Hawaiʻi is weighing revisions to its penal code that would change how long some people serve probation and how the state punishes drug possession cases involving trace amounts. The proposals are included in Senate Bill 2721 and are moving through the Legislature after a multi-stakeholder review process that, about every 10 years, examines offenses and punishments with an eye toward reform.
The probation portion targets what supporters describe as a mismatch between supervision duration and the likelihood that people will commit new crimes while under court-ordered monitoring. State and national research presented during the review process found that many people do not reoffend while they are on probation, and that when people do commit another crime under supervision, it often occurs within the first year.
At the same time, advocates say long probation terms can increase the chances that someone is incarcerated for minor supervision violations instead of new criminal conduct. They point to the restrictive conditions that can accompany felony probation in Hawaiʻi, including regular meetings with a probation officer, random searches of a person’s home or car, limits on leaving the court’s jurisdiction, curfew requirements, and even restrictions that can bar someone from leaving their house.
The proposals also respond to recent probation volume and patterns. According to the reporting, judges issued more than 17,000 probation orders in Hawaiʻi between July 2024 and June 2025. The changes are being discussed in the context of research cited from the Hawaiʻi Interagency Council for Intermediate Sanctions, which reported that about 41% of felony probationers were arrested or violated probation within the first year of supervision during 2015 and 2016, while that share dropped sharply in later years.
Advocates for criminal justice reform, including David Muhammad of the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, argued that extended periods of probation can be a waste of resources and can be harmful when the people being supervised are assessed as low risk for serious offenses. Muhammad said longer supervision increases the likelihood that someone will eventually be caught violating terms—describing it as “minor” in some cases but still capable of triggering reincarceration, with “harms” that he said are significant.
Support for shorter supervision is also tied to how probation can make daily life harder for people who must satisfy supervision requirements while working or maintaining housing. Under probation conditions described by advocates, people can face barriers to holding down a job or securing housing because compliance can depend on regular check-ins, curfews, and the approval required to leave jurisdiction—restrictions that they say can compound instability.
The penal code review recommendations included shortening probation for certain low-level, non-violent felonies. As described in the reporting, the committee recommended reducing probation for those offenses from four years to three. The change would not apply to people placed on probation for assault, terroristic threatening, kidnapping, extortion or arson.
Muhammad said even after the change, three years would still be longer than the national average for probation tied to low-level, non-violent felonies. However, some members of the penal code review committee opposed decreasing the probation term for certain crimes, raising concerns that shortening probation could affect offenses such as witness intimidation and retaliation, aggravated harassment by stalking, cruelty to animals and promoting pornography of a minor. Other stakeholders, including the Crime Victim Compensation Commission, said reducing probation terms could shift burdens for collecting restitution from the courts to crime victims after probation ends.
Rep. David Tarnas, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said he wants the bill to reflect the committee’s collaborative process, describing it as “a compromise” rather than “everything.” He said the chair is optimistic the bill containing the changes will pass, and said the version introduced in the House would move forward with the committee’s recommendations.
The legislation also includes a separate change aimed at drug possession. A second provision in Senate Bill 2721 would bring Hawaiʻi in line with what the reporting described as a national movement to reduce penalties for drug possession, including trace amounts. Under the proposal, possession of small amounts of drugs would be treated as a misdemeanor instead of a felony, courts would be required to order a substance abuse assessment and could require treatment, and incarceration would not begin until a person’s third offense. Even then, the proposed incarceration term described by the reporting would be six months, rather than the five years under current law.
Public defenders said the impact could be sweeping. Hayley Cheng, first deputy with the Office of the Public Defender, said the state’s criminal courts can be bogged down with felony minor drug possession cases involving people who are struggling with addiction but were arrested with drugs that are described as trace amounts in a pipe or baggie and nothing more. She said because possession of any amount of drugs such as meth and heroin is currently a felony in Hawaiʻi, defendants may face higher odds of remaining incarcerated pre-trial and could cost taxpayers more, in part because felony cases are handled in Circuit Court and can involve more time and litigation than misdemeanor cases in District Court.
Cheng also said the change would affect individuals beyond jail time, including the long-term consequences of felony convictions. She said felony convictions can make it harder to get a job or secure housing and can affect the right to vote. Nelson, who leads the sentencing reform initiative at the Vera Institute of Justice, said the approach reflects a view that severity does not solve drug use problems, and that “available treatment options” do.
The bill’s proposed penal code changes do not, the reporting said, expand treatment options in Hawaiʻi, a limitation advocates described as ongoing. Still, reform supporters framed the recommendations as steps toward a more research-based, rehabilitative criminal justice system that is designed to be responsive to vulnerable communities. Tarnas said he believes Hawaiʻi is moving in the right direction to create a system that is “fair and restorative, not just punitive,” adding that he called the proposals “major paradigm shifts” that “don’t come easy.”