JEFFERSON COUNTY DRUG DATABASE - Office Of Justice

* Statistics on the number of drug-related emergency roomincidents and the suspected drug utilized*The amount of drugs seized and purchased by law enforcement agencies*The assets that were seized and forfeitures realized bylocal law enforcement agencies during this time periodThe format used for the tables and graphs in this report arebased on information for the most part that is required by theBureau of Justice Assistance of the United states Department ofJustice. Additional facts were gathered at the request of someagencies whenever feasible. For example, data was collected onjuveniles for alcohol-related offenses at the request of many ofthe participating schools.The majority of the information contained in this report hasbeen compiled by the number of incidents as opposed to the numberof persons involved. Data was established based upon informationreceived by the reporting agencies. An acknowledgment of each ofthe entities that participated and the individuals who compiledthe requested information precedes the report. Without their participation, this report would not have been possible.Although every effort was made to insure complete and accurate data since this is the first endeavor of this kind, thereport should be looked at as a foundation that will require continued refinement rather than an end in itself. As the data collection continues over time much effort will be spent in furtherrevision to ensure common practices in reporting of data andstandardized definitions of data elements.2

I. ArrestsData on all drug arrests in Jefferson County from July 1988through June 1989 is contained in Table 1. The statistics wereobtained from two sources. Information was compiled on adult arrests based upon data supplied to the Crime Commission from theAdministrative Office of the Courts. Juvenile arrests figureswere obtained from the Department for Human Services. The data onjuveniles included only those incidents in which the drug offensewas the major charge. Data on incidents in which alcohol is themajor charge is addressed separately later in this report.The arrest data on adults and juveniles for drug arrestsshows that the majority of all arrests were for offenses involving marijuana(48.5%) and cocaine(22.4%). The following identifiesthe five most prevalent offenses along with the correspondingpercentage each category represents of the total arrests in Jefferson County is:*****38.6%Possession of Marijuana13.2%Trafficking in CocaineDrug Paraphernalia Offenses- 12.9%9.2%Possession of Cocaine8.1%Trafficking in Marijuana-Complete information on direct indictments was not availablefrom the Commonwealth Attorney's office. Only those indictmentsthat were a part of the Street Sales Enforcement Project are encompassed in the arrest table. Approximately 75 indictmentswere not included.Demographic data compiled on those arrested between July 1988through June 1989 is as follows:* There were 2730 unduplicated persons arrested for the 3846incidents illustrated in the table.***Of the 2730 people arrested, 7.3% were juveniles.The average age for the adult of:ender was 29 years.The average age for the juvenile offender was 16 years.* Of the 2730 unduplicated persons arrested, 46.9% werewhite males, 37.6% were black males, 9.9% were whitefemales, and 5.6% were black females.3

TABLE1DRUG ARRESTSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 9CANNABISHALLUC.SnM.A.ANT7111312258CJl2A": SS.8DRUG 33862186737The above figures do not Indude approximately 75 sealed Indictmentstaken directly to the Grand Jury. The arrests indude all luven e andadults proc-essed through District 10153846

DRUG ARRESTSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 89450!400 350 300 lJ:lc x:(!)(J) 250 -PoU1 Ii0. It::l-200 R:150 ( 100 - oJULY.NOVSEPTAUG" OCT )(' JANDECMONTHS X 50 - MARCHFEBMAYAPRilJUNEGraph l-A indicates the number of drug arrests by month. These numbersinclude all juvenile and adult arrests, but do not contain alldirect indictments processed through Circuit Court.

Df\LJG ARRESTSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 892.221.81.61.48::r0c1.2CIlPI ERTRAFFICKING OPIATES CANNABIS COCAINEC//J52SZJHALLUC.ISSJSTIM. & DEPRESS.OTHERGraph I-B shows drug arrests according to offense type and drug category

