This study examined the demographic, mental health, and criminal characteristics of 1,220 referrals to the Washoe County mental health court over a three-year period in order to determine which characteristics were associated with acceptance into the court. Results indicated that those with a thought disorder, a mood disorder, a felony index charge, and a misdemeanor index charge were significantly more likely to be accepted into the mental health court and those with a crime against a person, a crime against the community, and males were significantly less likely to be accepted into the court. A violent current crime and/or criminal history were also associated with rejection from the mental health court. These results have important policy implications for those who are referred to the court but who receive another disposition of their case and for those with violent crimes or criminal histories who are rejected by the court. This research is limited by its focus on one mental health court but does help to fill a void in the mental health court literature and sets the stage for a new focus on what becomes of those rejected from the mental health court.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbonettiC.A.1986. Criminality, prosecutorial screening and uncertainty: Toward a theory of discretionary decision making in felony case proceedings. Criminology,, 24: 623–644.
2.
AlbonettiC.A.1987. Prosecutorial discretion: The effects of uncertainty. Law and Society Review,, 21: 291–313.
3.
AlbonettiC.A.HepburnJ.R.1996. Prosecutorial discretion to defer criminalization: The effects of defendant's ascribed and achieved status characteristics. Journal of Quantitative Criminology,, 12: 63–81.
4.
AlmquistL.DoddE.2009. Mental health courts: A guide to research-informed policy and practice, New York, NY: Council of State Governments.
BontaJ.LawM.HansonK.1998. The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,, 123: 123–142.
8.
BoothroydR.A.MercadoC.C.PoythressN.G.ChristyA.PetrilaJ.2005. Clinical outcomes of defendants in mental health court. Psychiatric Services,, 56(7): 829–834.
9.
BoothroydR.A.PoythressN.G.McGahaA.PetrilaJ.2003. The Broward mental health court: Process, outcomes and service utilization. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26: 55–71.
10.
CaseB.SteadmanH.J.DupuisS.A.MorrisL.S.2009. Who succeeds in jail diversion programs for persons with mental illness? A multi-site study. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 27: 661–674.
11.
ChristyA.PoythressN.G.BoothroydR.A.PetrilaJ.MehraS.2005. Evaluating the efficiency and community safety goals of the Broward County Mental Health Court. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 23: 227–243.
12.
CosdenM.EllensJ.SchnellJ.Yamini-DioufY.2005. Efficacy of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 23(2): 199–214.
13.
CosdenM.EllensJ.SchnellJ.Yamini-DioufY.WolfeM.M.2003. Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 21(4): 415–427.
FrailingK.2010. How mental health courts function: Outcomes and observations. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 33(4): 207–213.
17.
GriffinP.A.SteadmanH.J.PetrilaJ.2002. The use of criminal charges and sanctions in mental health courts. Psychiatric Services,, 53(10): 1285–1289.
18.
HerinckxH.A.SwartS.C.AmaS.M.DolezalC.D.KingS.2005. Rearrest and linkage to mental health services among clients of the Clark County mental health court program. Psychiatric Services,, 56: 853–857.
19.
HidayV.A.MooreM.E.LamoureauxM.de MagistrisJ.2005. North Carolina's mental health court. Popular Government,, : 24–30. Spring/Summer
20.
HidayV.A.RayB.2010. Arrests two years after exiting a well-established mental health court. Psychiatric Services,, 61(5): 463–468.
21.
LambH.R.WeinbergerL.E.2008. Mental health courts as a way to provide treatment to violent persons with severe mental illness. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association,, 300: 722–724.
22.
LuskinM.L.2001. Who is diverted? Case selection for court-monitored mental health treatment. Law and Policy,, 23: 217–236.
23.
McNielD.E.BinderR.L.2007. Effectiveness of a mental health court in reducing criminal recidivism and violence. American Journal of Psychiatry,, 164: 1395–1403.
24.
MooreM.E.HidayV.A.2006. Mental health court outcomes: A comparison of re-arrest and re-arrest severity between mental health court and traditional court participants. Law and Human Behavior,, 30: 659–674.
