Utah Courts
UCJA Rule 4-409 (Code of Judicial Administration)
UCJA Rule 4-409 (Code of Judicial Administration)
Rule 4-409. Council Approval of Problem Solving Courts.
Intent:
To establish criteria for the creation and operation of problem solving courts, and to create a process for ongoing reporting from and evaluation of problem solving courts.
Applicability:
This rule applies to all trial courts.
Statement of the Rule:
(1) Definitions.
(1)(A) Applicant. As used in this rule, an applicant is the problem solving court judge, court executive, or other representative of the problem solving court as designated by the problem solving court judge.
(1)(B) Problem solving court. As used in this rule, a problem solving court is a targeted calendar of similar type cases that uses a collaborative approach involving the court, treatment providers, case management, frequent testing or monitoring and ongoing judicial supervision. Examples include drug courts, mental health courts and domestic violence courts.
(2) Initial application. Prior to beginning operations, each proposed problem solving court must be approved by the Judicial Council and must agree to comply with the requirements of this rule. An application packet, approved by the Judicial Council, shall be made available by the Administrative Office of the Courts. This packet must be submitted to the Council for approval by the applicant at least 90 days in advance of the proposed operation of a new court.
(3) Annual Report. Existing problem solving courts must annually submit a completed annual report on a form provided by the Administrative Office of the Courts.
(3)(A) Each problem solving court shall annually report at least the following:
(3)(A)(i) The number of participants admitted in the most recent year;
(3)(A)(ii) The number of participants removed in the most recent year;
(3)(A)(iii) The number of participants that graduated or completed the program in the most recent year; and
(3)(A)(iv) Recidivism and relapse statistics for as long a period of time as is available, but at least for one year. If the court has been in existence for less than one year, then for the amount of time the court has been in existence.
(4) Grants. In addition to complying with the requirements of CJA Rule 3-411, an applicant shall notify the Judicial Council of any application for funds to operate a problem solving court, whether or not the court would be the direct recipient of the grant. This notification should be made before any application for funding is initiated.
(5) Requirements to Operate a Problem Solving Court. All problem solving courts shall be required to adhere to the following:
(5)(A) Each problem solving court must adhere to the “Required Certification Criteria” outlined in the respective Certification Checklist applicable to that problem solving court, as promulgated and amended and approved by the Judicial Council.
(5)(B) Each problem solving court must adhere to the “Presumed Certification Criteria” outlined in the respective Certification Checklist applicable to that problem solving court, as promulgated and amended and approved by the Judicial Council, unless:
(5)(B)(i) the program can show sufficient compensating measures; or
(5)(B)(ii) the Judicial Council specifically waives that requirement.
(5)(C) To commence participation in a problem solving court:
(5)(C)(i) In a criminal proceeding, a plea must be entered before a person may participate in the court. Testing and orientation processes may be initiated prior to the plea, but no sanctions may be imposed until the plea is entered other than those which may be imposed in a criminal proceeding in which a person is released before trial. Prior to the acceptance of the plea, each participant must sign an agreement that outlines the expectations of the court and the responsibilities of the participant.
(5)(C)(ii) In juvenile dependency drug court, sanctions may not be imposed until the parent has signed an agreement that outlines the expectations of the court and the responsibilities of the participant.
(6) Certification. Each problem solving court must be considered for certification by the Judicial Council every two years. Each problem solving court shall cooperate with the Judicial Council’s certification review process.
(6)(A) Upon review, the Judicial Council may:
(6)(A)(i) certify a problem solving court that adheres to all requirements as outlined in subsection (5) of this rule;
(6)(A)(ii) de-certify a problem solving court that fails to adhere to one or more requirements as outlined in subsection (5) of this rule; or
(6)(A)(iii) conditionally certify a problem solving court that fails to adhere to one or more requirements as outlined in subsection (5) of this rule.
(6)(B) To de-certify or conditionally certify a problem solving court, the Judicial Council shall:
(6)(B)(i) inform the problem solving court of the requirement(s) that are not being adequately met; and
(6)(B)(ii) provide to the problem solving court an opportunity to respond regarding the requirement(s) that are not being adequately met.
(6)(C) In the event that the Judicial Council determines that the problem solving court should be conditionally certified, the Judicial Council shall:
(6)(C)(i) outline specific conditions necessary for the problem solving court to meet in order to be certified; and
(6)(C)(ii) provide the problem solving court with a specific period of time in which to remedy any such deficiency.
(6)(D) In the event that a conditionally certified problem solving court fails to meet the conditions outlined by the Judicial Council within the time allotted, the Judicial Council:
(6)(D)(i) shall de-certify the problem solving court; or
(6)(D)(ii) may extend the period of time to remedy any deficiency, for good cause shown.
(7) DUI Courts. The following courts are approved as DUI Courts: Riverdale Justice Court and other courts as may be approved by the Judicial Council in the future.
(8) Communications. A judge may initiate, permit, or consider communications, including ex parte communications, made as part of a case assigned to the judge in a problem-solving court, consistent with the signed agreement.