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 61 - 90 of 151
Like judges, prosecutors have absolute immunity from lawsuits seeking money damages. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1986). That immunity allows prosecutors to exercise the independence of judgment essential to their work—and to avoid the deluge of…
One of the primary vehicles through which officials might be sued for their work related to the Compact is 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Section 1983), a federal statute that creates a cause of action for violations of a person’s civil rights. The statute gives a…
Plaintiffs can bring Section 1983 actions against defendants in their official capacity or in their individual capacity. Defendants sued in their official capacity will generally be immune from suits for money damages under the Eleventh Amendment to the…
In general, Section 1983 liability will not be predicated solely on a theory of respondeat superior. For example, a chief probation officer or other supervisor or manager will not automatically be deemed vicariously liable simply because he or she sits…
An offender who absconds from a receiving state is a fugitive from justice. The procedures for returning a fugitive to a demanding state can be affected by the Uniform Extradition and Rendition Act (UERA). Under that act, a fugitive may waive all…
Whether a state can permit an offender to proceed to another state for multiple periods of time, never exceeding 45 consecutive days in any single occurrence
ICAOS Rules 4.111 and 5.103 also require sending states to issue nationwide arrest warrants for absconders who fail to return to the sending state in no less than fifteen (15) business days. Warrant requirements apply to offenders who fail to return to…
Although receiving states may not impose pre-acceptance requirements on offenders that would violate a state’s obligations under the Compact, the Compact and its rules would not prevent the receiving state from imposing post-acceptance testing…
(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) No state shall permit an offender who is eligible for transfer under this compact to relocate to another state except as provided by the Compact and these rules.  (b) An offender who is not eligible for transfer under this Compact is not subject to…
The following key terms and their definitions supplement terms defined by the Compact. They should be of special interests to judicial authorities: Abscond means to be absent from the offender’s approved place of residence and employment; and failing to…
Courts and paroling authorities have wide latitude in imposing conditions. Generally, a condition imposed as a part of probation or parole must be reasonably related to the underlying offense, promote offender rehabilitation, not unreasonably impinge on…
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) 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…
Principal among the provisions of the ICAOS are the waiver of formal extradition requirements for returning offenders who violate the terms and condition of their supervision. The ICAOS specifically provides that: The Compacting states recognize that…
Through its rules, the Commission allows an “expedited” option, which effectively allows the offender to transfer supervision on a “pending acceptance” basis. To qualify for expedited reporting instructions, the sending and receiving state must agree that…
The Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision is charged with overseeing the day-to-day operations of the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision, a formal agreement between member states that seeks to promote public safety by…
In Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), the Supreme Court clarified that a Section 1983 action should not be used to challenge the validity of a criminal judgment. If the alleged civil rights violation would be one that would render a conviction,…
Judges have absolute immunity from liability as long as they are performing a judicial act and there is not a clear absence of all jurisdiction. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978). A judge is not deprived of absolute immunity from liability for…
Under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, “[t]he Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State…
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…
Notwithstanding the authority of the sending and receiving state to impose conditions on an offender, several courts assert that certain conditions – such as banishment from a geographical area – are not appropriate because they interfere with the purpose…
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…
(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…
The Compact necessarily involves offenders moving across state lines. Therefore, considerations of different courts’ personal jurisdiction over the parties to a suit might come into play. Unfortunately, different courts have reached different results when…
Rule 4.107 authorizes the collection of fees from offenders subject to the Compact. Pursuant to Rule 4.107(a), the sending state may impose a transfer application fee on an offender and according to Rule 4.107(b), the receiving state may impose a…
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…
Compacts differ from administrative agreements in two principal ways. First, states, as sovereigns, have inherent authority to enact Compacts. See Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 37 U.S. (12 Pet.) 657, 725 (1838). Thus, states do not need any express…
(a) A misdemeanor offender whose sentence includes 1 year or more of supervision shall be eligible for transfer, provided that all other criteria for transfer, as specified in Rule 3.101, have been satisfied; and the instant offense includes one or more…
I. Overview For this policy, the definition of a survey is the gathering of information through questionnaires, interviews, etc., to make inferences about a sample, population, or process. The ICAOS national office serves as the Commission’s survey…
Displaying 61 - 90 of 151