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 1 - 30 of 98
Advisory Opinion 11-2006
Whether an offender is subject to retaking under the compact if a receiving state closes interest in a case pursuant to rule 4.112
Advisory Opinion 2-2010
Whether a sending state can close interest in a case if the offender's status no longer qualifies under the definition of supervision
Rule 4.102 - Duration of Supervision in the Receiving State
A receiving state shall supervise individuals transferred under the interstate compact for a length of time determined by the sending state. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004, amended September 11, 2024, effective November 1,…
Rule 4.112 - Closing of Supervision by the Receiving State
(a) The receiving state may close and cease supervision upon– The date of discharge indicated for the supervised individual at the time of application for supervision unless informed of an earlier or later date by the sending state; Notification to the…
Bench Book - 3.4.1 Duration of Supervision
When interpreting the ICAOS and its rules, eligibility for transferring supervision hinges on the nature of the offense, the sentence imposed, and the status of the supervised individual, rather than the duration of supervision remaining under Rule 3.101…
Advisory Opinion 1-2019
How states should manage absconders apprehended in the receiving state
Advisory Opinion 9-2006
Whether the offender being in the receiving state prior to investigation is a valid reason for rejection
Advisory Opinion 7-2004
Whether a receiving state can reject a transfer if there are warrants or pending charges in the receiving state
Bench Book - 3.4.2.2 Continuing Jurisdiction over Supervised Individuals Between the Sending & Receiving States
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…
Advisory Opinion 8-2005
Whether a receiving state can make a determination of substantial compliance if an offender commits a crime in the receiving state during the period of investigation or has an outstanding warrant
Advisory Opinion 4-2010
The effect of a Washington statute that prohibits certain offenders from being under supervision
Bench Book - 5.2.2.2 Tort Claims by Others
An unfortunate fact pattern that arises from time to time is when a Compact supervised individual 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…
Bench Book - 5.2.2 State Tort Claims
In addition to civil rights lawsuits, supervised individuals (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…
Bench Book - 5.2.1.4 No Substitute for Appeal or Habeas Corpus
In Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), the Supreme Court clarified that a Section 1983 action should not be used to challenge the validity of a criminal judgment. If the alleged civil rights violation would be one that would render a conviction,…
Bench Book - 1.7.1 Relief Must Be Consistent with the Compact
In Texas v. New Mexico, the Supreme Court sustained exceptions to a Special Master’s recommendation to enlarge the Pecos River Compact Commission, holding that one consequence of a Compact becoming “a law of the United States” is that “no court may order…
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…
Chapter 1 - General Law of Interstate Compacts
Overview The legal framework governing Compacts encompasses a blend of Compact texts and case law from federal and state courts nationwide. Due to the limited number of court decisions that establish specific legal principles for any given Compact, courts…
Rule 5.103-1 - Mandatory Retaking for Supervised Individuals Who Abscond
(a) Within 15 business days of receipt of an absconder violation report and case closure, the sending state shall issue a warrant and, upon apprehension, file a detainer with the holding facility where the supervised individual is in custody. (b) If a …
Bench Book - 3.2.1.6.2 Deferred Prosecution
 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…
Hearing Officer's Guide - V. Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a standard waiver for a probable cause hearing? No. States should follow the elements of a waiver that inform the supervised individual of the consequences of a waiver in writing to prevent any question as to the voluntary nature of the admission…
Bench Book - 1.1 Who Must Comply with an Interstate Compact?
Interstate Compacts are binding on signatory states, meaning once a state legislature adopts a Compact, it binds all agencies, state officials and citizens to the terms of that Compact. Since the very first Compact case, the U.S. Supreme Court has…
On-Demand - ICAOS 204 Probable Cause Hearings-Rule 5.108
When possibly subject to revocation in the sending state for violations (excluding new convictions) committed in the receiving state, compact offenders are ENTITLED to a probable cause hearing near where the alleged violations occurred prior to retaking.…
Bench Book - 3.2.2.1 Out-of-state Treatment
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…
Bench Book - 1.8 Party State, Interstate Commission, and Third-Party Enforcement Compacts
Some Compacts authorize the interstate commission to seek judicial action to enforce the Compact against a party state.  Article XII.C of the ICAOS is a good example. See Interstate Comm’n for Adult Offender Supervision v. Tennessee Bd. of Prob. &…
White Paper - Legal Implications of the Interstate Compact Offender Tracking System (ICOTS)
Published December 19, 2018 At the request of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision’s (ICAOS) Executive Committee, the following legal analysis has been prepared in order to serve as a resource documenting the legal implications of the…
Bench Book - 5.2.1.2 Constitutional Violations Related to ICAOS
While the Compact does not create a private right of action, this does not leave supervised individuals without recourse under Section 1983. Instead, their claims must be framed as violations of constitutionally protected rights. There are numerous…
White Paper - Discharge of Sentences in Lieu of Retaking is a Violation of the Compact and the ICAOS Rules
Published November 1, 2013 The ICAOS Executive Committee has requested this ‘white paper’ resulting from several recent cases in which courts, prosecuting attorneys, and probation and parole officers have apparently lacked awareness or ignored the…
Bench Book - 3.2.1.6.3 What Constitutes Second and Subsequent Conviction of Driving While Impaired?
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…
Rule 5.107 - Officers Retaking a Supervised Individual
(a) Officers authorized under the law of a sending state may enter a state where the supervised individual is found and apprehend and retake the individual, subject to this compact, its rules, and due process requirements. (b) The sending state shall be…
Guidelines for Resolving Compliance Issues 03-2008
I. Authority The Executive Committee is vested with the power to adopt a policy on behalf of the Interstate Commission during periods when the Interstate Commission is not in session. The Executive Committee oversees the day-to-day activities managed by…
Displaying 1 - 30 of 98