent sanction was mandatory substance abuse treatment. Incarceration was infrequent (4.9% of all cases). Other sanctions included community service, mandatory academic or vocational training and social service interventions such as anger management groups. Compliance with sanctions ranged from 63.7% for mandatory drug treatment sanctions to 75.5% for community service.

show abstract

Examining the Impact of Case Management in Vancouver’s Downtown Community Court: A Quasi-Experimental Design

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProblem solving courts (PSC) have been implemented internationally, with a common objective to prevent reoffending by addressing criminogenic needs and strengthening social determinants of health. There has been no empirical research on the effectiveness of community courts, which are a form of PSC designed to harness community resources and inter-disciplinary expertise to reduce recidivism in a geographic catchment area.MethodWe used the propensity score matching method to examine the effectiveness of Vancouver’s Downtown Community Court (DCC). We focused on the subset of DCC participants who were identified as having the highest criminogenic risk and were assigned to a case management team (CMT). A comparison group was derived using one-to-one matching on a large array variables including static and dynamic criminogenic factors, geography, and time. Reductions in offences (one year pre minus one year post) were compared between CMT and comparison groups.ResultsCompared to other DCC offenders, those triaged to CMT (9.5% of the DCC population) had significantly higher levels of healthcare, social service use, and justice system involvement over the ten years prior to the index offence. Compared to matched offenders who received traditional court outcomes, those assigned to CMT (n = 249) exhibited significantly greater reductions in overall offending (p<0.001), primarily comprised of significant reductions in property offences (p<0.001).ConclusionsOur findings indicate that CMT achieved significantly greater reductions in recidivism than traditional court among offenders with complex needs and high numbers of previous offences. Limitations of this research include a non-experimental design and one year follow up. Strengths include a robust matching process and extensive client level data spanning multiple sectors. Further research is needed to replicate the observed outcomes, to investigate the extension of community courts to settings with divergent offender needs and local resources, and to estimate potential cost avoidance attributable to this intervention.

show abstract

Responding to the Community: Principles for Planning and Creating a Community Court

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Courting the community: Organizational flexibility and community courts

Courting the community: Organizational flexibility and community courts

The Red Hook Community Justice Center: An Evaluation of a Community Court

Examining the Impact of Case Management in Vancouver’s Downtown Community Court: A Quasi-Experimental Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About