This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
A program designed to unclog 3rd District Court in Salt Lake County and reduce recidivism has expedited case processing, but failed to decrease the rate of new offenses committed by participants, according to a new study.
The study, by the Utah Criminal Justice Center at the University of Utah, also says that defendants in the Early Case Resolution program receive more lenient sentences than other defendants, rather than the intended "same justice sooner."
Later this month, the Utah Judicial Council will meet with representatives from Salt Lake County agencies and the district court to discuss terminating the parts of the program that aren't working, according to Rick Schwermer, assistant state court administrator.
"We cannot in good conscience continue doing what's not working," Schwermer said.
The program, spearheaded by then-Salt Lake County District Attorney Lohra Miller, began after her tenure ended in February 2011 with the expectation that a significant percentage of felony and class A misdemeanor cases could be resolved within a month of charges being filed. ECR calls for prosecutors to quickly identify matters that are easy to resolve, such as drug and property cases where no legal questions are at issue.
Other ECR goals were to provide the "same justice sooner" and to provide criminal defendants with appropriate sentences and treatment services.
One prediction was that 30 to 50 percent of those types of cases could be funneled into the ECR program, which was funded by about $700,000 of federal stimulus money.
The study said in 2013 that 56 percent of eligible cases were being resolved in 30 days or less from the time charges were filed and few took longer than two months.
But Schwemmer said the Judicial Council had concerns from the beginning and insisted that a rigorous outcome study be a condition of ECR's implementation. The council, the courts and the county all shared in the $180,000 cost to do two interim reports, in 2012 and 2013, and a final report in 2014, which was completed in December.
The findings say that:
• Case processing time was decreased for criminal cases in 3rd District Court because of the procedural changes from the program.
• Defendants in ECR cases received shorter probation periods and fewer jail days than non-ECR defendants for similar types of crimes.
• Fewer ECR defendants were ordered to complete substance abuse treatment.
• Although typically sentenced to shorter probation terms, ECR defendants were more likely to be terminated unsuccessfully from probation and terminated more quickly than non-ECR defendants. Those in the program also re-offended more quickly and more often.
David Litvack, coordinator of Salt Lake County's Criminal Justice Advisory Council, said the data gathered for the study will help the court retain its ECR gains, such as fewer hearings, and improve in areas where needed, including better supervision of offenders.
Kent Hart, executive director of the Utah Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said the program has improved the efficiency of the justice system and the study results will allow for making other positive changes.
"What is needed are definitely more treatment options and services that criminal defendants need to succeed," Hart said.
Schwemmer said knowing what doesn't work is as important as knowing what does.
"We've learned you can go too fast and if you go too fast, you can get it wrong," he said.
Schwemmer said 19 other counties in the country have implemented an ECR program and the information in the Utah study will benefit them.
Twitter: @PamelaMansonSLC