So far, so good. The court recently boasted the highest “graduation” rate of any treatment court in Minnesota, with approximately 86 percent successfully completing the program. Three years after they start, participants had 66 percent fewer new drunken-driving offenses than offenders who went through traditional court processes, according to a 2014 report.

The court now serves as a national role model — one of four selected from 700 DWI courts for an Academy Court award. Last week, Floerke and others held a training session for others from around the country.

While many treatment courts are often led by judges who favor compassion, Floerke “especially takes that very seriously,” said Jim Eberspacher, director of the National Center for DWI Courts, which gives out the awards. “He really strives hard to understand people and really wants to do better for them ... He’s just passionate about the work that he does.”

Frustrated with process

Awards and accolades are an honor, Floerke said, but the true satisfaction comes in seeing people who come into his court change. It’s why he helped start the court in 2008, after feeling frustrated with the usual judicial process.

“It seemed like we weren’t making a difference,” he said. “It seemed like everything was a script: You just do it the same way each time, then scratch your head or blame the person ... for not getting it.”

So he started reading and learning. He studied addiction, the brain, mental illness and motivations for change. And he worked with lawyers and probation officers and treatment professionals to implement individually tailored plans to get at the root of each defendant’s problem.




Addiction is usually formed by underlying pain or trauma that needs to be addressed, Floerke learned. Shaming doesn’t help, he said, but showing compassion does. He noticed that something as basic as “soft eyes” — a welcoming facial expression — can make a big difference in how an apprehensive defendant might respond.

“Soft eyes say to somebody ‘I’m safe. I’m really listening. I’m really here with you,’ ” Floerke said in the speech.

Research also guided the decision to focus on chronic offenders. Most are felons — having four DWIs within 10 years — who were headed for probation sentences. But a few are gross misdemeanor-level drivers who were failing on traditional probation. It was a gutsy move — the public is more apt to support unusual court settings for low-level criminals only.

But research showed that intense supervision and therapy aren’t necessary for most first-time drunken-driving offenders, about two-thirds of whom never get another one.

Floerke and staff analyze the DWI court’s progress, too.

“Keep track of the data and see if it works,” he said.

With less recidivism and incarceration time, state and local agencies saved more than $4,800 per participant during the two years after they enrolled, according to the 2014 report.

Floerke credits the court’s success to the staff, law enforcement officers, therapists and others who are deeply involved in it; Duluth is big enough to have resources, he said, but small enough that people know each other and work together. Before each Friday DWI court session, a group of 15 to 20 people sits at a big conference room table to update each other and discuss each participant.


Focuses on their success