Changes to Board of Pardons would bring more efficiency and more mercy, bill sponsor says

To get pardoned in this state, people convicted of a crime must appear in person before the Board of Pardons and plead their case.

That’s an inefficient, ineffective system, says Rep. Jamie Long (DFL-Mpls), because it places an overwhelming workload on the “three busiest people in the state” — the governor, attorney general, and chief justice of the state Supreme Court — who make up the Board of Pardons.

He sponsors HF3464, which would create a nine-member Clemency Review Commission to review pardon and commutation cases and present their non-binding recommendations to the board.

The House Public Safety and Criminal Justice Reform Finance and Policy Committee laid the bill over, as amended, Friday for possible omnibus bill inclusion.

The bill would also require a majority vote, with the governor required to vote in the majority, in order to approve a pardon petition. Currently, a unanimous vote is required.

That unanimous vote rule is too high of an obstacle for petitioners, said Long, noting it is stricter than all but six other states.

Mark Osler, professor of law at the University of St. Thomas, says Minnesota’s “very narrow pardon pipeline” means only about 20-40 are granted each year. In comparison, other states grant several hundred pardons each year.

Requiring a majority, but not unanimous, vote from the Board of Pardons, would be a step in the right direction, he said, if the goal of the justice system is to rehabilitate people and reintegrate them into society.

“There has to be a role for mercy, there has to be a role for tempering sometimes the undue harshness of criminal law,” he said.

The bill would require the Clemency Review Commission to evaluate 10 factors in a case for a pardon or sentence commutation, including:

• the nature, seriousness, circumstances, and age of the applicant’s offense;
• the successful completion or revocation of previous probation, parole, supervised release, or conditional release;
• the number, nature, and circumstances of the applicant’s other criminal convictions;
• the extent to which the applicant has demonstrated rehabilitation through postconviction conduct, character, and reputation; and
• the extent to which the applicant has accepted responsibility, demonstrated remorse, and made restitution to victims.

Amber Jochem, whose criminal history began with a methamphetamine addiction as a young adult, feels lucky to get a rare pardon.

Before her pardon, she could not volunteer at her grandchildren’s schools and she had to miss out on other family activities because background checks would reveal her criminal past.

“For me the pardon has been life-changing, and I feel like a productive member of society,” she said. “I’ve changed my life. I’ve given back in so many different ways to the community.”

Sen. Ron Latz (DFL-St. Louis Park) sponsors the companion, SF3382, which awaits action by the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee.