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 papers, advisory opinions, bylaws, policies, Hearing Officer's Guide, training modules, rules, helpdesk articles and the bench book. All results are cross-referenced with links to make navigation easy and intuitive.

Displaying 211 - 240 of 431

Advisory Opinions

Definitions

Keywords

Step by Step Rules

Topic Area

Whitepapers

Year Created

Year Effective

Year Updated

Fulltext search

# per page

Bench Book - 5.2.2.2 Tort Claims by Others

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…

Bench Book - 5.2.3 Claims under the Compact Itself

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…

Bench Book - 5.3 Immunity and Related Defenses

Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the government may not be sued without its consent. The concept flows from the common-law notion that the “the king can do no wrong” and that a lawsuit could not be brought against him in his own courts. Through…

Bench Book - 5.3.1 Eleventh Amendment Immunity

Under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, “[t]he Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State…

Bench Book - 5.3.1.1 Official Capacity versus Individual Capacity

Eleventh Amendment immunity also extends to state government officers and employees to the extent that they are sued in their official capacity, but not to suits against them in their individual capacity. The distinction between official-capacity and…

Bench Book - 5.3.1.2 No Protection for Local Governments

Eleventh Amendment immunity does not extend to the political subdivisions of a state (its municipalities and counties) or to the officers and employees of those subdivisions. Mt. Healthy Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977). Those…

Bench Book - 5.3.1.3 Waiver of Eleventh Amendment Immunity

There are several ways a state might waive its Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court. First, immunity can be waived by express state law. It can also be waived by voluntary participation in a federal program that expressly conditions…

Bench Book - 5.3.2 State Sovereign Immunity

State sovereign immunity is, as noted above, the doctrine that prevents a state from being sued in its own courts without its consent. It will generally be a matter of state law, and of course not every state is the same. Many states have narrowed or…

Bench Book - 5.3.3 Immunity in Another State's Courts

Neither the Eleventh Amendment nor other formulations of sovereign immunity bar a suit against a state in the courts of another state. Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979). In Mianecki v. Second Judicial Court of Washoe County, 658 P.2d 422 (Nev. 1983),…

Bench Book - 5.3.4 Judicial Immunity

Judges have absolute immunity from liability as long as they are performing a judicial act and there is not a clear absence of all jurisdiction. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978). A judge is not deprived of absolute immunity from liability for…

Bench Book - 5.3.5 Prosecutorial Immunity

Like judges, prosecutors have absolute immunity from lawsuits seeking money damages. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1986). That immunity allows prosecutors to exercise the independence of judgment essential to their work—and to avoid the deluge of…

Bench Book - 5.3.6 Qualified Immunity

Government officials sued in their individual capacity have what is known as qualified immunity from suits for damages to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person…

Bench Book - 5.3.7 The Public Duty Doctrine

Some states recognize the so-called public duty doctrine—the idea that a government official has no legal duty to protect an individual citizen from harm caused by a third person. The rule recognizes the limited resources of law enforcement and a refusal…

Bench Book - 5.3.8 Personal Jurisdiction

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…

Advisory Opinion 1-2015

Whether a transferred offender who commits a violation may be subjected to confinement for short periods in lieu of revocation

Advisory Opinion 2-2015

Whether an offender granted a conditional pardon and moved to a secure treatment facility is eligible for transfer under the Compact

Advisory Opinion 3-2015

Whether offenders sentenced to home detention programs are eligible for transfer under the Compact

Advisory Opinion 1-2014

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

Advisory Opinion 7-2004

Whether a receiving state can reject a transfer if there are warrants or pending charges in the receiving state

Advisory Opinion MA-2004

Adopting an emergency rule for Massachusetts who had not enacted the Compact

Advisory Opinion 4-2004

Whether an offender subject to a deferred sentence is eligible for transfer under the Compact

Advisory Opinion 1-2019

How states should manage absconders apprehended in the receiving state

2004 Advisory Opinions

ICAOS Advisory Opinions published in 2004

2005 Advisory Opinions

ICAOS Advisory Opinions published in 2005