North Carolina Specialty Courts, Treatment Access, and the Substance Use Crisis: A Promising but Underfunded Model.

Treatment courts aim to reduce criminal recidivism by addressing the behavioral health care needs of persons with psychiatric or substance use disorders that contribute to their offending. Stable funding and access to behavioral health providers are crucial elements of success for the treatment court model. What happens when courts lose state funding and must rely on local initiatives and resources? In this study, a survey of North Carolina treatment court professionals identified resource gaps and unmet needs. The authors argue that continuing state investment could make treatment courts more viable and effective. Medicaid expansion is a potential new resource for these problem-solving courts.

Viewing videotaped identification procedure increases juror sensitivity to single-blind photo-array administration.

We investigated whether watching a videotaped photo array administration or expert testimony could sensitize jurors to the suggestiveness of single-blind eyewitness identification procedures. Mock jurors recruited from the community (N = 231) watched a videotaped simulation of a robbery trial in which the primary evidence against the defendant was an eyewitness identification. We varied whether the witness made an identification from a single- or double-blind photo array, the evidence included a videotape of the photo array procedure, and an expert testified about the effects of single-blind identification procedures on administrators' behaviors and witness accuracy. Watching the videotaped photo array administration sensitized mock jurors to the suggestiveness of the single-blind procedure, causing them to be less likely to convict a defendant identified through single-rather than double-blind procedures. Exposure to the videotaped procedure also decreased the favorability of mock jurors' ratings of the eyewitness, irrespective of whether the lineup was conducted by a single-blind administrator. Expert testimony did not sensitize jurors to administrator bias. Thus, videotaping identification procedures could serve as an important procedural reform that both preserves a record of whether the lineup administration was suggestive and might improve jurors' evaluations of eyewitness evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record