CHAPTER 16-22
PUBLIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS
16-22-1 Definitions.
16-22-2 Drug court advisory council.
16-22-3 Drug court defined.
16-22-4 Drug court program.
16-22-5 Promulgation of drug court rules.
16-22-5.1 Key components for drug courts.
16-22-5.2 Standards and guidelines in accordance with key components.
16-22-5.3 Standards in accordance with best practices publication.
16-22-6 Admissibility of drug court participant's statements and reports in legal proceedings.
16-22-6.1 Drug court sanctions.
16-22-7 Semiannual drug court performance report.
16-22-8 HOPE probation programs.
16-22-8.1 Assignment of magistrate judge to preside over HOPE probation program.
16-22-9 Promulgation of HOPE probation program rules.
16-22-10 Evaluation of program impact on public safety.
16-22-11 Promulgation of rules governing evidence-based felony probation supervision practices.
16-22-12 Report of probation practices and training implementation.
16-22-13 Promulgation of rules regarding graduated sanctions program.
16-22-14 Report of graduated sanctions.
16-22-15 Evidence-based practices training.
16-22-16 Case history--Transfer to Department of Corrections.
16-22-17 Promulgation of rules regarding earned discharge credits.
16-22-18 Award of earned discharge credits.
16-22-19 Eligibility for earned discharge.
16-22-20 Report of earned discharge credits.
16-22-21 Oversight council responsible for monitoring and reporting performance and outcome measures.
16-22-22 Membership of oversight council.
16-22-23 Meetings of oversight council--Termination--Powers and duties.
16-22-24 Treatment and intervention programs.
16-22-25 Grant program for adult community residential services to reduce risk of recidivism.
16-22-26 Request for proposals.
16-22-27 Report by grant recipient.
16-22-28 Probation and parole policies for sanctioning positive urinalysis test for controlled substance.
16-22-29 Compliant discharge from probation or parole upon completion of treatment--Conditions.
16-22-30 Report to oversight council on probation and parole infractions.
16-22-31 Report of Interstate Drug Trafficking Task Force to oversight council.
16-22-1. Definitions.
Terms used in chapters 1-15, 1-54, 16-14, 16-22, 23A-27, 23A-47, 24-15, 24-15A, and 32-23 mean:
(1) "Alcohol or drug accountability program," the 24/7 program or the HOPE program described in §§ 16-22-8 and 16-22-9;
(2) "Board," the Board of Pardons and Paroles;
(3) "Case plan," an individualized, documented accountability and behavior change strategy that:
(a) Matches the type and intensity of supervision to the assessed risk of reoffending;
(b) Targets and prioritizes the specific criminal risk factors of the individual, with attention to addressing barriers to learning and participation; and
(c) Establishes a timetable for achieving specific behavioral goals, including a schedule for payment of victim restitution, child support, and other financial obligations;
(4) "Court-ordered financial obligation," money that an offender is required to pay and can include restitution, fines, costs, and fees, but does not include child support payments;
(5) "Criminal risk factors," characteristics and behaviors that, when addressed or changed, affect a person's risk for committing crimes. The term includes: antisocial behavior; antisocial personality; criminal thinking; criminal associates; dysfunctional family; low levels of employment or education; poor use of leisure and recreation; and substance abuse;
(6) "Department," the Department of Corrections;
(7) "Evidence-based practices," supervision policies, procedures, and practices and treatment and intervention programs and practices that scientific research demonstrates reduce recidivism among individuals under correctional supervision;
(8) "Outcome measure," a metric that captures an agency's effectiveness in impacting a condition within the population served or condition of public safety;
(9) "Oversight council," the council established by § 16-22-21;
(10) "Parolee," an offender under parole or suspended sentence supervision by the Department of Corrections;
(11) "Performance measure," a metric that captures agency performance on critical variables that are central to accomplishing the agency mission and goals within this chapter;
(12) "Recidivism," a return to prison within three years of release due to a parole or suspended sentence violation or due to a prison sentence as a result of a new felony conviction. However, for the purposes of §§ 16-22-3, 16-22-15, and 16-22-24, the term means being convicted of a felony while on probation supervision or within three years after discharge from probation;
(13) "Risk and needs assessment review," an examination of the results of a validated risk and needs assessment;
(14) "Secretary," the secretary of the Department of Corrections;
(15) "Treatment," when used in a criminal justice context, targeted interventions that focus on criminal risk factors in order to reduce the likelihood of criminal behavior and reflect evidence based practices;
(16) "Validated risk and needs assessment," an actuarial tool scientifically proven to determine a person's risk to reoffend and criminal risk factors, that when addressed, can reduce the person's likelihood of engaging in future criminal behavior.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 1.
