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 119
As previously noted, Article I of ICAOS authorizes officers from a sending state to enter a receiving state, or any state where a supervised individual has absconded, for the purpose of retaking. Except for limited exceptions, the decision to retake lies…
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 supervised…
Violent Crime – means any crime involving the unlawful exertion of physical force with the intent to cause injury or physical harm to a person; or an offense in which a person has incurred direct or threatened physical or psychological harm as defined by…
I. Authority The Executive Committee is vested with the power to act 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 the…
A key objective of the ICAOS is to facilitate the effective transfer of supervised individuals between states and to manage their return to the sending state through mechanisms other than formal extradition. Consequently, a supervised individual's status…
(a) A supervised individual subject to retaking that may result in a revocation shall be afforded the opportunity for a probable cause hearing before a neutral and detached hearing officer in or reasonably near the place where the alleged violation…
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…
As a general proposition, convicted persons enjoy no right to interstate travel or a constitutionally protected interest to supervision in another state. See Jones v. Helms, 452 U.S. 412, 418-20 (1981); Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 874 (1987); U.S…
If the hearing officer determines that probable cause exists and the supervised individual has committed the alleged violations, the receiving state may detain the individual in custody pending the outcome of decisions in the sending state. Within 15…
The courts have defined the relationship between the sending state and receiving state officials as an agency relationship. Courts recognize that in supervising out-of-state supervised individuals the receiving state acts on behalf of and as an agent of…
Effect of New Jersey statute on acquitted persons by reason of insanity
Individuals and sex offenders subject to lifetime supervision (CSL)
Interpretation of physical harm and whether states can consider other criteria such as plea bargains in determining eligibility
Whether offenders sentenced to home detention programs are eligible for transfer under the Compact
Whether an offender subject to a deferred sentence is eligible for transfer under the Compact
Whether Rule 5.108 permits the use of 2-way closed circuit video for conducting probable cause
The effect of a Washington statute that prohibits certain offenders from being under supervision
Whether offenders subject to Washington’s “deferred prosecution” statute are eligible for transfer under the Compact
Whether an offender granted a conditional pardon and moved to a secure treatment facility is eligible for transfer under the Compact
At the request of the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision’s (“ICAOS”) Executive Committee, and following a roundtable discussion with various ICAOS stakeholders, the following legal analysis has been prepared to serve as a resource…
Whether a receiving state can require relevant documents and return an offender that can no longer be safely supervised
How states should manage absconders apprehended in the receiving state
Whether a sending state may request an investigation prior to the offender’s release from incarceration
Authority to issue travel permits
Whether offenders who seek to reside in federal housing are eligible for transfer under the Compact
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
Imposing fees on offenders transferring through the Compact
Whether an offender whose supervision was never transferred and who subsequently absconds supervision is subject to retaking under the terms of the Compact
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, amended September 11, 2024, effective…
(a) Officers authorized by the law of a sending state may take custody of a supervised individual from a local, state or federal correctional facility at the expiration of the sentence or the individual's release from that facility provided that– No…
Displaying 31 - 60 of 119