What Are The Pros And Cons Of Problem Solving Courts
I. Introduction
a. Since their creation in the 1990’s, problem-solving courts have become of much interest to the legal community. Not only are these courts revolutionary in their way of processing cases, but also they are proving to have great success rates. One of the most important aspects of the problem-solving courts is how much more involved a judge is with each case. In traditional courts, a judge will most likely read off the names of the people in the docket, and simply sentence an individual according to what the DA has already negotiated. During a problem-solving court, the judge has the opportunity to get to know each defendant on a more personal level, and be able to help the defendant succeed. While results have shown that the more involved judges are, the more likely it is for a program to succeed, there is much criticism regarding the judge’s attachment to each case.
II. Pro I
a. Results have shown that judges becoming more involved means that people are more likely to succeed.
III. Pro II
a. Judges are put through training so that they know much more about what they are talking …show more content…
Since their creation in the 1990’s, problem-solving courts have become of much interest to the legal community. Not only are these courts revolutionary in their way of processing cases, but also they are proving to have great success rates. One of the most important aspects of the problem-solving courts is how much more involved a judge is with each case. In traditional courts, a judge will most likely read off the names of the people in the docket, and simply sentence an individual according to what the DA has already negotiated. During a problem-solving court, the judge has the opportunity to get to know each defendant on a more personal level, and be able to help the defendant succeed. While results have shown that the more involved judges are, the more likely it is for a program to succeed, there is much criticism regarding the judge’s attachment to each
a. Since their creation in the 1990’s, problem-solving courts have become of much interest to the legal community. Not only are these courts revolutionary in their way of processing cases, but also they are proving to have great success rates. One of the most important aspects of the problem-solving courts is how much more involved a judge is with each case. In traditional courts, a judge will most likely read off the names of the people in the docket, and simply sentence an individual according to what the DA has already negotiated. During a problem-solving court, the judge has the opportunity to get to know each defendant on a more personal level, and be able to help the defendant succeed. While results have shown that the more involved judges are, the more likely it is for a program to succeed, there is much criticism regarding the judge’s attachment to each case.
II. Pro I
a. Results have shown that judges becoming more involved means that people are more likely to succeed.
III. Pro II
a. Judges are put through training so that they know much more about what they are talking …show more content…
Since their creation in the 1990’s, problem-solving courts have become of much interest to the legal community. Not only are these courts revolutionary in their way of processing cases, but also they are proving to have great success rates. One of the most important aspects of the problem-solving courts is how much more involved a judge is with each case. In traditional courts, a judge will most likely read off the names of the people in the docket, and simply sentence an individual according to what the DA has already negotiated. During a problem-solving court, the judge has the opportunity to get to know each defendant on a more personal level, and be able to help the defendant succeed. While results have shown that the more involved judges are, the more likely it is for a program to succeed, there is much criticism regarding the judge’s attachment to each