16-22-2. Drug court advisory council.
The Chief Justice shall establish an advisory council to address the operational, coordination, resource, information management, and evaluation needs of the drug courts.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 2.
16-22-3. Drug court defined.
For the purposes of this chapter, a drug court is a court supervised alternative to incarceration and includes drug, driving under influence, and other specialty court dockets aimed at increasing offender accountability and decreasing recidivism.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 3.
16-22-4. Drug court program.
The Supreme Court may establish a drug court program in any court that has jurisdiction over criminal cases.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 4.
16-22-5. Promulgation of drug court rules.
The Supreme Court shall establish rules pursuant to § 16-3-1 for the eligibility criteria for participation in a drug court. No offender participating in a drug court is entitled to earned discharge on probation pursuant to § 16-22-17.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 5.
16-22-5.1. Key components for drug courts.
South Dakota drug courts shall adhere to the following ten key components in order to maintain the fidelity and preserve the structural integrity of such programs:
Key Component 1: Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing.
Key Component 2: Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants' due process rights.
Key Component 3: Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court program.
Key Component 4: Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol and other drug related treatment and rehabilitation services.
Key Component 5: Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing.
Key Component 6: A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants' compliance.
Key Component 7: Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential.
Key Component 8: Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness.
Key component 9: Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and operations.
Key Component 10: Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court effectiveness.
Source: SL 2014, ch 255 (Supreme Court Rule 13-13, § 2), eff. Jan. 1, 2014.
16-22-5.2. Standards and guidelines in accordance with key components.
The State Court Administrator's Office, in consultation with the Statewide Drug Court Advisory Board, shall implement statewide standards and guidelines in accordance with the ten key components to ensure the effectiveness and maintain the fidelity of the drug courts.
Source: SL 2014, ch 255 (Supreme Court Rule 13-13, § 3), eff. Jan. 1, 2014.
16-22-5.3. Standards in accordance with best practices publication.
The State Court Administrator's Office, in consultation with the Statewide Drug Court Advisory Board, shall implement statewide standards in accordance with "Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards," published by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals.
Source: SL 2014, ch 255 (Supreme Court Rule 13-13, § 4), eff. Jan. 1, 2014.
16-22-6. Admissibility of drug court participant's statements and reports in legal proceedings.
Nothing contained in this section may be construed to permit a judge to impose, modify, or reduce a sentence below the minimum sentence required by law. No statement made by a drug court participant in connection with the court's program or directives, nor any report made by the staff of the court or program connected to the court, regarding a participant's use of controlled substances is admissible as evidence against the participant in any legal proceeding or prosecution. However, if the participant violates the conditions or is terminated from drug court, the reasons for the violation or termination may be considered in sanctioning, sentencing, or otherwise disposing of the participant's case.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 6.
16-22-6.1. Drug court sanctions.
For any person admitted to a drug court, as defined in § 16-22-3, a sanction may include the imposition of jail time and this sanction may be imposed irrespective of § 23A-27-18.1. However, any jail term shall be credited toward any incarceration imposed upon a subsequent revocation of a suspended execution of sentence. The Supreme Court shall promulgate rules, pursuant to chapter 16-3, defining the best practices for drug court sanctions.
Source: SL 2015, ch 119, § 1.
16-22-7. Semiannual drug court performance report.
The Unified Judicial System shall semiannually report performance measures on drug courts to the oversight council.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 7.
16-22-8. HOPE probation programs.
The Supreme Court is authorized to establish South Dakota HOPE probation programs in any court that has jurisdiction over criminal cases.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 9, eff. Jan. 1, 2014; SL 2016, ch 113, § 1.
16-22-8.1. Assignment of magistrate judge to preside over HOPE probation program.
Any magistrate court with a magistrate judge presiding may, upon assignment of the presiding judge of the circuit, act in lieu of a circuit court judge having jurisdiction to administer and preside over a HOPE probation program established under § 16-22-8.
Source: SL 2018, ch 127, § 1, eff. Feb. 28, 2018.
16-22-9. Promulgation of HOPE probation program rules.
