A Resolution directing the Joint State Government Commission to conduct a study of problem-solving courts in this Commonwealth.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Create an account to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This resolution directs the Joint State Government Commission to conduct a comprehensive study of problem-solving courts operating in Pennsylvania. The study will examine the types of courts, their establishment process, accreditation procedures, data on cases and participants, funding costs compared to traditional courts, and how outcomes are measured. It will also assess whether the Commonwealth’s system aligns with national best practices for these courts.
Key provisions
- Describe each type of problem-solving court in Pennsylvania.
- Outline the process for establishing problem-solving courts.
- Determine the number of accredited courts by type.
- Analyze the accreditation process for each court type.
- Collect data on case numbers, defendant demographics, and decision-making processes within the courts.
- Compare the funding and costs of problem-solving courts to traditional courts.
- Evaluate how outcomes are measured in problem-solving courts versus traditional courts.
- Review nationally recognized best practices for problem-solving courts.
Who is affected
- The Joint State Government Commission
- Pennsylvania Courts
- Defendants participating in problem-solving courts
- Legal professionals involved in problem-solving courts
- The public of Pennsylvania
Notable changes
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Document of record
- Version
- Pn 1044 Html
- Published
- Not published in the source record
This version is published only as a document. Open the viewer to read it here, or download the file.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
9 on record
Primary sponsor
Christopher Rabb
Cosponsors
Danielle Friel Otten
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours