Compact Online Reference Encyclopedia (CORE)

Looking for information on a specific topic, training, rule, or process? Through one search here, you can find the information you need from ICAOS’ white papersadvisory opinions, bylaws, policies, Hearing Officer's Guidetraining modulesrules, helpdesk articles and the bench book. All results are cross-referenced with links to make navigation easy and intuitive.

Displaying 31 - 60 of 64
The Compact necessarily involves offenders moving across state lines. Therefore, considerations of different courts’ personal jurisdiction over the parties to a suit might come into play. Unfortunately, different courts have reached different results when…
The ICAOS was written to address problems and complaints with the ICPP. Chief among the problems and complaints were: Lack of state compliance with the terms and conditions of the ICPP; Enforceability of its rules given there was no enforcement mechanism…
Rule 4.107 authorizes the collection of fees from offenders subject to the Compact. Pursuant to Rule 4.107(a), the sending state may impose a transfer application fee on an offender and according to Rule 4.107(b), the receiving state may impose a…
As discussed, offenders have no constitutional travel rights and states have no constitutional obligations to open their doors to offenders from other states. Thus, ICAOS is the only mechanism by which states can regulate the interstate movement of adult…
That the Compact itself does not create a private right of action does not mean that offenders subject to it are left without a remedy under Section 1983. Instead, it means that their complaints must be framed as violations of a right enumerated in the…
The Commission recognizes that the transfer of sex offenders is complex due to individual state laws regarding sex offender registries and various residency and employment restrictions. Rule 3.101-3 addresses these challenges in order to promote offender…
Some federal statutes have their own enforcement mechanism through an express or implied cause of action in the federal statute itself. See Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) (applying the test through which a court determines whether a statute…
Notwithstanding the authority of the sending and receiving state to impose conditions on an offender, several courts assert that certain conditions – such as banishment from a geographical area – are not appropriate because they interfere with the purpose…
(a) Except as provided in sections (c) & (d), and subject to the exceptions in Rule 3.103 and 3.106, a sending state seeking to transfer supervision of an offender to another state shall submit a completed transfer request with all required…
I. Authorization Article I of the ICAOS BYLAWS provides that, the Commission “is established to fulfill the objectives of the Compact” through “the promulgation of binding rules and operating procedures” governing “oversight and coordination of offender…
Transfers fall into one of two categories, (1) mandatory acceptance and (2) discretionary acceptance. The authority to place an offender outside the state rests exclusively with the sending state. See Rule 3.101. The offender has no constitutional right…
Courts and paroling authorities have wide latitude in imposing conditions. Generally, a condition imposed as a part of probation or parole must be reasonably related to the underlying offense, promote offender rehabilitation, not unreasonably impinge on…
(a) An offender subject to retaking that may result in a revocation shall be afforded the opportunity for a probable cause hearing before a neutral and detached hearing officer in or reasonably near the place where the alleged violation occurred. (b) No…
Principal among the provisions of the ICAOS are the waiver of formal extradition requirements for returning offenders who violate the terms and condition of their supervision. The ICAOS specifically provides that: The Compacting states recognize that…
Whether Rule 5.108 permits the use of 2-way closed circuit video for conducting probable cause
Whether an offender who has been arrested and released on bail for pending charges in the receiving state may be apprehended and detained for retaking by the sending state pending resolution of the new criminal charge
Whether a receiving state can reject a transfer if there are warrants or pending charges in the receiving state
How states should manage absconders apprehended in the receiving state
Whether offenders who are not eligible to transfer under Rule 3.101 or 2.105 are permitted to a discretionary transfer
Whether an offender is subject to retaking under the compact if a receiving state closes interest in a case pursuant to rule 4.112
Whether the offender being in the receiving state prior to investigation is a valid reason for rejection
Clarification regarding sex offenders living in the receiving state at the time of sentencing and imposing/enforcing special conditions
Whether a receiving state can make a determination of substantial compliance if an offender commits a crime in the receiving state during the period of investigation or has an outstanding warrant
Adopting an emergency rule for Massachusetts who had not enacted the Compact
Whether receiving states can denying reporting instructions based on an invalid plan of supervision
Whether an undocumented immigrant is subject to the Compact
Whether offenders sentenced to home detention programs are eligible for transfer under the Compact
Effect of New Jersey statute on acquitted persons by reason of insanity
Interpretation of physical harm and whether states can consider other criteria such as plea bargains in determining eligibility
At the request of the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision’s (“ICAOS”) Executive Committee, and following a roundtable discussion with various ICAOS stakeholders, the following legal analysis has been prepared to serve as a resource…
Displaying 31 - 60 of 64