(1) Supervised individuals shall be subject to:
(a) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to
comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a
significant risk to prior victims of the supervised individual or the community
at large, and cannot be appropriately managed in the community; or
(b) Sanctions other than revocation and incarceration as appropriate to the
severity of the violation behavior, the risk of future criminal behavior by the
offender, and the need for, and availability of, interventions which may assist
the offender to remain compliant and crime-free in the community.
(2) (a) At a final revocation hearing, the board may subject a supervised individual to
a supervision continuation sanction for a period of up to nine (9) months, or
until the completion of the individual's sentence, whichever is shorter.
(b) Individuals under a supervision continuation sanction shall be placed in:
1. A state or local correctional or detention facility;
2. An inpatient program for substance abuse treatment which has been
approved by the department; or
3. Notwithstanding KRS 532.100, a halfway house, when the individuals
have been classified by the department as community custody.
(c) Individuals under a supervision continuation sanction shall be considered
inmates for the duration of the supervision continuation sanction period. If an
individual under a supervision continuation sanction successfully completes
the sanction and has not completed the individual's sentence, the individual
shall then be considered a supervised individual.
(d) 1. When a supervised individual has successfully completed the
supervision continuation sanction and has not completed the individual's
sentence, the individual shall be:
a. Reinstated to supervision in the community without another
hearing before the board; and
b. Subject to the same supervision conditions that the individual had
been under at the time of the probable cause revocation hearing.
2. When a supervised individual does not successfully complete a
supervision continuation sanction and has not completed the individual's
sentence, the individual shall be returned to the board for revocation
proceedings.
Effective: July 15, 2020
History: Amended 2020 Ky. Acts ch. 44, sec. 3, effective July 15, 2020. -- Amended
2019 Ky. Acts ch. 137, sec. 1, effective June 27, 2019. -- Created 2011 Ky. Acts ch.
2, sec. 59, effective June 8, 2011.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
127
cases (
100 in the last 5 years), 2012–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Andrews, 448 S.W.3d 773 (Ky. 2014).
Commonwealth v. Andrews, 448 S.W.3d 773 (Ky. 2014).
· cites it 36× “On discretionary review, the Commonwealth now claims that the Court of Appeals erred in finding that KRS 439.3106, a statute that was adopted as part of HB 463 in 2011, applied to the circuit court and in failing to recognize that the lower court properly exercised its *775…”
McClure v. Commonwealth, 457 S.W.3d 728 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 18× “Before addressing these alleged errors, we review the limited authority that has evolved regarding KRS 439.3106 in the statute’s brief existence.”
Helms v. Commonwealth, 475 S.W.3d 637 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 10× “Enacted in 2011 as part of the Public Safety and Offender Accountability Act, commonly referred to as HB 463, KRS 439.3106 provides: Supervised individuals shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the…”
Richardson v. Commonwealth, 494 S.W.3d 495 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 15× “256(2) required the trial court to employ the criteria provided in KRS 439.3106 prior to entering its order.”
Lainhart v. Commonwealth, 534 S.W.3d 234 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 6× “KRS 439.3106 states that probationers shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a significant risk to prior victims of the supervised individual or…”
Murrell v. Kentucky Parole Bd., 531 S.W.3d 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 12× “Because the proper interpretation of a statute, specifically KRS 439.3106, is a purely legal issue, our review is de novo.”
Burnett v. Commonwealth, 538 S.W.3d 322 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 6× “3106 provides that defendants on probation shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a significant risk to prior victims of the supervised individual…”
Blankenship v. Commonwealth, 494 S.W.3d 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 8× “KRS 439.3106 provides that: Supervised individuals shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to com- - ply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a signifi.”
Hall v. Commonwealth, 566 S.W.3d 578 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 7× “However, the Court went on to hold that KRS 439.3106"requires as conditions precedent to revocation that the probationer's failure to comply with the terms of probation constitutes 'a significant risk to [his] prior victims .”
Price v. Commonwealth, 534 S.W.3d 805 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 6× “463 adopted by the legislature in 2011, provides that defendants on probation shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a significant risk to prior…”
Brann v. Commonwealth, 469 S.W.3d 429 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 13× “After reviewing Andreivs, we again vacate and remand for the trial court’s consideration under KRS 439.3106. In December 2009, Brann was indicted by a Graves County Grand Jury for theft by unlawful taking over $500.”
Southwood v. Commonwealth, 372 S.W.3d 882 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 5× “Southwood then filed a motion to alter, amend or vacate the order pursuant to KRS 439.3106, a statute that had been enacted on June 8, 2011, two days before the revocation hearing.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(1) — 97 cases
Commonwealth v. Andrews, 448 S.W.3d 773 (Ky. 2014).
“On discretionary review, the Commonwealth now claims that the Court of Appeals erred in finding that KRS 439.3106, a statute that was adopted as part of HB 463 in 2011, applied to the circuit court and in failing to recognize that the lower court properly exercised its *775…”
McClure v. Commonwealth, 457 S.W.3d 728 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
“Before addressing these alleged errors, we review the limited authority that has evolved regarding KRS 439.3106 in the statute’s brief existence.”
Lainhart v. Commonwealth, 534 S.W.3d 234 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
“KRS 439.3106 states that probationers shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a significant risk to prior victims of the supervised individual or…”
Blankenship v. Commonwealth, 494 S.W.3d 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
“KRS 439.3106 provides that: Supervised individuals shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to com- - ply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a signifi.”
Price v. Commonwealth, 534 S.W.3d 805 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
“463 adopted by the legislature in 2011, provides that defendants on probation shall be subject to: (1) Violation revocation proceedings and possible incarceration for failure to comply with the conditions of supervision when such failure constitutes a significant risk to prior…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(1)(a) — 32 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(1)(b) — 8 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(2) — 17 cases
Commonwealth v. Andrews, 448 S.W.3d 773 (Ky. 2014).
“On discretionary review, the Commonwealth now claims that the Court of Appeals erred in finding that KRS 439.3106, a statute that was adopted as part of HB 463 in 2011, applied to the circuit court and in failing to recognize that the lower court properly exercised its *775…”
Richardson v. Commonwealth, 494 S.W.3d 495 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
“256(2) required the trial court to employ the criteria provided in KRS 439.3106 prior to entering its order.”
Southwood v. Commonwealth, 372 S.W.3d 882 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
“Southwood then filed a motion to alter, amend or vacate the order pursuant to KRS 439.3106, a statute that had been enacted on June 8, 2011, two days before the revocation hearing.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(2)(a) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(i) — 1 case
Brann v. Commonwealth, 469 S.W.3d 429 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).
“After reviewing Andreivs, we again vacate and remand for the trial court’s consideration under KRS 439.3106. In December 2009, Brann was indicted by a Graves County Grand Jury for theft by unlawful taking over $500.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 439.3106(l) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.