The ICAOS applies to all individuals who meet the eligibility requirements and are subject to some form of community supervision or corrections. The term “supervised individual” is intentionally broad to accommodate changes in sentencing practices and manage supervised populations flexibly. As a result, whether a supervised individual is formally “sentenced” and subject to “probation” or “parole” is largely irrelevant. From the judiciary’s perspective the relevant inquiry in determining whether ICAOS is a factor centers on two considerations: (1) what did the court do, and (2) was the end consequence of the court’s action community supervision. In this way, the ICAOS applies in a broad range of cases and dispositions beyond traditional conviction followed by probation or parole.
The Commission does not regard provisions like “bench” probation as eligible for transfer under the ICAOS, as these are more akin to instructions such as “go and commit no further offenses.” The ICAOS envisions a more formal type of supervision, incorporating elements such as regular reporting and oversight. A sentence that merely instructs an individual to “commit no other offenses” without including supervision and reporting requirements does not establish a “supervision” relationship that triggers the ICAOS. However, if reporting requirements are imposed, even if only to the court, and all other eligibility criteria are met, the supervised individual may be subject to the ICAOS. This is particularly relevant when a court imposes probation that includes only treatment elements and reporting requirements, as such an individual may indeed fall under the ICAOS. See discussion, infra at 2.7.