Utah Laws and Programs

Drug policy in the state of Utah is set by the state legislature. The elected officials of the legislature are advised in this task by official bodies such as the Utah Substance Abuse and Anti-Violence Coordinating Council, which is based within the governor's office and is composed of 26 members from government, law enforcement, and the community. Once policy has been set by the legislature it is implemented largely by law enforcement, judicial courts, and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Utah has pursued a variety of strategies to control drug use through legislation, with varying degrees of success. An example of legislation that has proved unsuccessful is the use of tax stamps. Similar to programs in many other states in the nation, Utah required tax stamps for marijuana and other illegal drugs. These stamps did not make possession of the substance legal, but if found in possession of an illegal drug that did not have the appropriate tax stamps the person would be subject to a fine in addition to the tax due. The stamps were purchased from the state tax commission, in a confidential manner, at a set rate depending on the amount and type of drug. The tax stamp law was enacted in 1988; however, the Utah Supreme Court in 1997 found in the case of Brunner v. Collection Division of Utah State Tax Commission that imposing the tax would constitute double jeopardy, and was therefore unconstitutional. Following this ruling, the tax stamp law has not been administered.

More recent legislation in Utah has focused on treatment of drug addiction by diverting drug-involved offenders into community-based treatment and supervision, rather than simply sending them to jail. The 2007 Drug Offender Rehabilitation Act (DORA) requires that people convicted of a felony offense be screened and assessed for substance abuse treatment. All persons screened are not mandated to treatment, but DORA provides the judge additional information and resources when sentencing. DORA provides a means for increased collaboration between probation/parole officers, treatment providers, and offenders, and is similar to policies adopted in the states of Washington, Arizona, Pennsylvania, California, and Kansas.

Although the program has not been in place long enough for a thorough evaluation, preliminary results indicate some positive effects (such as lower recidivism rate and fewer days spent incarcerated) when DORA offenders are compared with a historical comparison group.

Davis, Salt Lake, Summit, Utah, Washington, and Weber counties in Utah have been identified by the federal government as having a high volume of drug trafficking compared to many other parts of the nation. In an effort to disrupt the supply of illegal drugs being distributed around the country, these counties have been enrolled into the High Intensity Drug Trafficking program. This program involves coordinating and enhancing the efforts of law enforcement officials at all levels, by providing equipment, technology, and other resources.

Current studies show Utah having lower rates of illegal drug use compared to other states in the nation, but having higher rates of prescription drug abuse. Rates were quite high in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but have since decreased through education, sustained law enforcement pressure, reduced access in pharmacies, and the implementation of prescription monitoring programs. An example of a prescription monitoring program is the recently introduced Controlled Substance Database. This database aims to facilitate the state's ability to track controlled substances, and reduce “doctor shopping” for prescriptions.

...