Minnesota’s Innovative Sentence Review Program: A Model for Reform

My name is Joshua Bevill.  I'm serving a 30-year federal prison sentence for a low-level, nonviolent offense.  I've been in prison for nearly 15 years.  During my time on the frontlines I've witnessed up close and personal the human toll of injustice, which comes in many forms.

Among many other related pursuits, I routinely write about remarkable people who help rectify injustice, as well as help shine a light on the dark corners of the American justice system.

About a year ago, I learned that Mark Osler was taking a one-year leave of absence from his Clemency clinic to help with a new program rolled out by Minnesota.

I follow all of Mr. Osler's scholarly work—on Clemency reform—very closely. So I wanted to learn more. 

What I found is a fresh, innovative approach to ameliorating post-conviction injustice in the form of needlessly excessive sentences.

With that, Minnesota is flipping the script on criminal justice reform. The state has just given prosecutors a powerful new tool: the ability to review and potentially shorten prison sentences. This is a big deal.

Instead of relying on the often slow and opaque pardon process through the governor's office, Minnesota is putting the decision-making power right into the hands of people who know the cases inside and out – prosecutors. Led by Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, with a big assist from law professor Mark Osler, this new law is a game-changer. It could mean a second chance for many people.

The Shift from Pardon-Based Clemency

For years, getting a sentence reduced or a pardon has been nearly impossible. People had to jump through hoops, begging the governor's office to take pity on them. It was slow, confusing, and, more often than not, ended in heartache and disappointment.

But Minnesota is changing the game. Now, prosecutors can actually review cases and decide if someone deserves a shorter sentence. It's like cutting out the middleman. This new approach is way more accessible and gives people a better shot at getting a fair deal.

The Role of Prosecutors in Sentence Review

Prosecutors, by nature of their roles, are intimately familiar with the details of criminal cases, including sentencing nuances and the context of each individual’s situation. Under the new law, they are empowered to reexamine cases to determine if reductions are appropriate, especially in cases where the original sentences may no longer align with current legal standards or societal norms.

The involvement of prosecutors in this capacity ensures that sentence reductions are considered with a comprehensive understanding of the case’s background. It also provides a more balanced perspective, as prosecutors are expected to act impartially and in the interest of justice, rather than political expediency.

Early Outcomes and Data

The program has been active for about a year now, and early outcomes are promising. The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office has seen a notable number of applications and has already processed several cases leading to sentence reductions. For example, the recent cases reviewed have shown that many individuals who had been serving lengthy sentences may now be eligible for reduced time due to changes in the law or new evidence.

According to data from local news sources, the initiative has led to a number of significant reductions. While specific figures may vary, the overarching trend indicates that the new law is having a positive impact on individuals who have been serving long sentences but are now deemed to deserve a second chance.

A Model for Other States and Federal Reform

The success of Minnesota’s sentence review program has not gone unnoticed. It serves as a compelling model for other states and even for federal-level reforms. By allowing prosecutors to review and potentially reduce sentences, Minnesota has demonstrated a practical and effective way to enhance the clemency process, making it more accessible and just.

Other states could benefit from adopting similar frameworks, which could address issues such as over-incarceration and the disproportionate impact of lengthy sentences on marginalized communities. Federal reform could also take cues from Minnesota’s approach, especially in addressing cases where federal sentences might no longer align with current legal standards or societal values.

The Minnesota model also underscores the importance of integrating legal expertise with justice reform. By leveraging the knowledge and experience of prosecutors, the program enhances the efficiency and fairness of the sentence review process. This approach could help mitigate some of the challenges associated with traditional pardon systems and provide a more equitable pathway for those seeking sentence reductions.