II. DispositionsTable 2 indicates the results of cases reaching dispositionfrom July 1988 through June 1989. Because of the time lag betweenarrest and disposition, the arrests reported and the dispositionsmay refer to different cases.Of the cases where the disposition was known, the resultsindicated the following:* 45.28%***52.8%1.89%.03%resulted in a convictionwere dismissedwere informally adjustedresulted in an acquittalThe unknown numbers reflect those cases which are stillbeing processed by the court system. The breakdown of the unknowncategory is :****35 %11.1%53.6%.3%cases are being continued in district courtbench warrants have been issuedsent to the Grand Juryremanded from the docket in juvenile courtIt takes approximately 4.8 months from the time an individual is arrested until disposition in District Court. Thespecial prosecutor for narcotic cases in the Office of the Commonwealth Attorney estimates that the cases he handles in CircuitCourt do not reach disposition for approximately nine months.Information for Table 2 in this report was obtained fromdata received from the Office of the Commonwealth Attorney, theAdministrative Office of the Courts, and the Department for HumanServices. Statistics on defendants that were acquitted were onlyavailable from the Commonwealth Attorney's office. Information oncases being handled in Circuit Court on indictments prior to July1988 are not included in the data.7

TABLE 2DRUG DISPOSITIONSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE ACQUITTEDDISMISSED13INFORMAL 5652126TOTAL54128823204742191375514545 cases were amended to non-drug related charges and are notIncluded in the above table. 38 cases were amended to disorderlyconduct, 5 were amended to criminal possession of a forged instrument,1 was amended to criminal trespass in the first degree, and 1 wasamended to public intoxication/controlled substance.8

III. Drug ConvictionsInformation on the number of convictions classified by thetype of offense is outlined in Table 3. Each offense is classified according to the type of drug. We found that the five mostprevalent drug offenses resulting in convictions were:*****Possession of Marijuana50.3%Possession of Other Drugs- 16.8%Trafficking in Cocaine10.4%Trafficking in Marijuana7.9%possession of Marijuana5.0%The drug type "other" refers to drugs which could not beclassified in a specific category due to either the code used atthe time of arrest or when a charge is amended to a general drugcategory rather than a specific drug offense. For example, onecode commonly utilized by officers is "Trafficking in a Controlled Substance." When that code is used it would be impossible tosubstantiate the type of drug involved.Data for this table was derived from information providedby the Administrative Office of the Courts, Department for HumanServices, and the Office of the Commonwealth Attorney.9

TABLE 3DRUG CONVICTIONSTYPE OF OFFENSEJULY 1988 THROUGH JUNE 1989TYPE FESS.OTHER22CUL T 369687311230994CONSPIRACY IFRAUD3135315525213DRUG PARA.11OTHER,-TOTAL1621381781012102911367

DRUG CONVICTIONSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 89Stirn. (0.9%)Opiates (1.2%) Cocaine (15.6%)Other (21.3%)Halluc. (0.6%).Depress. (0.7%)Marij. (59.8%)Graph 3-A indicates convictions classified according to type of drug.

DRUG CONVICTIONS JULY 88 -JUNE 89TYPE OF OFFENSEDRUG PARA. (6.5%)CONSPIRACY/FRAUD (1.1 %)CULT/MANUFACTURING (1.6%)I TRAFFICKING (20.0%).(r-. OTHER (0.2%)"". POSSESSION (70.6%) ----------------Graph 3-B illustrates convictions by type of offense.

IV.Sentence TypeTable 4 shows the sentence type for those convicted ofdrug-related offenses between July 1988 through June 1989. Thecorresponding drug is noted on the table. The sentsnces mostfrequently applied were:54.3%FinesProbation- 26.5%Jail9.2%6.1%Prison-The statistics on the chart contains information for all adultand juvenile convictions in Jefferson County for the given timeperiod. When a combination of sentencing alternatives is utilized, the most serious sentence is shown. Information for thistable was obtained from the Commonwealth Attorney's office, theDepartment for Human Services, and the Administrative Office ofthe Courts.TABLE 4SENTENCE TYPE FOR DRUG CONVICTIONSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 89SENTENOE TYPEPRISONOPIATES6LOCAL MIT 421311152138172911367FINETOTALI63JAIL/PROBA TIONPROBATIONHALLUC.Probation numbers include concfrtional discharges forjuveniles and adults.1358712510

SENTENCE TYPEDRUG CONVICTIONS JULY 88 - JUNE 89COMMIT CHR (1.1 %)PRISON (6.1 %)JAIL (9.2%)JAIL/PROBATION (2.7%)I-' FINE (54.3%)PROBATION (26.6%)Graph 4-A reflects the type of sentences given for all drug offenses.

SENTENCE TYPECOCAINE CONVICTIONS JULY 88-JUNE 89COMMIT CHR (6.1 %)PRISON (29.6%)I-'U1 .' JAIL (4.7%)PROBATION (59.6%)Graph 4-B illustrates the type of sentence given for cocaine offences.

