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 31 - 60 of 348
Rule 5.110 - Retaking offenders from local, state or federal correctional facilities
(a) Officers authorized by the law of a sending state may take custody of an offender from a local, state or federal correctional facility at the expiration of the sentence or the offender’s release from that facility provided that– No detainer has been…
Rule 5.111 - Denial of bail or other release conditions to certain offenders
An offender against whom retaking procedures have been instituted by a sending or receiving state shall not be admitted to bail or other release conditions in any state. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004; amended October 4, 2006…
Rule 6.101 - Informal communication to resolve disputes or controversies and obtain interpretation of the rules
(a) Through the office of a state’s compact administrator, states shall attempt to resolve disputes or controversies by communicating with each other by telephone, telefax, or electronic mail. (b) Failure to resolve dispute or controversy— Following an…
Rule 6.102 - Formal resolution of disputes and controversies
(a) Alternative dispute resolution—Any controversy or dispute between or among parties that arises from or relates to this compact that is not resolved under Rule 6.101 may be resolved by alternative dispute resolution processes. These shall consist of…
Rule 6.103 - Enforcement actions against a defaulting state
(a) If the Interstate Commission determines that any state has at any time defaulted (“defaulting state”) in the performance of any of its obligations or responsibilities under this Compact, the by–laws or any duly promulgated rules the Interstate…
Rule 6.104 - Judicial Enforcement
The Interstate Commission may, by majority vote of the members, initiate legal action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or, at the discretion of the Interstate Commission, in the federal district where the Interstate…
Chapter 2: General Provisions
Rules governing the general provisions of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Chapter 3: Transfer of Supervision
Rules governing transfer of supervision under the compact of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Chapter 4: Supervision in Receiving State
Rules governing supervision in the receiving state under the compact of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Chapter 5: Retaking
Rules governing retaking an offender under the compact of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Chapter 6: Dispute Resolution and Interpretation of Rules
Rules governing dispute resolution and interpretation of rules under the compact of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
White Paper - State Liability: Why Your State Can Be Sanctioned Upon Violation of the Compact or the ICAOS Rules
Published September 2, 2011 At the request of the ICAOS Executive Committee resulting from several recent cases in which courts and other agencies have apparently lacked awareness or ignored the requirements of ICAOS and its rules in particular cases, the…
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…
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…
On-Demand - ICAOS 100 Introduction to the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
This on-demand training module provides a brief introduction to the Interstate Commission, its functions and resources available. This module is approximately 10 minutes.
Bench Book - 1.4.2 Withdrawal and Modification of Congressional Consent
Once Congress grants its consent to a Compact, the general view is that it may not be withdrawn. Although the matter has not been resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court, two federal circuit courts of appeal have held that congressional consent, once given, is…
Bench Book - 1.4.3 Implications of Congressional Consent
Congressional consent can significantly change the nature of an interstate Compact. “[W]here Congress has authorized the States to enter into a cooperative agreement, and where the subject matter of that agreement is an appropriate subject for…
Bench Book - 1.5 Interpretation of Interstate Compacts
Because Compacts are statutes and contracts, courts interpret interstate Compacts in the same manner as interpreting ordinary statutes and by applying contract law principles. PRACTICE NOTE: No court has explained when to apply statutory construction…
Bench Book - 1.6 Application of State Law that Conflicts with an Interstate Compact
Where state law and a Compact conflict, courts are required under the Supremacy Clause (for Compacts with consent) and as a matter of contract law to apply the terms and conditions of the Compact to a given case. The fact that a judge may not like the…
Bench Book - 1.7 Special Considerations for Litigation Involving Interstate Commissions
Special Considerations for Litigation Involving Interstate Commissions
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 - 1.7.2 Eleventh Amendment Issues for Interstate Commissions
The Eleventh Amendment guarantees state sovereign immunity from suit in federal court. The Eleventh Amendment ensures that states retain certain attributes of sovereignty, including sovereign immunity. Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 13 (1890). Over the…
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. &…
Bench Book - 1.9 Recommended Sources of Compact Law and Information
For additional information on interstate Compact law and interstate Compacts generally, see MICHAEL L. BUENGER, JEFFREY B. LITWAK, MICHAEL H. MCCABE & RICHARD L. MASTERS,, THE EVOLVING LAW AND USE OF INTERSTATE COMPACTS 2d ed. (ABA Publ’g 2016) and…
Chapter 2 - Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision (ICAOS)
Bench Book - 2.1 History of the Interstate Compact for Probation and Parole (ICPP)
In 1934, Congress authorized the creation of interstate Compacts on crime control, which led to the 1937 Interstate Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers. Also referred to as the Interstate Compact for Probation and Parole or the…
Bench Book - 2.2 Why the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision?
The intent of the ICAOS is not to dictate judicial sentencing or place restrictions on the court’s discretion relative to sentencing. See Scott v. Virginia, 676 S.E.2d 343, 347 (Va. App. 2009). The ICAOS contains no provisions directing judges on…
Bench Book - 2.3 General Principles Affecting Interstate Movement of Offenders
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…
Bench Book - 2.4 Historical Development of the ICAOS
The ICAOS was written to address problems and complaints with the ICPP. Chief among the problems and complaints were: Lack of state compliance with the terms and conditions of the ICPP; Enforceability of its rules given there was no enforcement mechanism…
Bench Book - 2.5 Purpose of the ICAOS
Against this backdrop, concerned parties proposed a new Compact to the states. Defined in Article I, the purpose of the Compact provided: [T]he framework for the promotion of public safety and protect the rights of victims through the control and…
Displaying 31 - 60 of 348