This article is in the news archives --- for current news go to the Third Branch News.
Drug Testing Often a Part of Supervised Release
As increasingly higher numbers
of criminal defendants in federal
courts are charged with drugrelated
offenses, regular drug testing often
is one of the conditions for pretrial release
or for probation after time in prison.
In the early months of 2011, more than
56 percent of the some 30,000 federal
defendants on pretrial release were designated
for drug testing. And more than
57 percent of the some 130,000 federal
offenders on supervised release were
under a court-imposed duty to submit to
post-conviction drug tests.
U.S. District Judge Robert Holmes
Bell (W.D.Mich.), chair of the Criminal
Law Committee of the Judicial
Conference, said drug testing was an
integral part of helping offenders and
protecting the public. “Testing helps
identify if a defendant or offender is
using drugs or has relapsed, so that
treatment may be undertaken or court
action taken,” he said. “In addition,
random testing is an effective way to
verify sobriety and deter relapse.”
The overwhelming majority of drug
tests involve the analysis of urine samples.
In the past year, at least 1.2 million such
samples were collected and analyzed
in the federal Judiciary’s probation and
pretrial services system.
The $15 million annual cost of that
collection and analysis is money well
spent, helping enable the supervised
release of some defendants and offenders
rather than the far costlier alternative
of incarceration. In fiscal year 2009, the
annual cost of keeping an offender in a
federal prison was $27,251.50; the annual
cost of having an offender supervised by a
probation officer was $3,807.78. The daily
cost of detaining someone before trial
was $67.79; the daily cost of supervision
by a pretrial services officer was $6.38.
“Probation and pretrial services
offices take advantage of a variety of
testing methods that are designed to
keep costs down, while assuring reliable
results,” Bell said.
Each of the federal court system’s 94
judicial districts has some form of on-site
testing, where drug tests are administered.
(Tests also can occur at an offender’s home
or at a treatment facility.) Independent
laboratories under contract with the
Administrative Office also are used.
“Defendants who receive drug testing
as a condition of their pretrial release have
a history of substance abuse, which poses
a risk of nonappearance or danger to the
community,” said Troy Greve, a supervisory
pretrial services officer in the District of
Nebraska. “The offense charged plays a
role in the decision-making process, but a
decision to drug test is based primarily on
the defendant’s history of substance abuse
regardless of the charged offense.”
Greve said one of the biggest
challenges facing probation and pretrial
officers are, “defendants and offenders
who refuse to give up their drug of choice.”
“They can be very creative, and will
attempt to evade detection by any means
necessary to continue their drug use,” he
said. “The most common tactic employed
is ‘flushing their system’ by drinking large
quantities of water.
One way to counter that tactic involves
simple persistence. “This flushing or
dilution is so common we had to find
a way to address it. In Nebraska, we
purchased devices called refractometers
that help us determine if a specimen was
‘flushed’ before we tested it,” Greve said. “If
the device indicates that a sample is too
diluted to be considered a valid specimen,
we require the defendant to wait and
provide additional samples until a valid
specimen is obtained.”