Section · Administrative Rules of South Dakota · View on sdlegislature.gov ↗
The projected end of fiscal year probation count for each county for fiscal year 2014 is calculated by increasing the fiscal year 2013 actual probation count by the factor as indicated in § 17:10:07:01. The projected end of fiscal year probation counts for each county for fiscal years 2015 to 2017, inclusive, are calculated by increasing the projected count from the previous fiscal year rounded to the nearest whole number by the projection factor. The table below contains projected end of fiscal year adult felony probation count used to determine payments under SDCL 1-15-36: County FY13 Actual Probation Counts Projection Factor FY14 Projected FY15 Projected FY16 Projected FY17 Projected Aurora 4 0.00% 4 4 4 4 Beadle 97 9.26% 106 116 127 138 Bennett 19 10.00% 21 23 25 28 Bon Homme 10 10.00% 11 12 13 15 Brookings 144 9.85% 158 174 191 210 Brown 302 5.09% 317 334 351 368 Brule 33 8.77% 36 39 42 46 Buffalo 1 0.00% 1 1 1 1 Butte 76 10.00% 84 92 101 111 Campbell 3 10.00% 3 4 4 4 Charles Mix 74 10.00% 81 90 98 108 Clark 12 10.00% 13 15 16 18 Clay 90 10.00% 99 109 120 132 Codington 177 10.00% 195 214 236 259 Corson 4 10.00% 4 5 5 6 Custer 33 2.59% 34 35 36 37 Davison 168 8.93% 183 199 217 237 Day 15 10.00% 17 18 20 22 Deuel 8 10.00% 9 10 11 12 Dewey 8 10.00% 9 10 11 12 Douglas 5 10.00% 6 6 7 7 Edmunds 11 10.00% 12 13 15 16 Fall River 57 4.61% 60 62 65 68 Faulk 3 10.00% 3 4 4 4 Grant 10 10.00% 11 12 13 15 Gregory 8 10.00% 9 10 11 12 Haakon 7 8.33% 8 8 9 10 Hamlin 3 0.00% 3 3 3 3 Hand 2 0.00% 2 2 2 2 Hanson 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 Harding 3 10.00% 3 4 4 4 Hughes 134 10.00% 147 162 178 196 Hutchinson 15 9.98% 16 18 20 22 Hyde 1 10.00% 1 1 1 1 Jackson 15 4.03% 16 16 17 18 Jerauld 7 10.00% 8 8 9 10 Jones 5 0.00% 5 5 5 5 Kingsbury 8 10.00% 9 10 11 12 Lake 40 0.00% 40 40 40 40 Lawrence 143 6.11% 152 161 171 181 Lincoln 74 10.00% 81 90 98 108 Lyman 19 1.39% 19 20 20 20 Marshall 6 10.00% 7 7 8 9 McCook 11 10.00% 12 13 15 16 McPherson 1 0.00% 1 1 1 1 Meade 189 10.00% 208 229 252 277 Mellette 9 0.00% 9 9 9 9 Miner 1 0.00% 1 1 1 1 Minnehaha 1284 10.00% 1412 1554 1709 1880 Moody 16 10.00% 18 19 21 23 Pennington 1006 10.00% 1107 1217 1339 1473 Perkins 23 10.00% 25 28 31 34 Potter 4 10.00% 4 5 5 6 Roberts 106 10.00% 117 128 141 155 Sanborn 2 0.00% 2 2 2 2 Oglala Lakota 2 0.00% 2 2 2 2 Spink 20 10.00% 22 24 27 29 Stanley 15 10.00% 17 18 20 22 Sully 6 10.00% 7 7 8 9 Todd 10 10.00% 11 12 13 15 Tripp 26 0.00% 26 26 26 26 Turner 24 3.92% 25 26 27 28 Union 107 8.81% 116 127 138 150 Walworth 59 0.00% 59 59 59 59 Yankton 233 10.00% 256 282 310 341 Ziebach 3 10.00% 3 4 4 4
Source: 41 SDR 53, effective October 6, 2014; SL 2015, ch 56, § 1, effective May 1, 2015.