Rule 5.108(a) applies the locational requirement in Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972), by requiring that the probable cause hearing be held, “in or reasonably near the place where the alleged violation occurred.” In most cases, this requires the hearing to be conducted in the receiving state. Rule 5.108(b) further assigns responsibility for conducting the hearing to the receiving state. See McGrew v. City of Portland, No. 3:23-cv-01082-HZ, 2024 WL 326597 (D. Or. Jan. 29, 2024) (concluding that the plaintiff had stated a claim for violation of due process when the receiving state did not conduct any due process hearing following arrest after the plaintiff failed to return to sending following a probation violation).
Under the former Interstate Compact for Probation and Parole (ICPP), which did not expressly allocate responsibility for conducting probable cause hearings, some courts held that due process could be satisfied by a hearing conducted in the sending state under limited circumstances. See, e.g., In re Hayes, 468 N.E.2d 1083 (Mass. App. Ct. 1984) (probable cause hearing in sending state sufficient where violation occurred there); California v. Crump, 433 A.2d 791 (N.J. Super. Ct. 1981) (permitting sending-state hearing where distance and circumstances justified). However, the ICAOS expressly addresses the location and responsibility for probable cause hearings.