Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-5602 (2026)
Statement of policy.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Statement of policy.
The legislature finds that:
(1) Substance abuse is a contributing cause for much of the crime in Idaho, costs millions of dollars in productivity, contributes to the ever increasing jail and prison populations and adversely impacts Idaho children;
(2) Drug courts which closely supervise, monitor, test and treat substance abusers have proven effective in certain judicial districts in Idaho and in other states in reducing the incidence of drug use, drug addiction, and crimes committed as a result of drug use and drug addiction. Successful drug courts are based on partnerships among the courts, law enforcement, corrections and social welfare agencies;
(3) Mental illness is a substantial contributing cause to crime in Idaho. Crimes committed by persons suffering from mental illness cause substantial losses to persons and business throughout the state and endanger public safety. In addition, millions of dollars are spent each year on the incarceration, supervision and treatment of mentally ill offenders;
(4) Mental health courts in Idaho and other jurisdictions that closely supervise and monitor mentally ill adult and juvenile offenders and oversee their treatment are an innovative alternative to incarceration for certain offenders. Such courts, which can be operated in conjunction with drug courts, have provided a cost-effective approach to addressing the mental health needs of offenders, reducing recidivism, providing community protection, easing the caseload of the courts, and alleviating the problem of increasing prison, jail and detention populations; and
(5) It is in the best interests of the citizens of this state to expand the use of drug courts and mental health courts in Idaho.
The goals of the drug courts and mental health courts created by this chapter are to reduce the overcrowding of jails and prisons, to reduce alcohol and drug abuse and dependency among criminal and juvenile offenders, to hold offenders accountable, to reduce recidivism, and to promote effective interaction and use of resources among the courts, justice system personnel and community agencies.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2021 · leading case: State v. Krystal Lynn Easley, 322 P.3d 296 (Idaho 2014).
State v. Krystal Lynn Easley, 322 P.3d 296 (Idaho 2014). “Idaho Code § 19-5602 requires a coordinating committee to develop guidelines for specialty courts, which shall include judges, court administrators, prosecutors, public defenders, treatment providers, law enforcement officers, legislators, executive officers from the governor’s…”
State v. Ahmed, 492 P.3d 1110 (Idaho 2021). “§ 32-1408(2); compare I.C. § 19-5602 (“The goals of the drug courts and mental health courts created by this chapter are to reduce the overcrowding of jails and prisons, to reduce alcohol and drug abuse and dependency among criminal and juvenile offenders, to hold offenders…”
State v. Cabral (Idaho Ct. App. 2020). “I.C. § 19-5602. Admitting Cabral into the drug court program would have brought her into close contact with other individuals with substance abuse issues.”
State of Idaho v. Paul Rogers (Idaho Ct. App. 2006). “I.C. § 19-5602(2). They offer a therapeutic setting involving “a regimen of graduated sanctions and rewards, substance abuse treatment, close court monitoring and supervision of progress, educational or vocational counseling as appropriate, and other requirements.”
— Idaho Code § 19-5602(2) — 1 case
State of Idaho v. Paul Rogers (Idaho Ct. App. 2006). “I.C. § 19-5602(2). They offer a therapeutic setting involving “a regimen of graduated sanctions and rewards, substance abuse treatment, close court monitoring and supervision of progress, educational or vocational counseling as appropriate, and other requirements.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.