The intent of the ICAOS is not to dictate judicial sentencing or place restrictions on the court’s discretion relative to sentencing. See Scott v. Virginia, 676 S.E.2d 343, 347 (Va. App. 2009). The ICAOS contains no provisions directing judges on sentencing in particular cases; and, it does not alter individual state sentencing laws, although the ICAOS may alter how those laws affect transfer decisions under the Compact. See, e.g., ICAOS Advisory Opinion 6-2005 (deferred sentencing) & Advisory Opinion 7-2006 (second offense DUI). The ICAOS only comes into play when a supervised individual seeks to transfer their supervision to another state.  

If part of complying with a judge’s sentence would require or permit travel or relocation to another state, the rules of the ICAOS may apply. When applicable, those rules would be binding on state officials in both the sending and receiving states. 

Similar to its application relative to the courts, the ICAOS does not govern the underlying decisions of a parole board, except when those decisions involve travel or relocation to another state. If the parole board authorizes such travel or relocation, the ICAOS rules apply and guide the actions of officials in both states. However, the ICAOS does not regulate the transfer of incarcerated individuals to serve their confinement in another state; such transfers may be governed by the Interstate Corrections Compact.