A presenter from the Sentencing Guidelines Commission told attendees during an Oct. 23, 2025, training that practitioners should use the edition of the sentencing guidelines that was in effect when the current offense occurred to determine severity levels and priors.

The presenter said Minnesota’s guidelines generally run Aug. 1 through July 31 (with a 2021 transition that used Sept. 15 for the start date) and advised that ‘‘the guidelines in effect when the current offense occurred’’ determine which manual and grids to consult. The presenter directed listeners to the commission’s archive at mn.gov/sentencing-guidelines for manuals and historical grids dating back to 05/01/1980.

Why it matters: recent case law and statutory changes change how priors are counted. The presenter summarized the Robinette decision, telling participants the Minnesota Supreme Court applied the amelioration doctrine so policies that mitigate punishment take effect regardless of the original offense date; as a result, after 2019 criminal-history calculation generally uses the manual in effect when the current offense occurred. The presenter said practitioners must still sometimes consult older manuals to find policies that were not reissued but to apply 2019 amelioration rules for criminal-history computations.

The webinar reviewed how imposed durations determine felony status. The presenter explained the statutory thresholds that govern whether a sentence counts as a felony in history, noting a timing change tied to July 1, 2023: prior to 07/01/2023 a felony-level imposed duration was 366 days; on or after 07/01/2023 the minimum reflected was 365 days. The presenter warned that a sentence length recorded as 365 days can be a gross misdemeanor if it was imposed before the July 2023 change.

The presenter distinguished stay-of-imposition and stay-of-execution outcomes, explaining that a stay of imposition leaves no imposed duration but still counts as a felony in criminal-history worksheets until successful completion or revocation; stays of execution affect how the sentence is carried out (jail, prison, probation). The presenter also said non-conviction dispositions (stays of adjudication, continuances for dismissal) are not included in felony history unless revoked and an imposed sentence is later entered.

On drug priors, the presenter described a three-question test commonly called the Strobel application for deciding whether a prior fifth-degree controlled-substance conviction counts as a felony after the 2016 drug-law changes: (1) did the prior occur on or after 08/01/2016; (2) was the prior a felony sale or a marijuana offense (which the 2016 laws did not reclassify the same way); and (3) was there a prior drug conviction sentenced before the current offense. If those conditions are met, the prior is counted as a felony for history; otherwise the prior may fall into the misdemeanor/gross-misdemeanor section unless the prosecutor clarifies otherwise.

The presenter explained how criminal-history decay works: felony priors are considered for 15 years from the established starting date to the date of the current offense, with the starting date determined by disposition, sentencing date, or (if a prison term was served) the date the prison sentence ended. Priors do not decay while a person is under custody or on warrant status.

On grids and severity assignment, the presenter stressed two steps: identify which grid the current offense uses (standard, offender grid, drug grid) and then use the guidelines in effect when the current offense occurred to equate prior severity levels. Examples covered include the 2006 creation of the offender grid and the 2016 drug grid (which introduced letter-number severity codes such as D2), and reclassifications such as machine-gun offenses that were moved to higher severity levels and therefore carry greater weight when converted to points.

The presenter reviewed the Hernandez rule (often called 'hernandizing'), explaining that when multiple offenses are sentenced in the same hearing the court typically carries the priors forward using the first sentence; that is a common practice except for limited statutory exceptions (for example, certain meth offenses involving children or vulnerable adults, burglary, or kidnapping where hernandizing does not apply). When an event results in multiple victims, the presenter said the policy allows carrying two priors at the highest severity level forward for future unrelated offenses.

Practical tips given included entering all priors in the electronic worksheet system, then removing those that do not apply; remembering that half points in the felony section round down (for example, 2.5 becomes 2); and watching custody status because it pauses decay. The presenter closed by thanking participants and noting a custody-focused training is planned next month.

Representative quotes from the session included the presenter’s guidance that "the guidelines in effect when the current offense occurred" determine which manual to use, and the practical direction that "we have them on our website mn.gov/sentencing-guidelines." The presenter also summarized case-law effects: "after 2019, you only need to use 1 book, the manual that is in effect when the current offense occurred," reflecting the amelioration-doctrine interpretation discussed in the webinar.

Next steps: no formal action or vote was taken; the presenter noted a follow-up custody training is scheduled in the coming month.