25.
NaplesM.MorrisL.S.SteadmanH.J.2007. Factors in disproportionate representation among persons recommended by programs and accepted by courts for jail diversion. Psychiatric Services,, 58: 1095–1101.
26.
NeiswenderJ.R.2004. Executive summary of evaluation of outcomes for King County mental health court, Seattle, WA: Washington State University. Retrieved from http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/DistrictCourt/MentalHealthCourt.aspx (click on Executive Summary of the MHC Outcome Evaluation, February, 2004)
27.
Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 176A.260. 2001. Conditions and limitations on assignment of defendant to program; Effect of violation of terms and conditions; Discharge of defendant upon fulfillment of terms and conditions; Effect of discharge.
PalermoG.2010. The Nevada mental health courts. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 33(4): 214–219.
31.
PoythressN.G.PetrilaJ.McGahaA.BoothroydR.A.2002. Perceived coercion and procedural justice in the Broward mental health court. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 25: 517–533.
32.
RachBeiselJ.ScottJ.DixonL.1999. Co-occurring severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders: A review of recent research. Psychiatric Services,, 50(11): 1427–1434.
33.
RedlichA.D.HooverS.SummersA.SteadmanH.J.2010. Enrollment in mental health courts: Voluntariness, knowingness, and adjudicative competence. Law and Human Behavior,, 34(2): 91–104.
34.
RedlichA.D.SteadmanH.J.CallahanL.RobbinsP.C.VesselinovR.OzdogruA.A.2010. The use of mental health court appearances in supervisions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 33(4): 272–277.
35.
RedlichA.D.SteadmanH.J.MonahanJ.PetrilaJ.GriffinP.A.2005. The second generation of mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,, 11(4): 527–538.
36.
RidgelyM.S.EngbergJ.GreenbergM.D.TurnerS.DeMartiniC.DembowskyJ.W.2007. Justice, treatment and cost: An evaluation of the fiscal impact of Allegheny County mental health court. RAND No. TR-439-CSG, Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2007/RAND_TR439.pdf
37.
SteadmanH.J.NaplesM.2005. Assessing the effectiveness of jail diversion programs for persons with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance use disorders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 23: 163–170.
38.
SteadmanH.J.RedlichA.D.CallahanL.RobbinsP.C.VesselinovR.2011. Effect of mental health courts on arrests and jail days. Archives of General Psychiatry,, 68(2),): 167–172.
39.
SteadmanH.J.RedlichA.D.GriffinP.PetrilaJ.MonahanJ.2005. From referral to disposition: Case processing in seven mental health courts. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,, 23: 215–226.
40.
StodolaM.A.2004. An assessment and evaluation of mental health courts in Maricopa County, Arizona, Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts, Institute for Court Management, Court Executive Development Phase III Paper.
41.
TrupinE.RichardsH.2003. Seattle's mental health courts: Early indicators of effectiveness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 26: 33–53.
42.
UlmerJ.2001. Intermediate sanctions: A comparative analysis of the probability and severity of recidivism. Sociological Inquiry,, 71: 164–193.
43.
Van VleetR.K.HickertA.O.BeckerE.E.KunzC.2008. Evaluation of the Salt Lake County mental health court: Final report, Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah. Retrieved from http://www.law.utah.edu/_studyfiles/94/94.pdf
44.
WalesH.W.HidayV.A.RayB.2010. Procedural justice and the mental health court judge's role in reducing recidivism. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,, 33(4): 265–271.
45.
Washoe County MHC Handbook. 2007. Handbook of the Washoe County mental health court. Received via e-mail from court services officer on 1 November 2007
46.
WolffN.FabrikantN.BelenkoS.2011. Mental health courts and their selection processes: Modeling variation for consistency. Law and Human Behavior,, 35: 402–412. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-010-9250-4
47.
WolffN.PogorzelskiW.2005. Measuring the effectiveness of mental health courts: Challenges and recommendations. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,, 11: 539–569.
