WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 5215

Summary of bill SF 5215 (2025-2026) — Swift and Certain Sanctions Act

Purpose and intent

  • Establish a statewide, mandatory system of graduated sanctions for technical violations of probation, parole, and supervised release in Minnesota.
  • Reduce reliance on custodial responses to technical violations and promote noncustodial, proportionate sanctions.
  • Create accountability through standardized data collection and reporting on sanctions and outcomes, with attention to disparities.

Key provisions and changes

Section 244.52–244.57: Short title and definitions

  • Enacts the act to be cited as the “Swift and Certain Sanctions Act.”
  • Defines key terms:
    • Commissioner: Minnesota Department of Corrections.
    • Community supervision agencies: entities responsible for supervising individuals on probation, parole, supervised release, etc.
    • Noncustodial sanction: sanctions that do not involve jail/prison confinement.
    • Technical violation: violation of a condition of supervision that is not a new crime and does not threaten public safety.
    • Validated risk assessment: scientifically supported instrument for risk assessment.

Section 244.54: Graduated sanctions grid; creation

  • By February 1, 2027, the commissioner must establish and maintain a statewide graduated sanctions grid governing responses to technical violations.
  • Development must include consultation with:
    • Sentencing Guidelines Commission
    • Community supervision agencies
    • Judicial branch
    • Justice research entities with expertise in evidence-based supervision
  • Grid must:
    • Classify technical violations into severity levels
    • Incorporate validated risk assessment results
    • Provide presumptive and proportional sanctions that escalate with repeated violations
    • Prioritize noncustodial sanctions unless clearly insufficient to achieve compliance

Section 244.55: Graduated sanctions grid structure; mandatory use

  • Grid structure:
    • Violations on vertical axis categorized as first minor, second minor, third minor, first major, second major, third major
    • Risk levels on horizontal axis: very high, high, moderate, low, administrative
    • Sanctions organized into ranges:
    • Range 1: verbal/written warning, increased reporting, drug testing, coaching
    • Range 2: electronic monitoring, increased treatment, curfew up to 60 days
    • Range 3: curfew up to 120 days and 30–40 hours of community service
    • Range 4: curfew up to 180 days, additional community service, additional jail time, and revocation referral
  • Mandatory use:
    • Beginning April 1, 2027, supervising authorities or courts must apply the grid when responding to a technical violation
    • Departures from presumptive sanctions require written findings that either the presumptive sanction is insufficient or the violation presents immediate public safety risk
    • Rebuttable presumption that incarceration is not an appropriate response to a technical violation
    • All sanctions must be documented and tracked for progressive responses

Section 244.56: Limits on revocation

  • Exhaustion requirement:
    • Probation, parole, or supervised release cannot be revoked for a technical violation until noncustodial sanctions have been applied according to the grid and exhausted or proven ineffective
  • Threshold for revocation:
    • A technical violation may lead to revocation only after three or more prior technical violations, unless there is an immediate and substantial threat to public safety

Section 244.57: Data collection and reporting

  • Data collection requirements:
    • Record technical violations
    • Track sanctions imposed under the grid
    • Monitor use of custodial sanctions
    • Track revocations
    • Analyze disparities by race, ethnicity, and geography
  • Annual reporting:
    • The commissioner must submit an annual report to the legislative chairs and ranking minority members detailing implementation progress and outcomes of the graduated sanctions grid

Who/what would be affected

  • Individuals under court-ordered supervision (probation, parole, supervised release) in Minnesota, who commit technical violations.
  • Supervising authorities (probation/parole agents, courts) responsible for applying sanctions and issuing decisions.
  • Community supervision agencies, the judiciary, the Sentencing Guidelines Commission, and research entities involved in policy development and implementation.
  • The department of corrections, which would collect data and produce annual reports.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • By February 1, 2027: Commissioner must establish and maintain the statewide graduated sanctions grid.
  • Beginning April 1, 2027: Mandatory application of the grid to respond to technical violations; departures require documented written findings.
  • Ongoing: Data collection, monitoring, and annual reporting to Legislature.

Potential impact and considerations

  • Aims to reduce unnecessary incarceration for technical violations and emphasize noncustodial, escalating sanctions.
  • Creates a standardized framework to increase consistency across jurisdictions.
  • Requires significant data collection and interagency coordination.
  • Potential concerns to monitor: adequacy of noncustodial sanctions for high-risk individuals, capacity of supervising authorities to implement the grid, and ensuring that disparities (racial/ethnic/geographic) are effectively addressed in practice.

This summary reflects the bill’s provisions as introduced, focusing on the structure, requirements, and anticipated effects of the Swift and Certain Sanctions Act.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.