Minnesota Attorneys Opposed Sentencing Guideline Changes
Seventeen county attorneys signed a letter challenging a proposal to eliminate the practice of Hernandizing.
Updated on Oct. 6, 2026 in Criminal Justice
Live Poll
Should courts have more discretion when sentencing individuals convicted of multiple felony offenses?
Seventeen Minnesota county attorneys released a letter on Tuesday opposing a proposed change to state sentencing guidelines. The proposal seeks to eliminate 'Hernandizing,' a practice that allows courts to count multiple felony convictions when calculating an offender's criminal history score.
Why it matters
The attorneys argue that removing this practice risks treating repeat offenders with multiple felony convictions more leniently. If the legislature does not act to stop the change, the new guidelines will become law automatically.
The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, composed of 13 governor-appointed members, is reviewing a proposal to end the 1981 precedent of Hernandizing. The commission is scheduled to meet this Thursday.
The players
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission
This body is responsible for establishing and modifying the sentencing guidelines used in the state's criminal justice system.
Minnesota Supreme Court
This is the state's highest court, which established the precedent for the contested sentencing practice in 1981.
The details
Established in the 1981 case State v. Hernandez, the practice currently allows district courts to use multiple felony convictions from separate events to increase a criminal history score. The proposed change aims to restrict this method, which critics argue would significantly reduce sentencing severity for repeat offenders.
Timeline
1981: State v. Hernandez established criminal history scoring.
Tuesday: Attorneys released a letter challenging the proposal.
Thursday: The Sentencing Guidelines Commission will meet.
End of 2026: The legislature may act on the proposal.
Legal Context
This dispute marks a significant challenge to the decades-old legal precedent set by State v. Hernandez in 1981. The debate highlights ongoing tensions in the criminal justice system regarding how repeat offenses influence sentencing outcomes across the state.
Residents may see impacts on how repeat criminal offenders are sentenced in local district courts if the proposed changes are enacted. The shift could potentially result in more lenient sentencing outcomes compared to current guidelines.
The takeaway
The opposition from seventeen county attorneys highlights a significant divide regarding the future of sentencing repeat felony offenders in Minnesota. These developments reflect the high stakes involved in legislative decisions that can automatically reshape state criminal penalties.
What happens next
The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission will convene on Thursday to discuss the proposed changes to state sentencing practices.
Further reading
For more on the state's judicial policies, visit Criminal Justice.
More information
For official inquiries, you may email sentencing guidelines commission.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Southernminn.
Live Poll
Should courts have more discretion when sentencing individuals convicted of multiple felony offenses?
