Skip to content
Bills from the 2011–12 session

Assembly Bill 86

Corrections and sentencing

Topics: Crime and criminals: Felony, Earned Release Review Commission, Parole or probation, Sentences and penalties

Stopped before the full Assembly voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Apr 7, 2011

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2012: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

2009 Wisconsin Act 28 (the Act) made several changes to the adult correctional system, most of which took effect on October 1, 2009. Prior to the effective date of the provisions relating to the adult correctional system (pre-Act), a person who was imprisoned for a felony he or she committed prior to December 31, 1999, was allowed to petition the parole commission in the Department of Corrections (DOC) to be released to parole after the person served 25 percent of his or her sentence, or six months, whichever was greater. The parole commission determined whether, and under what conditions, the person should be released to parole. A person who committed a felony on or after December 31, 1999, is sentenced to a bifurcated sentence, with the first portion of the sentence served in confinement and the second portion served under extended supervision in the community.

Pre-Act, a person who was serving a bifurcated sentence was, with few exceptions, required to serve the entire confinement portion of his or her sentence before being released to extended supervision. A person's confinement portion could have been extended if he or she violated a prison regulation. If a person's confinement portion was extended for such a violation, the law pre-Act required his or her extended supervision portion to be reduced so that the total length of the person's sentence remained unchanged.

Read the full summary

The law pre-Act allowed a person who is sentenced to a bifurcated sentence for a Class C to Class I felony to petition the sentencing court to adjust his or her sentence and release the person from prison to extended supervision if he or she has served 85 percent (for Class C to Class E felonies) or 75 percent (for Class F to Class I felonies) of the confinement portion of the sentence. If a person's confinement portion was reduced by the sentencing court, the law pre-Act required his or her extended supervision portion to be extended so that the total length of the person's sentence remained unchanged. Pre-Act, a person who was released to extended supervision was required to serve his or her entire sentence before extended supervision terminated.

The Act renamed the parole commission the earned release review commission (ERRC) and allows most persons who are incarcerated for a Class C to Class I felony to earn "positive adjustment time" toward early release from confinement. Under the Act, the amount of positive adjustment time a person can earn varies depending on the classification of the felony, the person's history and likelihood of reoffending, and other factors determined by DOC.

The Act allows DOC to release the person to extended supervision when he or she serves his entire period of confinement, minus positive adjustment time earned, subject to court review. Under the Act, if a person's period of confinement is reduced by positive adjustment time, his or her period of extended supervision is increased so that the length of the sentence does not change. The Act requires the ERRC to perform the duties previously performed by the parole commission and to review petitions for early release from confinement.

Under the Act, the sentencing court could, at the time of sentencing, order a person to serve a risk reduction sentence. A person serving a risk reduction sentence could be eligible for early release to extended supervision if he or she complies with a treatment plan developed for the person by DOC.

Pre-Act, persons who had committed most felonies were allowed to petition the sentencing court for release to extended supervision for the remaining term of his or her sentence if the person had a terminal condition, reached age 65 after serving at least five years of his or her term of confinement portion, or reached age 60 after serving at least ten years of his or her term of confinement portion.

Under the Act, the petition may also be filed by a person with any serious health condition and must be submitted to the ERRC instead of to the sentencing court. In addition, under the Act, DOC may release to extended supervision any person serving the confinement portion of a bifurcated sentence if the person is not confined following a violent offense, the person is believed to be able to live in the community without assaulting another, and the release will not be more than 12 months before the date that the person otherwise would be eligible for release to extended supervision. If DOC releases a person, his or her term of extended supervision must be extended by the length of time he or she was originally sentenced to confinement so that the total length of the sentence does not change.

Pre-Act, if a person sentenced to a bifurcated sentence violated any condition of his or her release to extended supervision, the person's extended supervision was revoked, he or she was returned to prison, and the division of hearings and appeals within DOA or DOC (reviewing authority) made a recommendation to the court that convicted the person as to how long the person should remain in prison. After it received the reviewing authority's recommendation, the court was allowed to order the person to remain in prison for a period that did not exceed the time remaining on his or her bifurcated sentence.

Under the Act, the reviewing authority determines how long to imprison the person whose extended supervision is revoked and enters its own order for the person to remain in prison for a period that does not exceed the time remaining on his or her bifurcated sentence.

This bill eliminates positive adjustment time and risk reduction sentences, restores the parole commission, eliminates the ERRC, and returns the sentencing provisions, and most of the provisions relating to early release from confinement to pre-Act law. Under the bill, a person may petition the sentencing court for release to extended supervision for the remaining term of his or her sentence if the person has an extraordinary health condition, reaches age 65 after serving at least five years of his or her term of confinement portion, or reaches age 60 after serving at least ten years of his or her term of confinement portion.

Under the bill, a person who was sentenced after October 1, 2009, but before the effective date of the bill, and who earned positive adjustment time during that period may petition the sentencing court for an early release to extended supervision. If the sentencing court agrees to reduce the confinement portion of the person's sentence by the number of positive adjustment time days he or she earned, the sentencing court must increase the term of extended supervision by the same number of days.

Under the bill, a person who was sentenced to a risk reduction sentence after October 1, 2009, but before the effective date of the bill and who complied with the program plan developed by DOC may be released to extended supervision after he or she serves at least 75 percent of the confinement portion of his or her sentence.

Who's behind it

28 lawmakers are its ⁠. 27 are Republicans and 1 is a Independent.

7 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 35 names

Authors (28)

Signed on in support (7)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There was one vote on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections vote on an amendment

Passed, 5 to 3 · May 12, 2011

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections, Ayes 5, Noes 3”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2012

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. May 17, 2011

    “Placed at the foot of the calendar of 5-17-2011” (the official wording)

  3. May 12, 2011

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  4. May 12, 2011

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 3.

  5. May 6, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  6. May 5, 2011

    The committee held a public hearing.

  7. Apr 25, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  8. Apr 15, 2011

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  9. Apr 15, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  10. Apr 7, 2011

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  11. Apr 7, 2011

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections.

  12. Apr 7, 2011

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Apr 7, 2011 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Suder, Krug, Jacque, Petersen, Spanbauer, Ziegelbauer, Steineke, Severson, T. Larson, Kestell, Mursau, Thiesfeldt, LeMahieu, Strachota, Kleefisch, Murtha, Endsley, Marklein, Rivard, Honadel, Bies, Kaufert, Stone, Brooks, Petryk, Ripp, Knodl and Klenke;Cosponsored by Senators Wanggaard, Leibham, Moulton, Zipperer and Galloway

  2. Apr 7, 2011 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections

  3. Apr 7, 2011 · Assembly

    Representative Williams added as a coauthor

  4. Apr 15, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 15, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Apr 15, 2011 · Assembly

    Representative Farrow added as a coauthor

  7. Apr 25, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  8. May 5, 2011 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  9. May 6, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  10. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  11. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections

  12. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections, Ayes 5, Noes 3

  13. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections, Ayes 5, Noes 3

  14. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  15. May 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 5-17-2011 by committee on Rules

  16. May 17, 2011 · Assembly

    LRB correction

  17. May 17, 2011 · Assembly

    Placed at the foot of the calendar of 5-17-2011

  18. May 17, 2011 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 offered by Representative Radcliffe

  19. May 17, 2011 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 offered by Representative Radcliffe

  20. Sep 13, 2011 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  21. Mar 23, 2012 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote