Certain felons made ineligible to serve as jurors in criminal cases.
Summary
HF 3336 would make people who are under correctional supervision for a felony offense ineligible to serve as jurors in criminal cases, including grand juries. The disqualification would remain in place until the person’s sentence has been fully discharged under Minnesota law. The bill states that this rule applies notwithstanding any other law or court rule to the contrary.
In practical terms, the bill creates a categorical exclusion from criminal jury service for individuals on felony supervision, such as those on probation, parole, or supervised release, until their sentence is completed. It is limited to criminal cases and does not address civil jury service. The measure is framed as a public safety bill and would add a new section to Minnesota Statutes chapter 593.
Impact
The bill would amend Minnesota law by adding section 593.55 to chapter 593, establishing a new statutory eligibility restriction for jury service. It would override any conflicting law or court rule and bar persons under felony correctional supervision from serving on criminal juries or grand juries until discharge of sentence under section 609.165. The affected parties are individuals with felony convictions who remain under supervision, as well as courts and jury administrators responsible for screening jurors in criminal cases.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available context suggests a straightforward, policy-focused proposal with no documented public debate in the materials provided. The bill’s framing as a public safety measure indicates support from its author for tightening juror eligibility in criminal cases. No opposing or supporting arguments are captured in the supplied record.
Contention
The main policy issue is whether people under felony supervision should be categorically excluded from criminal juries until their sentences are fully discharged. Supporters are likely to argue that such individuals should not participate in criminal adjudication while still under correctional control, while critics could view the rule as overly broad or as unnecessarily limiting jury pool diversity and civic participation. No specific objections or amendments are shown in the provided committee materials.