§
Subdivision 1.Commissioner responsibility.
(a) For individuals committed to the commissioner's authority, the commissioner must develop, implement, and provide, as appropriate:
(1) substance use disorder treatment programs;
(2) sexual offender treatment programming;
(3) domestic abuse programming;
(4) medical and mental health services;
(5) spiritual and faith-based programming;
(6) culturally responsive programming;
(7) vocational, employment and career, and educational programming; and
(8) other rehabilitative programs.
(b) While evidence-based programs must be prioritized, selecting, designing, and implementing programs under this section are the sole responsibility of the commissioner, acting within the limitations imposed by the funds appropriated for the programs under this section.
§
Subd. 2.Challenge prohibited.
No action challenging the level of expenditures for rehabilitative programs authorized under this section, nor any action challenging the selection, design, or implementation of these programs, including employee assignments, may be maintained by an inmate in any court in this state.
§
Subd. 3.Disciplinary sanctions.
The commissioner may impose disciplinary sanctions on any inmate who refuses to participate in rehabilitative programs.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case:
Rud v. Fabian, 743 N.W.2d 295 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007).
Rud v. Fabian, 743 N.W.2d 295 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 64× “Is the amendment to Minn.Stat. § 244.03 (1998) enacted by 1999 Minn.”
State Ex Rel. McMaster v. Young, 476 N.W.2d 670 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 6× “01 (1990), and the description of voluntary programs to be provided by the Commissioner under Minn.Stat. § 244.03 (1990). A state created liberty interest arises in situations in which the state has placed substantive limitations on the exercise of official discretion.”
Loyd v. Fabian, 682 N.W.2d 688 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “” Minn.Stat. §§ 244.03, .05, subd. lb(b). By signing the “program contract”, Loyd agreed with the statements that he had received an orientation manual and would abide by institutional and TRIAD rules and policies.”
Roth v. Comm'r of Corr., 759 N.W.2d 224 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 4× “” Minn.Stat. § 244.03 (2006). No inmate who violates a disciplinary rule or refuses to participate in a rehabilitative program as required under *228 section 244.”
Nicolaison v. Erickson, 425 N.W.2d 597 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 244.03 (1986) provides, in part: The commissioner shall provide appropriate mental health programs and vocational and educational programs with employment-related goals for inmates who desire to voluntarily participate in such programs.”
Eric Matthew Hopper v. Tom Roy, Minnesota Comm'r of Corr. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “In concluding that the commissioner lacked the authority to compel Rud to attend sex- offender treatment, this court determined that the specific language of Minnesota Statutes section 244.03 (1984), which made participation in mental health programs voluntary, controlled over…”
Anthony Schmitt v. Jolene Rebertus (8th Cir. 2025).
· cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. Ann. § 244.03 , subd. 1(a). “[S]electing, designing, and implementing programs under this section are the sole responsibility of the commissioner.”
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.