SENTENCE TYPEMARIJUANA CONVICTIONS JULY 88-JUNE 89PRISON (0.4%) PROBATION (17.1 %).C7'IJAIL (11.0%)JAIL/PROBATION (2.1 %)COMMIT CHR (0.1 %).FINE (69.3%)Graph 4-C represents the type of sentences given for marijuana offenses.

V. Prison sentence LengthTable 5 contains statistics on the average length in monthsfor offenders were sentenced to prison for drug-related offensesfrom July 1988 through June 1989. Please note that offendersbeing sentenced for cocaine convictions received the longest sentence. Information for this table was obtained from the Office ofthe Commonwealth Attorney.TABLE 5PRISON SENTENCE LENGTHDRUG-RELATED OFFENSESJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 89OPIATESCOCAi:' ONSPIRACY /FRAUDTOTAL OFAVERAGESHALLUC.STIMULANTI5115iI,I63TOTALI 240!6015DEPRESS.III125276I581682660175724393

Ave.PRISON SENTENCE LENGTH IN MONTHSDRUG CONVICTIONS JULY 88 - JUNE 891201101009080 Jj70::1p"Ii(I)600.(Jl (Xl5040.3020100COCAINE TRAFFICKING POSSESSIONHALLUC.DEPRESSANT CONSPIRACY/FRAUDGraph 5-1 shows the average length in months for those sentencedto prison classified by offense and category of drug.

VI.Juvenile Drug and Alcohol ArrestsTable 6 contains information on the number of drug and alcohol arrests involving juveniles from July 1988 through June1989. The data contains statistics on all alcohol arrestshandled in juvenile court by the Child Designated Workers (DCW).The numbers do not include alcohol-related arrests that wereprocessed in other areas in District Court such as "Driving Underthe Influence n charges and "Possession of Alcohol" by an offenderover eighteen. When the drug or alcohol offense was not the majorcharge, the data was not included in this report. Informationutilized to compile this table was provided by the Department forHuman Services.The most prevalent type of offenses included the following:* possession of Alcohol* Using/consuming Alcohol* Possession of Marijuana* Trafficking in Cocaine* possession of Cocaine-53.2%22.9%12.4%4.7%1. 5%TABLE 6JUVENILEDRUG AND ALCOHOL ARRESTSJULY 88 - JUNE 05fIUSING/CONSUMINGTOTAL253120t2ARRESTS INCLUDE OI'LY THOSE PROceSSED "f'IflOUGi JJVENl.E COURT19tTOTAL222611010DRUG PARA.POSSESSION1ALCOHOL7450578I19419519648846

VII. Juvenile Dispositions for Drug and Alcohol OffensesTable 7 embodies the dispositions for juvenile drug and alcohol offenses handled in Juvenile Court. Due to the time lag between arrest and disposition, the juvenile drug and alcohol arrests shown in Table 6 may refer to different cases. The numbersdo not include dispositions for alcohol cases such as "Drivingunder the Influence" which are processed in other areas of District Court. !'Possession of Alcohol" cases in which the offenderis over eighteen years of age ar also not covered here.Abbreviations utilized in the chart stand for the followingdispositions-* JCYC- Juvenile was sentenced to the Jefferson CountyYouth Center.* Remand- Case was remanded from the docket.* Commit CHR- Child was committed delinquent to the Cabinetfor Human Resources.* Informal Adj.- Case was informally adjusted.* Vol WK/DM/INF- Volunteer work was ordered and case was dismissed or was informally adjusted.Information for Table 7 was gathered from statisticsprovided by the Department for Human Services. Some of the casesoutlined in the table were not processed through District Courtbut were handled informally by the Child Designated Workers. Onlythose cases in which drugs and alcohol were the major charge wereincluded in this report.TABLE 7JUVENILE COURT DISPOSITIONSJULY 88 THROUGH JUNE 89Cf FENSEIRELATED CAUGJCYCCOCAINE5MARIJUANA13HALLUCINOGENS1FJr I 4461421603

JUVENILE DRUG Af\lD ALCOHOL DISPOSITIONSTYPE OF DiSPOSITIONVOL WK/DM/INF (3.5%)JCYC (4.2%)DISMISSED (12.4%)REMAND (2.5%)PROBATION (5.7%)'".COMMIT CHR (3.2%)INFORMAL ADJ. (68.4%)Graph 7-1 shows the type of juvenile drug and alcohol dispositions.

