Drunken driving courts prepare for more action from minimum-sentence law

John Hult, South Dakota Searchlight – The state’s court system is preparing for a potential spike in DUI court participation after last year’s lawmakers attached mandatory minimum prison sentences to felony repeat offenses.

That was among the messages State Court Administrator Greg Sattizahn delivered to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday at the Capitol in Pierre during an update on the work of the state’s Unified Judicial System.

The state has already added DUI court options to two existing drug courts in Watertown and Huron, Sattizahn said, though it’s too early to tell how the mandatory minimum law will ultimately impact the workload for those courts.

South Dakota State Court Administrator Greg Sattizahn speaks to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 16, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)
South Dakota State Court Administrator Greg Sattizahn speaks to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 16, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight) 

Lawmakers and Gov. Kristi Noem passed the bill requiring prison terms for fourth and subsequent DUI convictions in 2023.

The bill allows for the use of DUI courts, however. Those courts function much like treatment programs, but have the force of law to send people to prison for failure to abide by program strictures. Those who do 18- to 24-months in the court without breaking the rules – sobriety, group therapy attendance, employment and parenting classes are among the typical requirements – can avoid prison altogether.

DUI courts are part of South Dakota’s specialty courts system, which also includes drug courts, mental health courts and veterans courts. The courts save money over prison and are more effective at reducing repeat offenses, according to state data. The most recent full assessment of the courts in 2020 put graduation rates at about 60%. Last week, Problem Solving Courts Coordinator Noreen Plumage told South Dakota Searchlight that the graduation figure currently stands at 57% – one point higher than the national average.

The mandatory minimums law took effect in July, so Sattizahn said many of the higher-level offenses that would fetch a mandatory minimum sentence and perhaps involve offenders who’d be eligible for a DUI court are unresolved.

“Most of those cases are still in the sentencing or determination-of-guilt phase,” Sattizahn said.

Even so, the courts are preparing for a spike. There were 19 more people in DUI court this January than there were in January 2023, though he stressed that it’s too early to attribute that to the new law.

Juvenile probation numbers up

Sattizahn’s appearance before the committee was about more than DUI courts. His briefing on the court system’s recent work and changes to the law that might affect it also touched upon juvenile delinquency, young adults in the court system, indigent legal defense and updates to the state’s approach to managing domestic violence through protection orders.

On the juvenile side, Sattizahn said, the state now has more kids on probation than it has at any time since 2015, the year the state reformed the juvenile justice system to keep more kids out of lockdown. There are currently 1,216 children on probation, he said, and the courts are working more closely with schools, along with court and police representatives, to address the increase.

Domestic violence ‘lethality assessments’

On domestic violence, Sattizahn said the courts are working to implement last year’s Senate Bill 103. That bill ordered the courts to create a pilot program for “lethality assessments,” which are designed to find out an alleged abuser’s relative risk to hurt their partner again.

The courts have landed on a system from a company called Odara. Police in Minnehaha, Mellette, Day and Yankton counties will soon be trained in how to use the tool, which will consider a series of risk factors in calls involving domestic violence or protection order violations. The results will be forwarded to the courts for use in deciding the terms of a defendant’s pretrial release.