Problem-solving courts are increasingly imposing requirements that adversely affect immigrant defendants seeking to participate in alternative sentencing and diversion programs. Upfront guilty pleas, admissions of guilt, and jail sanctions may leave immigrants at risk of deportation and other negative immigration consequences—even if they successfully complete court-ordered programming and the court ultimately dismisses the charges against them. These consequences in turn affect defendants' families and communities and complicate the work of key players in the criminal justice system. This article explains why immigrant defendants are at risk and how problem-solving courts may adopt programs and policies that address these concerns for immigrant communities.
American Bar Association. (2004). American justice through immigrants' eyes. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Association of the Bar of the City of New York. ( 2007). The immigration consequences of deferred adjudication programs in New York City. The Record, 62, 312-326.
4.
Auguste v. Ridge, 395 F.3d 123 (3d Cir. 2005).
5.
Berman, G., & Anderson, D. (1999). Drugs, courts and neighborhoods: Community reintegration and the Brooklyn Treatment Court. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
6.
Berman, G., & Feinblatt, J. (2005). Good courts. New York: The New Press.
7.
Bleuze, N. (2001). Matter of Roldan: Expungement of conviction and the role of states in immigration matters. University of Colorado Law Review, 72, 817-850.
8.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2006, May). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
9.
Butcher, K.F., & Piehl, A.M. (2007). Why are immigrants' incarceration rates so low? Evidence on selective immigration, deterrence, and deportation. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research working paper 13229.
10.
Butcher, K.F., & Piehl, A.M. (2008). Crime, corrections, and California: What does immigration have to do with it?California Counts: Population Trends and Profiles, 9, 1-22.
11.
Casey, P., & Rottman, D. (2003). Problem-solving courts: Models and trends. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts .
12.
Catholic Legal Immigration Network. (2000). Placing immigrants at risk: The impact of our laws on American families. Washington, DC: Author.
13.
Christian, C.A. (2006). Awareness of collateral consequences: The role of the prosecutor. New York University Review of Law and Social Change, 30, 621-622.
14.
Cissner, A., & Rempel, M. (2005). The state of drug court research: Moving beyond "do they work?" New York: Center for Court Innovation.
15.
Clear, T.R. (2007). The impact of incarceration on public safety. Social Research, 74, 613-630.
16.
Dow, M. (2004). American gulag: Inside U.S. immigration prisons . Berkeley: University of California Press.
17.
Farole, D.J., Puffett, N., Rempel, M., & Byrne, F. (2005). Applying the problem-solving model outside of problem-solving courts. Judicature, 89, 40-42.
18.
Feinblatt, J., & Berman, G. (1997). Community court principles: A guide for planners . New York: Center for Court Innovation .
19.
Fisler, C., Berman, G., & Fox, A. (2003). Risks and rewards: Drug courts and community reintegration . National Drug Court Institute Review, 3(2), 1-33.
20.
Fix, M., & Zimmermann, W. (1999). All under one roof: Mixed-status families in an era of reform. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
21.
Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2007). Incarceration and intergenerational social exclusion . Social Problems, 54, 399-433.
22.
Frazer, M.S. (2006). The impact of the community court model on defendant perceptions of fairness: A case study at the Red Hook Community Justice Center . New York: Center for Court Innovation .
23.
Gilbert, L. (2007, Spring). Facing justice: Ethical choices in representing immigrant clients. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 20, 219-260.
24.
Gill v. Ashcroft, 335 F.3d 574, 579 (7th Cir. 2003).
25.
Headley, B. (2006). Giving critical context to the deportee phenomenon . Social Justice, 33, 40-56.
26.
Herrera-Inirio v. INS, 208 F.3d 299 (1st Cir. 2000).
27.
Hora, P.H., Schma, W.G., & Rosenthal, J.T.A. (1999). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug treatment court movement: Revolutionizing the criminal justice system's response to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review, 74, 439-537.
28.
Human Rights Watch. (2007). Forced apart: Families separated and immigrants harmed by United States deportation policy. New York: Parker, A.
29.
Hynes, C. (2007). Drug treatment alternative-to-prison sixteenth annual report. Brooklyn, NY: Kings County District Attorney.
30.
Johnson, R.M.A. (2001). Message from the president: Collateral consequences . Alexandria, VA: National District Attorneys Association.
31.
Kanstroom, D. (2007). Post-deportation human rights law: Aspiration, oxymoron, or necessity?Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties, 3, 195-231.
32.
Kesselbrenner, D., & Rosenberg, L.D. (2007). Immigration law and crimes . St. Paul, MN: Thomson/ West.
33.
Lee, E. (2000). Community courts: An evolving model. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
34.
Marlowe, D.B., & Kirby, K.C. (1999). Effective use of sanctions in drug courts: Lessons from behavioral research. National Drug Court Institute Review , 2, 1-31.
35.
Matter of Devison-Charles, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1362 (BIA 2000).
36.