The Supreme Court shall establish rules pursuant to § 16-3-1 for the programs consistent with the following components, modeled after the national HOPE court initiative:
(1) Involvement and commitment of criminal justice officials including judges, state's attorneys, defense attorneys, law enforcement, court services officers, and treatment providers;
(2) Eligibility criteria focused on offenders with a high risk to reoffend, without consideration of the current offense;
(3) Judicial involvement in setting and communicating to the probationer program expectations and consequences for noncompliance;
(4) Frequent, effective, and randomized drug and or alcohol testing;
(5) Swift, certain, and proportional sanctions for noncompliance with program conditions;
(6) Swift and certain warrant service for absconding; and
(7) Compilation, evaluation, and publicly reported program results.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 10, eff. Jan. 1, 2014; SL 2016, ch 113, § 2.
16-22-10. Evaluation of program impact on public safety.
Each program shall be evaluated for the impact on public safety outcomes. The Unified Judicial System shall report performance measures for the programs semiannually to the oversight council.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 11, eff. Jan. 1, 2014; SL 2016, ch 113, § 3.
16-22-11. Promulgation of rules governing evidence-based felony probation supervision practices.
The Supreme Court shall establish rules pursuant to § 16-3-1 governing evidence-based felony probation supervision practices, including a validated risk and needs assessment, and targeting the probationer's criminal risk factors with suitable supervision and intervention, focusing resources on moderate-risk and high-risk offenders.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 14, eff. Oct. 1, 2013.
16-22-12. Report of probation practices and training implementation.
The Unified Judicial System shall monitor and report semiannually to the oversight council the extent to which practices of probation supervision, as adopted in rule by the Supreme Court, as well as training requirements prescribed in §§ 16-22-15 and 16-14-4 are implemented.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 15, eff. Oct. 1, 2013.
16-22-13. Promulgation of rules regarding graduated sanctions program.
The Supreme Court shall establish rules pursuant to § 16-3-1 to develop a graduated sanctions procedure and grid to guide court services officers in determining the appropriate response to a violation of conditions of probation. The graduated sanctions program shall use short jail stays as the most severe sanction within the grid, shall collect data related to the use of sanctions and their outcomes, and shall include a process for reviewing sanctions that are challenged by the probationer. The rules shall vest statewide oversight of graduated sanctions procedure, use, and data collection with the State Court Administrator's Office.
The system of graduated sanctions shall be created with the following objectives:
(1) Responding to violations of probation quickly, consistently and proportionally, based on the nature of the violation and the risk level of the probationer;
(2) Reducing the time and resources expended by the court to respond to violations; and
(3) Reducing the commission of new crimes and revocation rates.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 16, eff. Oct. 1, 2013.
16-22-14. Report of graduated sanctions.
The State Court Administrator's Office shall report semiannually to the oversight council the number and percentage of probationers who received a graduated sanction.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 17, eff. Oct. 1, 2013.
16-22-15. Evidence-based practices training.
Any person who exercises supervision over a probationer pursuant to § 23A-27-12.1 or provides intervention services to any probationer shall receive sufficient training on evidence-based practices, how to target criminal risk factors to reduce recidivism, recognizing the signs and symptoms of mental health problems, and defusing mental health crises.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 18, eff. Oct. 1, 2013; SL 2017, ch 109, § 29.
16-22-16. Case history--Transfer to Department of Corrections.
If a probationer is sentenced to a term of imprisonment in a state correctional facility, the Unified Judicial System shall transfer the case history of the probationer including the results of a risk and needs assessment conducted on the probationer to the Department of Corrections.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 19, eff. Oct. 1, 2013; SL 2023, ch 82, § 6.
16-22-17. Promulgation of rules regarding earned discharge credits.
The Supreme Court shall establish rules pursuant to § 16-3-1 for the criteria and procedure for earning and awarding earned credits for discharge from probation.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 22.
16-22-18. Award of earned discharge credits.
The State Court Administrator's Office shall oversee the award of earned discharge credits of at least fifteen days for each month a probationer is in compliance with the terms and conditions of supervision.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 23.
16-22-19. Eligibility for earned discharge.
Each offender placed on felony probation for a term of at least six months, except an offender placed on probation for a conviction of a sex offense as defined in § 22-24B-1, or a violation of sex offender registry requirements, or a violation of community safety zone requirements and who will serve time in the community under probation supervision, is eligible for earned discharge and completion of sentence under § 16-22-18.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 24.
16-22-20. Report of earned discharge credits.
