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 151 - 180 of 204
A receiving state shall require that an offender transferred under the interstate compact comply with any offender registration and DNA testing requirements in accordance with the laws or policies of the receiving state and shall assist the sending state…
An offender in violation of the conditions of supervision may be taken into custody or continued in custody by the receiving state. History: Adopted October 4, 2006, effective January 1, 2007; amended September 14, 2016, effective June 1, 2017.  
The sending state shall give the same force and effect to conditions imposed by a receiving state as if those conditions had been imposed by the sending state. History: Adopted October 26, 2004, effective January 1, 2005; amended October 4, 2006,…
A receiving state shall continue to supervise offenders who become mentally ill or exhibit signs of mental illness or who develop a physical disability while supervised in the receiving state.  History: Adopted November 3, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
A receiving state is obligated to continue to supervise offenders “who become mentally ill or exhibit signs of mental illness or who develop a physical disability while supervised in the receiving state.” See Rule 2.108. Therefore, it would be…
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…
A sending state shall be responsible for the cost of retaking the offender. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
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…
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…
(a) Acceptance, rejection or termination of supervision of an offender under this compact shall be made only with the involvement and concurrence of a state’s compact administrator or the compact administrator’s designated deputies. (b) All formal written…
A receiving state shall supervise an offender transferred under the interstate compact for a length of time determined by the sending state. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
(a) If there is reasonable suspicion that an offender has absconded, the receiving state shall attempt to locate the offender. Such activities shall include, but are not limited to: Documenting communication attempts directly to the offender, including…
A receiving state shall be responsible for the cost of detaining the offender in the receiving state pending the offender’s retaking by the sending state. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
(a) Except as provided in sections (c) & (d), and subject to the exceptions in Rule 3.103 and 3.106, a sending state seeking to transfer supervision of an offender to another state shall submit a completed transfer request with all required…
A sending state shall retake an offender within 30 calendar days after the offender has been taken into custody on the sending state’s warrant and the offender is being held solely on the sending state’s warrant. History: Adopted November 4, 2003,…
States that are party to this compact shall allow officers authorized by the law of the sending or receiving state to transport offenders through the state without interference. History: Adopted November 4, 2003, effective August 1, 2004.
Courts have generally upheld sex offender registration requirements for offenders whose supervision transfers under an interstate Compact so long as such registration requirements are not discriminatory. Thus, a receiving state may impose sex offender…
Offenders subject to deferred sentences are eligible for transfer of supervision under the same eligibility requirements, terms, and conditions applicable to all other offenders under this compact. Persons subject to supervision pursuant to a pre-trial…
A receiving state shall supervise offenders consistent with the supervision of other similar offenders sentenced in the receiving state, including the use of incentives, corrective actions, graduated responses, and other supervision techniques.…
(a) Application fee—A sending state may impose a fee for each transfer application prepared for an offender. (b) Supervision fee— A receiving state may impose a reasonable supervision fee on an offender whom the state accepts for supervision, which shall…
(a) A sending state is responsible for collecting all fines, family support, restitution, court costs, or other financial obligations imposed by the sending state on the offender. (b) Upon notice by the sending state that the offender is not complying…
(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…
(a) Notification to victims upon transfer of offenders—Within 1 business day of the issuance of reporting instructions or acceptance of transfer by the receiving state, the sending state shall initiate notification procedures to victims of the transfer of…
(a) Eligibility for Transfer—At the discretion of the sending state a sex offender shall be eligible for transfer to a receiving state under the Compact rules. A sex offender shall not be allowed to leave the sending state until the sending state’s…
Transferring an offender’s supervision pursuant to the Compact does not deprive the sending state of jurisdiction over the offender, unless it is clear from the record that the sending state intended to relinquish jurisdiction. See, e.g., Scott v.…
(a) A sending state may request transfer of supervision of an offender who does not meet the eligibility requirements in Rule 3.101, where acceptance in the receiving state would support successful completion of supervision, rehabilitation of the offender…
(a) An offender applying for interstate supervision shall execute, at the time of application for transfer, a waiver of extradition from any state to which the offender may abscond while under supervision in the receiving state. (b) States that are party…
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…
(a) At the time of acceptance or during the term of supervision, the receiving state may impose a condition on an offender if that condition would have been imposed on an offender sentenced in the receiving state. (b) A receiving state shall notify a…
(a) A sending state may submit a completed request for transfer of supervision no earlier than 120 calendar days prior to an offender’s planned release from a correctional facility. (b) If a pre-release transfer request has been submitted, a sending state…
Displaying 151 - 180 of 204