1. Method of Granting Stayed Sentences. When the appropriate cell on the applicable Grid specifies a stayed sentence, the court may pronounce a stay of execution or a stay of imposition. The court must pronounce the length of the stay, which may exceed the duration of the presumptive prison sentence, and may establish appropriate conditions.
a. Stay of Execution. When ordering a stay of execution, the court must pronounce the prison sentence duration, but its execution is stayed. The presumptive duration is shown in the appropriate cell.
b. Stay of Imposition. When ordering a stay of imposition, the court must not pronounce a sentence duration, and the imposition of the sentence is stayed.
The Commission recommends that stays of imposition be used for offenders who are convicted of lower severity offenses and who have low criminal history scores. The Commission further recommends that convicted felons be given one stay of imposition, although for very low severity offenses, a second stay of imposition may be appropriate.
2. Conditions of Stayed Sentences. While the Commission has chosen not to develop specific guidelines for the conditions of stayed sentences, it recognizes that there are several penal objectives to be considered in establishing conditions of stayed sentences, including:
(2) public condemnation of criminal conduct;
(3) public safety;
(6) retribution; and
(7) risk reduction.
The Commission also recognizes that the relative importance of these objectives may vary with both offense and offender characteristics and that multiple objectives may be present in any given sentence. The Commission urges courts to utilize the least restrictive conditions of stayed sentences that are consistent with the objectives of the sanction. The Commission further urges courts to consider the following principles in establishing the conditions of stayed sentences:
(1) Retribution. If retribution is an important objective of the stayed sentence, the severity of the retributive sanction should be proportional to the severity of the offense and the prior criminal record of the offender. A period of confinement in a local jail or correctional facility may be appropriate.
(2) Rehabilitation. If rehabilitation is an important objective of the stayed sentence, the court should make full use of available local programs and resources. The absence of a rehabilitative resource, in general, should not be a basis for enhancing the retributive objective in sentencing and, in particular, should not be the basis for more extensive use of incarceration than is justified on other grounds.
(3) Restitution. The Commission urges courts to make expanded use of restitution and community work orders as conditions of a stayed sentence, especially for offenders with short criminal histories who are convicted of property crimes, although the use of these conditions in other cases may be appropriate.
(4) Supervision. Supervised probation should be a primary condition of stayed sentences.
(5) Fines. If fines are imposed, the Commission urges the expanded use of day fines, which standardizes the financial impact of the sanction among offenders with different income levels.
The Commission views a revocation of a stayed sentence and commitment to be justified when:
(1) the offender is convicted of a new felony for which the Guidelines recommend prison; or
(2) the offender continues to violate conditions of the stay despite the court's use of expanded and more onerous conditions.
The decision to revoke an offender's stayed sentence should not be undertaken lightly. Great restraint should be exercised in imprisoning offenders who were originally convicted of low severity level offenses or who have short prior criminal histories. For these offenders, the Commission urges continuance of the stay and use of more restrictive and onerous conditions, such as periods of local confinement. Less judicial tolerance is urged for offenders who were convicted of a more severe offense or who had a longer criminal history. For both groups of offenders, however, the court should not reflexively order imprisonment for non-criminal violations of probationary conditions.
1. In General. In order to promote the goals of the Sentencing Guidelines, it is important to ensure that jail credit is consistently applied. The court must assure that the record accurately reflects all time spent in custody - including examinations under Minn. R. Crim. P. 20 or 27.03, subd 1(B) - for the offense or behavioral incident for which the offender is sentenced. Minnesota Statutes, Rules of Criminal Procedure, relevant court decisions, and these Guidelines determine how jail credit is applied.
2. Applying Jail Credit. To uphold the proportionality of sentencing, jail credit should be applied in the following manner:
a. The Commissioner of Corrections must deduct jail credit from the sentence imposed by subtracting the time from the specified minimum term of imprisonment. If there is any remaining time, it must be subtracted from the specified maximum period of supervised release.
b. To avoid double credit when applying jail credit to consecutive sentences, the court must apply the jail credit to the first sentence only.
c. To avoid creating a concurrent sentence when a current offense is sentenced consecutively to a prior offense for which the offender is already serving time in a prison or jail, the court must not apply jail credit from the prior offense to the current offense.
d. When a stayed sentence is revoked and the offender is committed, jail credit must reflect time spent in confinement as a condition of the stayed sentence.
e. Jail credit must be awarded at the rate of one day for each day served for time spent in confinement under Huber Law (Minnesota Statutes, section 631.425).
The Guidelines apply when determining:
(1) the appropriate sentence for a juvenile certified as an adult under Minnesota Statutes, section 260B.125; or
(2) the stayed adult sentence pronounced as part of the disposition imposed for a juvenile convicted as an extended jurisdiction juvenile under Minnesota Statutes, section 260B.130.
The Commission recommends that, under Minn. R. Crim. P. 27.03, subd 1(B)(1)(b), the court order a physical or mental examination of the offender as a supplement to the presentence investigation required by Minnesota Statutes, section 609.115, when:
(1) an offender has been convicted under Minnesota Statutes, section 609.342 (first-degree criminal sexual conduct), 609.343 (second-degree criminal sexual conduct), 609.344 (third-degree criminal sexual conduct), 609.345 (fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct), or 609.365 (incest); or
(2) an offender is convicted under Minnesota Statutes, section 609.17, of an attempt to commit an act proscribed by Minnesota Statutes, section 609.342 (first-degree criminal sexual conduct) or 609.344 (third-degree criminal sexual conduct.)
Under Minnesota Statutes, section 609.115, subdivision 10, when a defendant is convicted of a crime, the court must inquire whether the defendant is currently serving in or is a veteran of the armed forces of the United States, and if so, may take further action as permitted by that provision.
1. Policy Modifications. Modifications to sections 1 through 8 of the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines, and associated commentary and appendices, apply to offenders whose date of offense is on or after the specified modification effective date.
2. Clarifications of Existing Policy. Modifications to commentary and appendices relating to existing Guidelines policy apply to offenders sentenced on or after the specified effective date.