The State Court Administrator's Office shall provide semiannually to the oversight council the number and percent of probationers who qualify for earned discharge credits and the average amount of credits earned by offenders.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 25.
16-22-21. Oversight council responsible for monitoring and reporting performance and outcome measures.
There is hereby established an oversight council responsible for monitoring and reporting performance and outcome measures related to the provisions set forth in this chapter. The Unified Judicial System shall provide staff support for the council.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 67.
16-22-22. Membership of oversight council.
The oversight council shall be composed of thirteen members. The Governor shall appoint four members, including one member from the Board of Pardons and Paroles, one member from the Department of Corrections, one member from the Department of Social Services, and one additional member who shall serve as chair. The Chief Justice shall appoint four members, one of whom shall be a defense attorney. The majority leader of the Senate shall appoint two legislative members of the Senate, one from each political party. The majority leader of the House of Representatives shall appoint two legislative members of the House of Representatives, one from each political party. The Attorney General shall appoint one member.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 68.
16-22-23. Meetings of oversight council--Termination--Powers and duties.
The oversight council shall meet within ninety days after appointment and shall meet at least semiannually thereafter. The oversight council terminates five years after its first meeting, unless the Legislature, by joint resolution, continues the oversight council for a specified period of time.
The oversight council has the following powers and duties:
(1) Review the recommendations of the criminal justice initiative work group in the final report dated November 2012, and track implementation and evaluate compliance with this chapter;
(2) Review performance and outcome measures proposed by the Department of Corrections, Unified Judicial System, and Department of Social Services;
(3) Review performance and outcome measure reports submitted semiannually by the Department of Corrections and Unified Judicial System pursuant to §§ 1-54-9, 16-22-7, 16-22-10, 16-22-12, 16-22-14, 16-22-20, 16-22-24, 23A-47-8, 24-15A-47, 24-15A-49, and 24-15A-53 and evaluate the impact of § 23A-4-3;
(4) Review of behavioral health intervention outcomes delivered to probationers and parolees administered by Department of Social Services pursuant to § 16-22-24;
(5) Review the payments of the reinvestment fund to counties, pursuant to § 1-15-36, the number of probationers above the trend line, and the rate of felony convictions to prison and probation by each county;
(6) Review the number and length of stay of offenders admitted to the Department of Corrections, particularly in the categories included in this chapter;
(7) Review the activities of §§ 23A-27-18.1, 32-23-4.1, 32-23-4.6, and 32-23-4.9, including:
(a) The number of offenders supervised and the number of violations of the conditions pursuant to § 32-23-4.9; and
(b) The number and percent of offenders in § 23A-27-18.1 imprisoned in the county jail for more than one hundred eighty days; and
(8) Prepare and submit an annual summary report of the performance and outcome measures that are part of this chapter to the Legislature, Governor, and Chief Justice. The report should include recommendations for improvements and a summary of savings generated from this chapter.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 69.
16-22-24. Treatment and intervention programs.
Treatment and intervention programs, as used in this section, mean substance abuse, mental health, or cognitive based treatment received by probationers or parolees.
All treatment and intervention programs for parolees and probationers shall be intended to reduce recidivism as demonstrated by research or documented evidence.
Payment for substance abuse or mental health treatment services may be made only if the services are recommended through an assessment conducted by a provider accredited by the Department of Social Services. Payment for cognitive based treatment services may be made only if the services are recommended through a risk and needs assessment tool used by the Department of Corrections or the Unified Judicial System.
The Department of Social Services shall collect data related to the participation, completion and treatment outcomes of all probationers and parolees receiving treatment services paid for by the Department of Social Services. The Department of Social Services shall report this information semiannually to the oversight council.
The Department of Corrections shall collect data on the recidivism outcomes of parolees receiving treatment and interventions. The Department of Corrections shall report this information semiannually to the oversight council.
The Unified Judicial System shall collect data on the recidivism outcomes of probationers receiving treatment and interventions, the number and the percentage of probationers referred for mental health assessment, the number and the percentage of probationers referred for mental health treatment, and the annual cost of probationer mental health assessments and treatment both in total and separated by funding source. The Unified Judicial System shall report this information semiannually to the oversight body established pursuant to § 16-22-21.
Source: SL 2013, ch 101, § 70; SL 2017, ch 109, § 32.
16-22-25. Grant program for adult community residential services to reduce risk of recidivism.