Matter of Punu, 22 I&N Dec. 224 (BIA 1998).
37.
Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).
38.
Mears, D.P. (2002). Immigration and crime: What's the connection? Federal Sentencing Reporter, 14, 284-288.
39.
Meekins, T. (2007). Risky business: Criminal specialty courts and the ethical obligations of the zealous criminal defender. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 12, 85-126.
40.
Meyer, W.G., & Ritter, A.W. (2002). Drug courts work. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 14, 179-185.
41.
Moosa v. INS, 171 F.3d 994 (5th Cir. 1999).
42.
Morawetz, N. (2000). Understanding the impact of the 1996 deportation laws and the limited scope of proposed reforms. Harvard Law Review, 1113, 1936-1962.
43.
National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (1997). Defining drug courts: The key components. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
44.
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. (2003). Crossing the bridge: An evaluation of the drug treatment alternative-to-prison (DTAP) program. New York : Columbia University.
45.
New York State Judicial Committee on Women in the Courts. (2004). Immigration and domestic violence: A short guide for New York state courts. New York: Author.
46.
Nolan, J.L. (2003). Redefining criminal courts: Problem-solving and the meaning of justice. The American Criminal Law Review, 40, 1541-1565.
47.
Olukotun, D. (2005). Harm reduction statutes and immigrants in California: Removal of the shadow-class. Georgetown Immigration Law Journal , 19, 429-449.
48.
Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975.
49.
Peutz, N. (2006). Embarking on an anthropology of removal. Current Anthropology, 47(2), 217-231.
50.
Phillips, S., Hagan, J.M., & Rodriguez, N. (2006). Brutal borders? Examining the treatment of deportees during arrest and detention. Social Forces, 85, 93-109.
51.
Pogorzelski, W., Wolff, N., Pan, K., & Blitz, C. (2005). Behavioral health problems, ex-offender reentry policies, and the "Second Chance Act."American Journal of Public Health, 95, 1718-1723.
52.
Quinn, M.C. (2000-2001). Whose team am I on anyway? Musings of a public defender about drug treatment court practice. New York University Review Law & Social Change, 26, 37-75.
53.
Rempel, M., Fox-Kralstein, D., Cissner, A., Cohen, R., Labriola, M., Farole, D., et al. (2003). The New York state adult drug court evaluation: Policies, participants and impacts. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
54.
Rose, D., & Clear, T. (1998). Incarceration, social capital and crime: Implications for social disorganization theory. Criminology, 36, 441-479.
55.
Simon, W.H. (2003). Criminal defenders and community justice: The drug court example. American Criminal Law Review, 40, 1595-1608.
56.
Spinak, J.M. (2003). Why defenders feel defensive: The defender's role in problem-solving. American Criminal Law Review, 40, 1617-1623.
57.
Taylor, M.H., & Wright, R.F. (2002). The sentencing judge as immigration judge. Emory Law Journal, 51, 1131-1185.
58.
Tooby, N., & Rollin, J. (2005). Safe havens: How to identify and construct non-deportable convictions. Oakland, CA: Law Offices of Norton Tooby.
59.
Travis, J., McBride, E.C., & Solomon, A.L. (2005). Families left behind: The hidden cost of incarceration and reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
60.
Tyler, T.R., & Huo, Y.J. (2002). Trust in the law. New York : Russell Sage Foundation.
61.
Uggen, C., & Manza, J. (2002). Democratic contraction? Political consequences of felon disenfranchisement in the United States. American Sociological Review, 67, 777-803.
62.
Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 281-310.
63.
Uritsky v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 728 (6th Cir. 2005).
64.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006a). Selected social characteristics in the United States: 2006. Washington, DC: American Community Survey.
65.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006b). Total population in the United States: Not a citizen, by state (custom table) . Washington, DC: American Community Survey.
66.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. ( 2007). Form N-400, application for naturalization. Retrieved March 5, 2008, from http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/N-400.pdf
67.
Vargas, M.D. (2006a). Immigration consequences of guilty pleas or convictions . New York University Review of Law & Social Change, 30, 701-716.
68.
Vargas, M.D. (2006b). Representing immigrant defendants in New York (4th ed.). New York: New York State Defenders Association.
69.
Visher, C., & Travis, J. (2003) Transitions from prison to community: Understanding individual pathways. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 89-113.
70.
Welch, J. (2004). Defending against deportation: Equipping public defenders to represent noncitizens effectively. California Law Review, 92, 541-583.
71.
Western, B. (2007). Mass imprisonment and economic inequality. Social Research, 74, 509-546.
72.
Wilkinson, R.A., Bucholtz, G.A., & Siegfried, G.M. (2004). Prison reform through offender reentry: A partnership between courts and corrections. Pace Law Review, 24, 609, 619-621.
73.
Wis. Stat. Ann. 971.08(1)(c).
74.
Wishnie, M.J. (2004). State and local police enforcement of immigration laws. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 6, 1084-1115.
