New Mexico Drug/DWICourts Peer Review Process

General Courtroom Environment Observation Protocol:

Program: ______

Observer: ______

Date: ______

Status Hearing Start Time (When the judge enters the room): ______

Status Hearing Ending Time (judge leaves and/or everyone is dismissed): ______

  1. How many participants’ cases were heard during the hearing?

# Present______# No-shows______

Divide number present into length of time in status hearing to get average time spent per participant in court: minutes [Best Practice 7.2]

Note how much time was typically spent from the time the participant was called before the judge and then returned to his/her seat: ______

2. What staff attended the drug/DWI court status hearing?[Best Practices 1.6, 1.9]

Coordinator

Judge

Public defender(s)/defense attorney

Prosecuting attorney(s)

Treatment provider(s) ______

Probation

Case manager

Law enforcement (Besides Bailiff)

Bailiff

Court clerk

Jail liaison

Court reporter

Interpreter

Community partner (Describe role/agency: ______)

Other ______

  1. Can conversations between the judge and each participant be heard throughout the courtroom?

[It is important that everyone be able to hear. The judge and team should take advantage of the courtroom as classroom. Participants learn from the modeling of others and will learn as much from listening to others’ conversation with the judge as they do from their own.]

YesSomewhatNo

  • If no, what is keeping these conversations from being heard?
  • Microphones are not used, judge speaks quietly, side conversations are occurring between team members and/or participants, noise from people entering/exiting the courtroom, courtroom is too large, other courtroom setup/layout issues, etc.
  • Notes:
  1. Did participants sit in the courtroom for the entire status hearing or come and go as their cases were called?

(Staying throughout hearing is a learning experience for participants. It also is an indicator of a structured court [consistency and rules]. Early dismissal can be given as a reward.) Talk to coordinator or other team members if you have questions or feedback about the hearing.)

All participants stayed in the court the whole status hearing [good]

 All participants came and went as their cases were called [good if those who left were successful participants who were seen first and released early as a reward] [bad if the coming and going is disruptive or if all participants leave when they are done regardless of their status]

Some participants stayed the whole time while others didn’t [was there a rationale for what the program’s process? Were those who did well released early while others stayed?]

  1. To what extent did the drug/DWI court staff appear to work as a team?

Not at all

Somewhat

Very much

Notes:

  1. Describe how the judge interacted and behaved toward the other team members (e.g., case worker, attorneys, treatment representatives).

a. Overall, did the judge exhibit signs of collaboration and a team approach toward the team when talking to participants?

YesSomewhat No

b. Did the judge appear to follow the decisions made by the team at the pre-court staff meeting?

YesSomewhat No

Notes:

  1. In general, how did the judge interact with the drug/DWI court clients/participants?

(Pay attention to the general feel of the courtroom, the level of formality/informality, and the relationship between the judge and participants. Judge must build a relationship with participants, convey caring, maintain consistency, and follow through on consequences. This information may be used in your interpretation of the overall operation of the program as well as in the future by the state office as it looks at effectiveness of different program characteristics across the state.)

  • Did s/he speak directly to the participants? ___Yes ___No
  • Did the participants stand or sit while speaking to the judge? ___Stand ___Sit
  • Was the judge respectful when speaking to the participants _____Yes _____No
  • From whom did the judge request answers, information, or explanations? [When the judge requests information from team members it can help demonstrate the collaborative/team approach to drug/DWIcourt. When participants perceive that the program is collaborative and therapeutic, the program has significantly better outcomes. Asking participants for their perspective or explanation can help the client feel that they are being heard and the process is more fair.]

Exclusively from the Participant

Primarily from the Participant, but also from other staff members present (e.g., attorney, social worker)

Equally from the Participant and staff members present

Primarily from staff members, but also from the Participant

Exclusively from staff members

Other (describe process):

  1. Did the judge allow participants to speak (e.g., explain their behavior, or talk about what went well for them, etc.)?

YesSomewhatNo

  • Did the judge listen to the participant and pick up on new information (positive or negative) provided by the participant and address it appropriately in court?

_____Yes _____Somewhat _____No [For example, if the participant volunteers new information about engaging in a pro-social activity, does the judge ask for more information and praise the participant? If the participant mentions spending time with a friend who uses, does the judge ask for more information and remind the participant s/he should not be spending time with that friend?]

  1. Did the judge explain to each participant the reasons for the sanctions or incentives being provided?

YesSomewhatNo

  1. Did the judge describe to each participant what behavior they were doing right, or what behavior s/he would like to see the participant begin doing or continue doing?

YesSomewhatNo

  1. During the course of his/her interactions with each participant, did the judge provide a learning experience for the other participants in the courtroom?

YesSomewhatNo

mStatus Hearing (Court) Observation Form - NM August2017

Page 1 of 4