San Diego’s District Attorney Is Ready to Fill Drug Courts

San Diego’s top prosecutor says her office is ready to start enforcing a new crime-fighting ballot measure that California voters overwhelmingly approved this month.  

“I met with my police chiefs and sheriffs to discuss how this would work and how to implement it with the intent that it has, which isn’t just to add numbers of people going to jail, but … to have leverage,” San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan told me in an interview last week.  

That leverage is not just stricter theft penalties, but options for fighting drug crimes; the new measure will push more defendants into drug courts, where they can get treatment instead of prison sentences. 

“Our drug courts are now half-empty, because there is no real incentive for people to engage with the difficult work to address the problem that is addiction,” Stephan told me. “As a first step my aim is to have those be full so that we can begin to save lives.” 

Proposition 36 reverses parts of Proposition 47, a 2014 ballot measure that reduced some felonies to misdemeanors to reduce prison crowding. Much of the hype around Proposition 36 has focused on its harsher penalties for retail theft and robbery.  

But Stephan thinks one of the most important tools it provides is the carrot-and-stick approach of drug court. Defendants accused of non-violent drug crimes can choose to undergo treatment in place of prison sentences. Those who complete the programs will have their charges dismissed, but felony sentences would apply to anyone who refuses or quits drug treatment. 

How Drug Courts Tackle Addiction 

Drug courts are a joint effort of the Superior Court, Public Defender’s Office, District Attorney’s Office, County Health and Human Services and local law enforcement agencies, according to  San Diego Superior Court.  

Under drug court supervision, a judge meets with participants on a weekly to monthly basis, monitoring their progress in beating addiction. Participants work with case managers who coordinate their services and requirements. People enrolled in drug court must undergo frequent drug tests, and participate in services including detox, residential treatment, sober living programs and group or individual therapy. Job training and education support are also part of the package. 

There are four adult drug courts in San Diego County Superior Court. Each can handle 110 people, for a total of 440 participants, but they were only 59 percent full this year, according to the district attorney’s office. On average, 84 people graduate from drug court each year. 

Stephan said people with drug addiction are often unwilling to seek help until they’re forced to. Drug court graduates tell her they credit the process with helping them become sober, find employment and reunite with family, she said. 

“As a first step my aim is to have those be full so that we can begin to save lives,” Stephan said. 

Critics point out that there aren’t enough in-patient beds for people seeking voluntary treatment now, and warn that adding court-mandated cases would strain the system further.  

“They’re using Prop. 36 as this magic wand that forces people into treatment but doesn’t provide any resources to force people to get the treatment,” said Khalid Alexander, president of Pillars of the Community, which helps defendants and their families navigate the criminal justice system and advocate for reform. 

Stephan says drug courts provide a starting point. As the county fills those slots, the county should also build shelter and housing and expand resources to address the “dual diagnosis” of mental illness and addiction, she said. 

What Happens Next? 

Proposition 36 will take effect on Dec. 18, Stephan said, and her office will start enforcing it the next day. She expects to handle about 600 additional felony cases per year that the city of San Diego would have previously charged as misdemeanors, and said her office is preparing to prosecute those. 

A county staff analysis that supervisors received in October estimates that the measure will lead to 5,000 to 8,000 extra field arrests and bookings each year. 

Meanwhile criminal justice advocates are bracing for changes they say will add “exponentially” more felony charges to San Diego’s courts, overwhelm public defenders and subject vulnerable communities to excessive policing.   

“I think the people who are going to bear the brunt of it are people who have been historically marginalized and ignored; the poor, the black and the brown,” Alexander, the criminal justice reform advocate, said. 

Alexander calls it a “quick fix” that could erode public safety in the long run. He expects felony charges to skyrocket, and he worries more punitive law enforcement policy could lead to police abuse and jail deaths.  

What Will it Cost? 

Stephan maintains that Proposition 36 could create net savings over time by preventing addiction and incarceration through “offramps” to criminal activity. Court-mandated treatment can help break the link between drugs, theft and prison, she argued.  

“Deep addiction is a factor in homelessness,” she said. “Of course, that’s a driver for rampant theft and habitual theft.”  

Stephan is counting on a ballot measure voters passed in March to help pay for that. Proposition 1 authorizes the state to issue bonds for $6.38 billion to build mental health and drug treatment facilities and supportive housing. It’s not clear how much of that bond money will go to San Diego. 

In the meantime, county officials project that Proposition 36 will cost tens of millions of dollars in lost social service funding and increased law enforcement costs. When Proposition 47 reduced some felonies to misdemeanors, that meant fewer defendants went to prison. Cuts to prison populations generated nearly $100 million in savings that California used for social services, the county analysis stated. 

“The passage of Proposition 36 may eliminate future Proposition 47 grant opportunities that would support these types of programs into the future,” the report stated. 

San Diego County has used $6 million in one-time funds from Proposition 47 for programs to address mental health and addiction, housing and homelessness, according to the county report. But it could lose another $8 million that the state conditionally awarded for housing and services. And stepped up arrests, prosecution and other law enforcement measures might cost the county $58 million, the report estimated. 

Stephan said the measure, which passed by more than two-thirds, shows that Californians are fed up with fentanyl overdoses and theft sprees. Pre-election polls reported that nearly half of Democrats, more than 80 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of independent voters supported Proposition 36.  

“I’m very aware that this was a mandate,” to boost public safety protection, Stephan said. “It’s very consistent with what I’ve seen on the street, talking with businesses, talking with providers dealing with addiction and the horrible conditions on the streets, and talking to parents who have lost kids to fentanyl.”