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 562
Offenders in Federal Housing
Plaintiffs can bring Section 1983 actions against defendants in their official capacity or in their individual capacity. Defendants sued in their official capacity will generally be immune from suits for money damages under the Eleventh Amendment to the…
There is rarely any doubt in the case law that probation and parole officials are “persons” and that, in performing their duties, they are acting under “color of law” within the meaning of Section 1983. The law also allows suits against municipalities and…
In addition to civil rights lawsuits, offenders (and others) sometimes file tort claims related to conduct arising under the Compact. In many cases some form of immunity will apply, and questions related to immunity will generally turn on the state law of…
Offenders will sometimes allege that officers were negligent in carrying out their duties under the Compact. For example, in Grayson v. Kansas, No. 06-2375-KHV, 2007 WL 1259990, at *1 (D. Kan. Apr. 30, 2007), a probationer transferred under the Compact…
An unfortunate fact pattern that arises from time to time is when a Compact offender causes the injury or death of a victim. Victims of those incidents (or their family members or estate) will sometimes raise tort claims against correctional or judicial…
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…
ICAOS Advisory Opinions published in 2014
ICAOS Advisory Opinions published in 2015
ICAOS Advisory Opinions published in 2019
The Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision is charged with overseeing the day-to-day operations of the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision, a formal agreement between member states that seeks to promote public safety by…
(a) Acceptance, rejection or termination of supervision of an offender under this compact shall be made only with the involvement and concurrence of a state’s compact administrator or the compact administrator’s designated deputies. (b) All formal written…
(a) As required by the compact, and as specified by the operational procedures and forms approved by the commission, the states shall gather, maintain and report data regarding the transfer and supervision of offenders supervised under this compact. (b)…
(a) The commission shall determine the formula to be used in calculating the annual assessments to be paid by states. Public notice of any proposed revision to the approved dues formula shall be given at least 30 calendar days prior to the Commission…
(a) States shall use the forms or electronic information system authorized by the commission. (b) Section (a) shall not be construed to prohibit written, electronic or oral communication between compact offices. History: Adopted November 3, 2003,…
(a) A misdemeanor offender whose sentence includes 1 year or more of supervision shall be eligible for transfer, provided that all other criteria for transfer, as specified in Rule 3.101, have been satisfied; and the instant offense includes one or more…
Offenders subject to deferred sentences are eligible for transfer of supervision under the same eligibility requirements, terms, and conditions applicable to all other offenders under this compact. Persons subject to supervision pursuant to a pre-trial…
A person who is released from incarceration under furlough, work-release, or other preparole program is not eligible for transfer under the compact. History: Adopted November 3, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
A receiving state shall continue to supervise offenders who become mentally ill or exhibit signs of mental illness or who develop a physical disability while supervised in the receiving state.  History: Adopted November 3, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
Proposed new rules or amendments to the rules shall be adopted by majority vote of the members of the Interstate Commission in the following manner. (a) Proposed new rules and amendments to existing rules shall be submitted to the Interstate Commission…
As previously discussed, Rule 5.102 requires the sending state to retake an offender for a new felony or violent crime conviction after the offender’s release from incarceration for the new crime. This may result in a considerable amount of time between…
Upon receipt of a violation report for an absconding offender, a sending state must issue a national arrest warrant on notification that the offender has absconded. If the absconding offender is apprehended in the receiving state, the sending state shall…
Post-Transfer Hearing Requirements
Offenders, including those subject to supervision under the ICAOS, have limited rights. Conditional release is a privilege not guaranteed by the Constitution; it is an act of grace, a matter of pure discretion on the part of sentencing or corrections…
Under the rules of the Commission, a state is not specifically obligated to provide counsel in circumstances of revocation or retaking. However, particularly with regard to revocation proceedings, a state should provide counsel to an indigent offender if…
The ICAOS recognizes that the transfer of supervision (and hence the relocation of an offender) is a matter of privilege subject to the absolute discretion of the sending state and, to a more limited extent, the discretion of the receiving state. Courts…
An offender convicted of a new conviction in the receiving state forming the basis for retaking is not entitled to further hearings, the conviction being conclusive as to the status of the offender’s violations of supervision and the right of the sending…
Where the retaking of an offender may result in revocation of conditional release by the sending state, the offender is entitled to the basic due process considerations that are the foundation of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Morrissey and Gagnon, and…
If the offender is entitled to a probable cause hearing, Rule 5.108(d) defines the offender’s basic rights. However, each state may have procedural variations. Therefore, to the extent that a hearing officer is unclear on the application of due process…
Rule 5.108(e) requires the receiving state to prepare a written report of the hearing within 10 business days and to transmit the report along with any evidence or record from the hearing to the sending state. The report must contain (1) the time, date…
Displaying 31 - 60 of 562