There is hereby established the alternative care program to be administered by the Unified Judicial System. The Unified Judicial System shall award grants to nonprofit entities within the State of South Dakota that provide indigent adults with extended residential alternative care programs designed to reduce the risk of recidivism. The grants shall be awarded for room and board costs for South Dakota residents of the program with a maximum award of thirty dollars per day per resident. Any grant award shall be distributed in quarterly installments.
Source: SL 2015, ch 120, § 1, eff. Mar. 19, 2015.
16-22-26. Request for proposals.
The Unified Judicial System shall initiate a request for proposal and publicize the availability of the grant funding and any procedures for obtaining grants pursuant to § 16-22-25.
Source: SL 2015, ch 120, § 2, eff. Mar. 19, 2015.
16-22-27. Report by grant recipient.
The recipient of any such grant shall prepare a report containing information on the results and outcomes for program participants including: completion rates, termination rates, graduation rates, and recidivism data. The report shall be submitted to the Legislature no later than November 15, 2016.
Source: SL 2015, ch 120, § 3, eff. Mar. 19, 2015.
16-22-28. Probation and parole policies for sanctioning positive urinalysis test for controlled substance.
The Unified Judicial System, for probation, and the Department of Corrections, for parole, shall each revise the respective agency's policies for probation and parole requiring a minimum sanction of some period of incarceration for a urinalysis test that is positive for a controlled substance. The sanction shall be imposed for the initial positive test. The policies may exempt a residual positive urinalysis. Any drug court or other specialty court which has an approved sanctioning grid is exempt from the provisions of this section.
Source: SL 2017, ch 92, § 1.
16-22-29. Compliant discharge from probation or parole upon completion of treatment--Conditions.
A parolee or probationer who is eligible for earned discharge credits and serving a sentence or sentences exclusively subject to presumptive probation pursuant to § 22-6-11, regardless of date of offense, shall be discharged from probation or parole supervision upon completion of all treatment programs required as a condition of the person's probation or parole provided the parolee or probationer has been on supervision for a minimum of twelve full continuous calendar months and in the twelve full continuous calendar months the parolee or probationer:
(1) Has not been under or received a sanction for violation of conditions of supervision;
(2) Has not absconded from supervision;
(3) Has not been placed in jail or prison;
(4) Has not had a probation or parole violation report submitted and does not have a pending probation or parole violation report or pending criminal offense; and
(5) Has complied with all conditions of the person's supervision including completion of any treatment program required as a condition of probation or parole.
A parolee or probationer serving an eligible South Dakota sentence in another state under the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision who meets the criteria in this section is entitled to discharge in the same manner as a parolee or probationer supervised in South Dakota. Each drug court participant who meets the criteria in this section is entitled to discharge in the same manner as a parolee or probationer if the participant has successfully completed the drug court program.
Within thirty days following a probationer or parolee meeting the criteria for discharge under this section, the supervising court services officer or parole agent shall submit a notice of compliant discharge.
The notice of compliant discharge for a parolee shall be submitted to the secretary of the Department of Corrections. If the secretary finds the parolee met the criteria for compliant discharge, the secretary shall within fifteen days of receipt of the notice from the parole agent issue a certificate of discharge pursuant to § 24-15A-7.
The notice of compliant discharge for a probationer shall be submitted to the sentencing court. If the court finds that the probationer has met the criteria for compliant discharge, the court shall enter an order discharging the probationer from probation.
A parolee or probationer who meets the criteria for a compliant discharge but, prior to the issuance of the certificate of discharge, receives a formal sanction, absconds, is placed in jail or prison, violates supervision conditions resulting in the submission of a parole or probation violation report, or who fails to comply with supervision conditions shall be removed from the compliant discharge process. The offender shall be retained on supervision or in custody.
Source: SL 2017, ch 92, § 3.
16-22-30. Report to oversight council on probation and parole infractions.
The Unified Judicial System and the Department of Corrections shall annually submit a report to the oversight council which includes aggregate statistics on the number of probation or parole infractions and the sanction for each. The report shall also include a summary of the incentives given to probationers or parolees under supervision.
Source: SL 2017, ch 92, § 5.
16-22-31. Report of Interstate Drug Trafficking Task Force to oversight council.
The Interstate Drug Trafficking Task Force shall quarterly submit a report to the chair of the oversight council which includes aggregate statistics on the number of arrests made by the task force, the underlying felonies for those arrests, and the amount of drugs seized by the task force.
Source: SL 2017, ch 92, § 6.
