If the retaking of an offender is based on violations of the conditions of supervision that occur in another state, the hearing to which the offender is entitled may be substantially less. In general, if the violation occurs during a visit for example, the hearing will generally consist of the following elements:
When the demand for return of an offender is based on actions that occurred in another state, the scope of review receiving state officials must conduct is substantially narrowed. It is sufficient that officials conducting the probable cause hearing be satisfied on the face of documents presented that an independent decision maker in another state has made a preliminary determination that there is probable cause to believe the offender committed a violation of sufficient gravity as to result in revocation of community supervision in the receiving state. Such a determination is entitled to full faith and credit in the asylum state and can, therefore, form the basis of retaking by the sending state without additional hearings. The offender is entitled to notice. The hearing may be non-adversarial. The offender, while entitled to a hearing, need not be physically present given the limited scope of the proceeding. See, generally, In re Hayes, 468 N.E.2d 1083 (Mass. Ct. App. 1984).
Click terms below to reveal definitions used in this rule.
Retaking – means the act of a sending state in physically removing an offender, or causing to have an offender removed, from a receiving state.
