Pennsylvania's Act 59 of 2022 (signed into law July 8, 2022) made significant changes to how the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole handles technical violations — rule infractions that are not new crimes, such as missing a check-in appointment, failing a drug test, or changing residence without approval. Before Act 59, Pennsylvania routinely returned people to state prison for these non-criminal violations, contributing to one of the highest parole revocation rates in the country.
What Is a Technical Violation?
A technical violation is a breach of a supervision condition that is not a new criminal offense. Common examples include:
- Failing to report to a parole agent on schedule
- Testing positive for drug or alcohol use
- Leaving the county or state without permission
- Failing to maintain employment or attend a required program
- Associating with known criminals
What Act 59 Changed
Act 59 established a graduated response framework for technical violations. The key provisions:
- No automatic re-incarceration for first technical violation. The board must impose a non-confinement response (increased supervision, drug treatment, curfew) before recommitting to state prison for a technical violation.
- Caps on recommitment time. Even for repeated technical violations, the recommitment period is capped. For people on parole for a nonviolent offense, the cap limits the amount of backtime that can be imposed.
- Drug treatment as default response. A positive drug test alone, for many parolees, must be responded to with treatment referral rather than re-incarceration on the first occurrence.
What Act 59 Did Not Change
Act 59 addresses only technical violations. A new criminal conviction — even a misdemeanor — is a direct violation (not a technical one) and may still result in full recommitment to serve the remainder of the original sentence. The board retains full authority to revoke parole for direct violations.
Context: Why Pennsylvania Needed Reform
Before Act 59, Pennsylvania returned more people to prison on technical violations than nearly any other state in the country. The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Vera Institute documented that this pattern drove significant prison population growth without meaningful public safety benefit — most people returned on technical violations had committed no new crime. Act 59 reflected a bipartisan legislative consensus that this pattern was both costly and counterproductive.