Ensuring public safety for the 21st century

2021 Rule Amendments & ICOTS Enhancements

On September 29, 2021, the Commission approved several Rule Amendments and ICOTS Enhancements to be implemented on April 1, 2022.  Details can be accessed on the ABM archive page.

Commissioners, Deputy Compact Administrators and Compact Staff are invited to join a training session to recap the justifications and impacts of each of the amendments and enhancements to prepare states for training stakeholders in their state. Follow-up training will also be scheduled in the Spring of 2022 prior to implementation to cover the new ICOTS processes on the new Warrant Tracking Process.

Have a question you would like addressed regarding the amendments or enhancements? Submissions can be made to mspring@interstatecompact.org

Registration links:

Session #1 Nov 30th & Dec 2nd (registration closed)

Session #2 coming February or March 2022!

Resources:

Session #1 (Fall 2021) PowerPoint

Session #1 (Fall 2021) Recording

Session #2 (Spring 2022) PowerPoint (Coming Soon!)

Session #2 (Spring 2022) Recording (Coming Soon!)

Q & A:

Q:  My state has compliance concerns of meeting a 15-business day timeframe.  Is assistance available?

A:  As every state functions differently, states face different challenges issuing compact compliant warrants.  The new 'Warrant Status' ICOTS Enhancement will assist through data reporting to identify areas of compliance concern nationally, state-to-state and locally within each state.  States with compliance concerns are encouraged to proactively reach out for assistance sooner than later. Note too, the approve rules actually EXPAND timeframes in most instances a warrant is required.  The Commission’s Technical Training Assistance Policy is available to all member states and provides solutions based on your state’s specific technical or training needs.

 

Q:  My state has no control over court's timeline to issue warrants or DA offices to process them.  How are we expected to be in compliance?

A:  Any and all compliance concerns with ICAOS Rules should be elevated to your state's appointed Commissioner.  Commissioners are vested with the authority to “take all actions necessary and appropriate to effectuate the Compact’s purposes and intent.” See, Compact Statute, Article IX, Section A.  Timeframes for issuing compact compliant warrants are not a new requirement and as noted above have mostly been expanded in these approved rule amendments.  As with any compliance concern, states should engage its stakeholders, utilize its State Council resources as well as reach out to the national office for Commission support to ensure Compact duties are fulfilled.  

 

Q:  Fifteen business days (3 weeks) is too long and our in-state policies require warrants to be issued within 5 business days.  Why 15 business days?

A:   Through various committee/region discussions over the years and based of the 2019 Warrant Audit responses, 15 business days is a balance between public safety and a state’s ability to issue warrants. While recognizing some states may face challenges, it is important to establish a standard that can be measured.  States can certainly establish their own policies and procedures for shorter timeframes internally to ensure activities are completed within the ICAOS rules.

 

Q:  Will warrant status information be expected to be entered for absconders since the cases are closed in ICOTS?  And when the warrant is served and the offender is apprehended within the receiving state (moving the warrant status to historical,) should these cases be re-opened in ICOTS?

A:  The new warrant status is entered on the offender profile, not specific compact cases.  So like other special statuses in ICOTS (e.g. sex offender, history of violence, victim sensitive) the status can be managed/entered anytime regardless whether there is an active case on the profile. 

As stated in AO 1-2019,  once an offender is apprehended within the jurisdiction of the receiving state after being reported an absconder, Rule 5.103-1 applies and the case should be re-opened and remain open (see Rule 4.112 (b)) until either retaking occurs (documenting PC and retaking logistics) and of course if supervision is to be resumed (retaking will not occur.)  In either circumstance, the receiving state would remain responsible for supervision while the offender is in the receiving state.  

 

Q:  For warrants required for violation reports requiring retaking (including absconders,) is the warrant due to be issued within 15 business days of receipt of the violation report or violation report response?   What about cases in which the sending state would like probable cause established for behavior requiring retaking?

A:   As stated in each rule, warrants are to be issued within 15 business days of receipt of the violation report.  The only exception to this is if behavior requiring retaking is reported and the sending state requests probable cause in its initial response.  In those instances, the warrant would be required to be issued after probable cause is established for the revocable behavior and the decision to retake is made by the sending state.  

 

Q:  When the new Warrant Status enhancement is implemented, are states expected to enter historical warrant data?  If so, how far back are they expected to enter warrant records from?

A:  States currently tracking warrant data on active cases are encouraged to enter warrant data into ICOTS on records where warrants were issued prior to the enhancement if they have the data to complete such records and have confirmed the warrant is still active. Otherwise, warrant data will be expected to be entered in ICOTS in cases where warrants are required based on activities occurring on or after April 1st, 2022.

 

 

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful

Comments

0 comments

Please sign in to leave a comment.