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 1 - 30 of 52
 Determining eligibility under the Compact involves a multi-faceted analysis, starting with the broad definition of a "supervised individual." According to Rule 1.101, a "supervised individual" is an adult who is placed under supervision due to a criminal…
According to the Commission’s definition of “supervised individual,” the ICAOS can regulate a wide range of adults under supervision. An individual does not need to be on formal "probation" or "parole" to be eligible for transfer and supervision under the…
Transfers are classified into two categories, (1) mandatory acceptance and (2) discretionary acceptance. The authority to transfer a supervised individual to another state lies solely with the sending state. See Rule 3.101. The supervised individual does…
Rule 3.101-1 addresses three categories of military individuals: (1) military personnel, (2) family members living with military personnel; and (3) veterans for medical or mental health services. Military Personnel are eligible for reporting instructions…
 Other circumstances in which a receiving state is mandated to accept supervision include the employment transfer of a supervised individual or the employment transfer of a family member with whom the supervised individual resides. Rule 3.101-1(a)(3) and…
A supervised individual not subject to the ICAOS is not eligible to have their supervision transferred to another state, but neither are they restricted in their travel, except as otherwise ordered by the sentencing court. See Sanchez v. N.J. State Parole…
 In addition to traditional cases where an individual is formally adjudicated and placed on supervision, the ICAOS also applies in so-called “suspended sentencing,” “suspended adjudication,” and “deferred sentencing” contexts. Rule 2.106 provides that “…
 Some states may use a “sentencing” option referred to as deferred prosecution. Authorized by state statutes, this option allows the supervised individual to admit to or stipulate the facts of the criminal conduct but defers prosecution contingent upon…
Special attention should be given to individuals convicted of a second or subsequent offense for driving while impaired (DUI and DWI offenses). Because state laws vary significantly in defining what constitutes a second or subsequent conviction, the…
One area for potential confusion centers on the issue of treatment in lieu of supervision or treatment as supervision. In such cases, courts may be inclined to defer sentence and require enrollment in a community-based or in-house treatment program in…
Initiating the Transfer Process
The Commission's rules can significantly affect the time between the final disposition of a case and the supervised individual’s ability to move to another state. Even if the supervised individual is eligible for transfer under the Compact, the court…
 The Commission’s rules provide an “expedited” option, allowing a supervised individual to transfer supervision on a “pending acceptance” basis. To qualify for expedited reporting instructions, both the sending and receiving states must agree that an…
The Commission adopted Rule 3.103 to address situations where individuals, upon sentencing, live in the receiving state and need to relocate before acceptance and receiving reporting instructions. This rule permits a supervised individual who is residing…
A supervised individual who is otherwise eligible for transfer under Rule 3.101 may not be required to submit to psychological testing by the receiving state as a condition for accepting the transfer. Imposing such “pre-acceptance” requirements on…
While receiving states cannot impose pre-acceptance requirements on supervised individuals that would violate their obligations under the Compact, the Compact and its rules do not prohibit receiving states from imposing post-acceptance testing…
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…
Transferring an individual’s supervision through the Compact does not deprive the sending state of jurisdiction over the individual unless the record indicates that the sending state intended to relinquish jurisdiction. See, e.g., Scott v. Virginia, 676 S…
While a state may be required to accept supervision based on the supervised individual’s eligibility status, the receiving state may determine that certain conditions are necessary at the time of acceptance. The receiving state can only impose conditions…
As the ICAOS governs the movement of supervised individuals and not the terms and conditions of sentencing, the ICAOS rules are silent on the imposition of restitution. This is therefore a matter governed exclusively by the laws of the sending state and…
States are bound by the Commission’s rules under the terms of the Compact. The rules adopted by the Commission have the force and effect of statutory law and all courts and executive agencies shall take all necessary measures to enforce their application…
Whether offenders who seek to reside in federal housing are eligible for transfer under the Compact
Whether an undocumented immigrant is subject to the Compact
Whether the offender being in the receiving state prior to investigation is a valid reason for rejection
Whether a receiving state can exceed the 45 day rule to determine if a supervision plan is valid for sex offenders
Whether a state can permit an offender to proceed to another state for multiple periods of time, never exceeding 45 consecutive days in any single occurrence
Whether a receiving state can require relevant documents and return an offender that can no longer be safely supervised
Whether a sending state may request an investigation prior to the offender’s release from incarceration
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52