VIII. Drug-Related Incidents in the Jefferson county SchoolsTable 8 and Table 9 illustrates the results of the survey ofall schools in Jefferson County on the amount of drug and alcoholrelated incidents that occurred on school premises or during aschool sponsored function. Twenty-four private schools, theCatholic high schools, and the public schools participated in thestudy. Each responded on an anonymous basis providing informationon the number of incidents that involved students selling drugsor alcohol, using drugs or alcohol, and the number of studentsreferred by school officials for evaluation or counseling due toa substance abuse problem. Additionally, we requested that theyreport the action taken as a result of the incident.We found the most prevalent drug reported in incidents byschool officials involving either student usage or sales wasmarijuana. Specifically, 53.3% of all incidents involving druguse was for marijuana. 57% of all incidents regarding the sale ofdrugs were for marijuana.Of the students referred for treatment and counseling for asubstance abuse problem , 41% were experiencing difficulty withalcohol, while 35 % were assisted as a result of marijuana abuse.We received an excellent return rate from the schools surveyed under this project. One school refused to participate atthe onset and one school did not return survey forms. Only thoseprivate and public school with grades six and above were invitedto be involved in the project. Catholic grade schools were alsonot included in the study.TABLE 8STUDENTS REFERREDFOR NTS\iI1OTHERALCOHOlTOTAL102976COUNSELING34927I 3269162TOTAL384474298238I22

------------------------TABLE 9SCHOOL DRUG-RELATED INCIDENTSJULY 1988 THROUGH JUNE 1989ACTION FORDRUG TOTALHALLUC.134712137·0ACTION FORSELLING N48351623TOTAL813EXPULSIONTOTALALCOHOL1645128

IX.Drug and Alcohol Treatment ProgramsTable 10 indicates the results compiled from a quarterlysurvey of every chemical dependency facility in Jefferson Countyfrom July 1988 through June 1989 to determine the number of individuals served, slots that were availiable and the averagewaiting time for drug and alcohol treatment. We requested thateach agency submit statistics according to the type of programutilized and the drug of choice for each individual. If the person had a cross addiction, we counted the drug used for that individual more than once. Therefore, the numbers of substancesused at admission by individuals do not add up to the totalserved. Not every chemical dependency program was able to reportin this manner due to record keeping procedures. In these instances, the type of substance was recorded as unknown.For the 2879 individuals that received treatment in an inpatient program, the following substances were identified asthe drug of choice at the time of wnResidential programs repoxted a history of abuse of the following substances for which the 65 clients they served had at thetime of inogensstimulantsdepressantsalcoholThe longest waiting lists encountered by individuals seekingtreatment were for those who wanted to enter a methadone program.Agencies that treated the 58 methadone patients served reportedthat the individuals they helped had a history of the sants-'-24

Of the 2072 individuals treated in out-patient programs , theorganizations reported that the history of substances abused bytheir clients at the time of admission ulantsdepressantsalcoholunknownWe asked several employee assistance programs to submit dataon the number of individuals that were seen and referred fortreatment due to a substance abuse problem. Programs reportedevaluating 146 people from July 1988 through June 1989 for drugor alcohol problems. Data on the type of substance abused was unavailable.X. Drug and Alcohol Resources dedicated to Criminal ,JusticeClientsWe also requested that treatment facilities which hadresources dedicated to criminal justice clients provide data onthe total served, slots available, and average waiting list.Table 11 illustrates the results of that survey. We found thatin-patient and out-patient programs are currently being utilizedby criminal justice clients. Of the 224 individuals served byin-patient programs, client histories indicated that abuse of thefollowing ucinogensdepressantsalcoholunknownOf the 705 criminal justice clients that received treatmentthrough out-patient programs the substances abused as reportedat admission tsdepressantsalcoholunknownInformation on drug and alcohol treatment was received

HARVEY I. SLOANE COUNTY JUDGEtExECTlVE KIM M ALL ', EXECUTiVE DIREC OR . Jan Hecht Norton-Children's Hospital - Kathy Heckman JEFFERSON COUNTY OFFICE OF THE CORONER Dr. Richard Greathouse Dora Kacprowski JUDGES Judge Donald Smalley KENTUCKY JUSTICE CABINET Debra McGovern iii .