Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003 (2026)
[Repealed Effective 7/1/2025] Intensive supervision program; eligibility; procedure; time limits; program violations; notice to Department of Corrections; participation in program during term of probation; provision of certain data to Oversight Task Force
✓ current as of July 2026
- (1) An intensive supervision program may be used as an alternative to incarceration for offenders who are not convicted of a crime of violence pursuant to Section 97-3-2 as selected by the court and for juvenile offenders as provided in Section 43-21-605. Any offender convicted of a sex crime shall not be placed in the program.
- (2) The court may place the defendant on intensive supervision, except when a death sentence or life imprisonment is the maximum penalty which may be imposed by a court or judge.
- (3) To protect and to ensure the safety of the state's citizens, any offender who violates an order or condition of the intensive supervision program may be arrested by the correctional field officer and placed in the actual custody of the Department of Corrections. Such offender is under the full and complete jurisdiction of the department and subject to removal from the program by the classification hearing officer.
- (4) When any circuit or county court places an offender in an intensive supervision program, the court shall give notice to the Mississippi Department of Corrections within fifteen (15) days of the court's decision to place the offender in an intensive supervision program. Notice shall be delivered to the central office of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and to the regional office of the department which will be providing supervision to the offender in an intensive supervision program.
The courts may not require an offender to participate in the intensive supervision program during a term of probation or post-release supervision.
- (5) The Department of Corrections shall provide to the Oversight Task Force all relevant data regarding the offenders participating in the intensive supervision program including the number of offenders admitted to the program annually, the number of offenders who leave the program annually and why they leave, the number of offenders who are arrested or convicted annually and the circumstances of the arrest and any other information requested.
Laws, 1993, ch. 576, § 2; Laws, 1994, ch. 606, § 3; Laws, 1994 Ex Sess, ch. 26, § 26; Laws, 1995, ch. 399, § 1; Laws, 1996, ch. 397, § 2; Laws, 1998, ch. 461, § 1; Laws, 2000, ch. 622, § 1; Laws, 2001, ch. 393, § 10; Laws, 2001, ch. 482, § 1; reenacted without change, Laws, 2003, ch. 418, § 2; reenacted without change, Laws, 2005, ch. 485, § 3; reenacted without change, Laws, 2006, ch. 392, § 2; Laws, 2008, ch. 313, § 1; reenacted, Laws, 2008, ch. 479, § 2; Laws, 2009, ch. 502, § 1; Laws, 2011, ch. 459, § 2; reenacted without change, Laws, 2012, ch. 316, § 2, eff. 4/5/2012.
Reenacted without change by Laws, 2022, ch. 311, HB 534,§ 2, eff. 6/30/2022.
Reenacted without change by Laws, 2018, ch. 408, HB 879,§ 2, eff. 6/30/2018.
Amended by Laws, 2014, ch. 457, HB 585, 11, eff. 7/1/2014.
Reenacted without change by Laws, 2014, ch. 317, SB 2608, 2, eff. 3/12/2014.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases, 1996–2018 · leading case: Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).
Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003. This is because, under our sentencing statutes, only a court may revoke post-release supervision.”
Tipton v. State, 150 So. 3d 82 (Miss. 2014). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1013(d) (Rev. 2011).”
Tipton v. State, 41 So. 3d 679 (Miss. 2010). “I would find that: (1) "incarceration services" reasonably embraces monitoring offenders on house arrest, and (2) there is nothing in Section 97-11-33 to indicate that, with the language "any contractor providing incarceration services," the Legislature intended to restrict its…”
Jefferson v. State, 958 So. 2d 1276 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(2) (Rev.2004).”
Smith v. State, 942 So. 2d 308 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(1) (Rev.2004).”
McBride v. Sparkman, 860 So. 2d 1237 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003). “2000); Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003 (3) (Supp.2003).”
Moore v. State, 830 So. 2d 1274 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Rev.2000).”
Burns v. State, 933 So. 2d 329 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). “" Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003 (Rev.2004), adopted 1993 Miss.”
Lewis v. State, 761 So. 2d 922 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Supp.1999).”
Perry v. State, 798 So. 2d 643 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). “Perry was not placed on probation, but rather was placed in the ISP, or "house arrest," as described in Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003 (Rev.2000). This code section describes the program, plus states the following: (3) To protect and ensure the safety of the state's citizens, any…”
Jackson v. State, 962 So. 2d 649 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(1) (Rev.2005).”
Babbitt v. State, 755 So. 2d 406 (Miss. 2000). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Supp. 1999) (emphasis added).”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(1) — 7 cases
Tipton v. State, 41 So. 3d 679 (Miss. 2010). “I would find that: (1) "incarceration services" reasonably embraces monitoring offenders on house arrest, and (2) there is nothing in Section 97-11-33 to indicate that, with the language "any contractor providing incarceration services," the Legislature intended to restrict its…”
Smith v. State, 942 So. 2d 308 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(1) (Rev.2004).”
Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003. This is because, under our sentencing statutes, only a court may revoke post-release supervision.”
Jefferson v. State, 958 So. 2d 1276 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(2) (Rev.2004).”
Jackson v. State, 962 So. 2d 649 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(1) (Rev.2005).”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(2) — 2 cases
Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003. This is because, under our sentencing statutes, only a court may revoke post-release supervision.”
Jefferson v. State, 958 So. 2d 1276 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(2) (Rev.2004).”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) — 11 cases
Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003. This is because, under our sentencing statutes, only a court may revoke post-release supervision.”
Tipton v. State, 41 So. 3d 679 (Miss. 2010). “I would find that: (1) "incarceration services" reasonably embraces monitoring offenders on house arrest, and (2) there is nothing in Section 97-11-33 to indicate that, with the language "any contractor providing incarceration services," the Legislature intended to restrict its…”
Tipton v. State, 150 So. 3d 82 (Miss. 2014). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1013(d) (Rev. 2011).”
Lewis v. State, 761 So. 2d 922 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Supp.1999).”
Babbitt v. State, 755 So. 2d 406 (Miss. 2000). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Supp. 1999) (emphasis added).”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(4) — 3 cases
Ivory v. State, 999 So. 2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003. This is because, under our sentencing statutes, only a court may revoke post-release supervision.”
Moore v. State, 830 So. 2d 1274 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1003(3) (Rev.2000).”
Bufkin v. King, 139 So. 3d 792 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014).
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.