Rita Miller cried so hard she threw up.

There was no escaping a paper trail that led right to her, but she couldn't stop. She stole to support her drug habit for about a decade, but after two convictions on that front, she turned to another source of cash - however brief and easy to trace it might have been. And despite her violent physical reaction to another round of lies, the mother of two resorted to forging checks worth nearly $3,100.

By 2002, Rita had pleaded guilty to three felonies in seven years - two for stealing and one for forgery. Her addiction to cocaine was such that she would leave her two teenage daughters for two days at a time to go on drug binges.

"My life was completely out of control," she said. "It was desperation."

Rita tried and failed at rehab four times prior - never staying clean for more than a year. Her attempt at probation in 1996 followed a similar theme when she failed six or seven drug tests, by her estimation, before finally seeing her probation revoked.

Every addict's rock bottom comes at a different point, and for Rita, it arrived in 2002. After that third guilty plea, Rita had a choice: five years in prison or one last shot in Buchanan County's drug court. She opted for drug court, graduated from the program in 2006, has been clean for five years and now is one year away from completing the social work program at Missouri Western State University.

"Everything is looking really good," said Rita, now 45. "If anyone has the opportunity to go through the program and wants to change their life, this program will help them."

Twenty-nine people graduated from drug court this year - Buchanan County's attempt to address addiction through more than just punitive means - and 30 in 2008. The 12-year-old program, which currently has 108 participants and funding for another 27, has received bipartisan support and routine praise from community leaders. But two months ago, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers released a report critical of drug courts.

It alleges drug courts skim off the top of potential participants, taking the easier cases to boost success rates while ignoring those more risky individuals who need treatment the most. The report also accuses drug courts of turning into conviction mills, making the receipt of guilty pleas from defendants more important than treatment.

For this four-part series, the News-Press interviewed judges, lawyers and participants involved with Buchanan County's drug court to gauge whether NACDL's criticisms are warranted at the local level. Dawn Williams served as an assistant prosecutor in Platte and Buchanan counties, as well as a public defender, before becoming a private defense attorney.

While she supports the drug court idea, Ms. Williams still credits much of NACDL's criticism as fair. To start with, she said she believes requiring a guilty plea in return for admittance into the program unfairly punishes participants. The judges suspend the imposition of that sentence, but the guilty plea still can affect participants' chances of attaining employment or financial aid. And prosecutors also can use that plea to enhance future charges.

"It does seem like a conviction mill," Ms. Williams said.

This is the area of the report where the line between defense attorneys and the prosecution and judges is clear and shows no signs of yielding. Buchanan County Prosecutor Dwight Scroggins told the News-Press flatly that pre-plea programs don't work.

"Everyone knows that," he said.

Judge Dan Kellogg, who runs one of the county's two drug courts, said he doesn't believe there is anyone in his court who wouldn't have pleaded guilty anyway. In addition, he sees the guilty plea as an essential step for an addict to accept that he or she has a problem. By acknowledging the criminality of their actions, drug addicts then are better able to address underlying problems, in Mr. Kellogg's mind.

It's an argument other attorneys in the prosecutor's office echo. How can users succeed at rehab if they can't even admit they broke the law in the first place?

"They need to have some sort of repercussion and take responsibility up front," said Kristina Zeit, the prosecutor's representative on the drug court team.

Mr. Scroggins took the argument a step further, asserting that not requiring a guilty plea would have a demoralizing effect on law enforcement officers who enter risky situations to arrest addicts. If nothing came of those arrests, said he believes officers might think twice before engaging drug addicts.

"It's not like (the drug court participants) just came voluntarily through the door," Mr. Scroggins said.

On this point, Rita agrees with the judges and prosecutors. She said she believes admitting to the crime is essential to recovery.

But Sue Rinne, the district defender for the St. Joseph public defender's office, contends acknowledging a physiological problem doesn't have to entail admitting a legal problem as well. Ms. Rinne believes simply standing up at an AA meeting and saying, "I have an addiction" suffices. She stopped short of calling the process a "conviction mill."

Regardless of defense attorneys' criticisms, Mr. Scroggins showed no indication he's interested in changing the county's set-up in regard to guilty pleas. The county prosecutor said pre-plea programs essentially reward participants for failing drug court. In regard to post-plea programs, he told the News-Press, "Every bit of research that's ever been done on drug courts shows that it works."

R.J. Cooper can be reached

at rjcooper@npgco.com.