Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake

Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake
4/21/2018 Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake New RuleTraining May 2017 Welcome and Introductions

Training Objectives Approved Amendments & Implementation Plans
4/21/2018 Training Objectives Approved Amendments & Implementation Plans New Offender Application Website & ICOTS generated Progress Report & Violation Report Requiring Retaking Resources PPTs, publications Updated Ondemand Review the amendments, including a look at the new processes using screenshots. Also for the first time, the language on the offender application has changed. With that, the website generated will have a new look to distinguish the web generated from the ICOTS generated form Close out to ensure everyone knows where to find training tools including PPTS, new ondemands and updated ondemand trainings.

Impact for Amendments Promotes single standard of supervision
Affirms the authority of a receiving state to impose conditions, supervise and sanction Requires documentation of supervision practices and justification for retaking Sustain violations in the sending state Supports EBP and behavioral change History: As you all know, the previous rule pertaining to significant violations was that it took 3 significant violations in order to invoke mandatory retaking by the sending state. That rule has been problematic for a very long time at both ends of the spectrum. In some cases, the receiving state felt that it had to keep supervising a case for the 1st or 2nd significant violation when they would have revoked an instate offender who had the same behavior. On the other hand, field staff all over the country, including MN, would submit violation reports on behavior that wasn’t really revocable in significant violations #1 and #2, so that they could get to #3. It became a counting game rather than focusing on the behavior. IC Rules require that receiving states supervise offenders as they would their own in state offenders. This rule amendment package emphasizes this throughout all of the language changes, promoting more of a single standard of supervision. It has always been the rule that states are to supervise IC offenders in the same manner as they would their own, but the new rule emphasizes the receiving states authority to do so, including rewards, incentives, programming and services, and also graduated or progressive sanctions before revocation is pursued. 3. This new rule requires the receiving state to document of the supervision of the offender while in the receiving state. It is meant to not only provide information about the violation but to give the sending state the whole story or the whole picture of the offender and this period of supervision. This will help sending states immensely proving their case in revocation proceedings. 4. Corrections across the country has moved to implementing evidence based practices and promoting offender change. Same is true with IC cases, we want to do what is in the best interest of the public and offender rehabilitation. This includes using alternative sanctions to promote positive offender change, rather than revoke and incarceration. The new rules emphasize working with IC offenders and offering them the same opportunities as you would an instate offender. Again, this includes rewards and incentives as well as progressive sanctions.

Amendment Overview Rule 1.101 Rule 3.108 Rule 4.101 Rule 4.103
ICOTS impact $133k New data elements-increase reporting capabilities for supervision techniques Offender Application for Interstate Compact Transfer Offender Violation Report Progress Report – redesign as a ‘managed process’ MN DOC Policy When voted upon, the rule changes were one package-one vote- The Behavior Requiring Retake Rule amendment and language changes affected all rules listed here. The rule amendments are posted on the ICAOS website as well as our MN website. Resources will all be available at the end of this powerpoint. These rule changes will not be presented in order but rather by topic Behavior requiring retaking Conditions Supervision responsibility Progress Report Violation Report-Retaking ICOTS changes The affected areas are a redesign to ICOTS to capture new data elements in the Progress Report and the Violation Report, that is what has delayed the effective date of these rules. It was a major project for our vendor to update the ICOTS system. MN Policy has been updated effective June 1 to reflect the new rule changes.

Highlights for Amendments
4/21/2018 Highlights for Amendments Effective Date: June 1, 2017 ICOTS changes implemented: May 31st, 2017 Redesigned ‘Managed’ Progress Report Renamed Violation Report Requiring Retaking ‘Behavior Requiring Retaking’ replaces ‘Significant Violation’ report type New Offender Application for Transfer ICOTS piece will be easy. Screens will require and prompt for more documentation, we will demonstrate that later in the training Progress reports currently don’t go through the full work flow and with the new rule change, they will go through the workflow in what we call a “managed process” so they will be reviewed by supervisors and/or compact office staff. Yearly progress reports will no longer be required and we will talk about that later in the training. The term significant violation has been removed from the rules and the new term is “behavior requiring retaking.” The violation report will only be completed when it is a retaking issue. All other behavior is documented on the progress report You probably have all seen the new Application form already that has been updated to emphasize the offender’s acknowledgment that they understand and agree to both the conditions of the sending, but also the receiving state.

Scenario Offender from IA transferred to MN-May 2015
4/21/2018 Scenario Offender from IA transferred to MN-May 2015 Crime: DUI 3rd (3years probation) September offender tests positive and referred for a substance abuse evaluation. Evaluation recommends intensive outpatient September 2015-offender enters intensive outpatient treatment, completes on October 31, 2015 April Offender misses three tests, two office appointments, tests positive for alcohol. Agent requests an updated evaluation. May updated evaluation recommends short term residential treatment, offender enters and completes June2016 November 2016—Offender relapses and admits to drinking all weekend, A and D issued (3 days) and further treatment recommended PR PR PR PR Lets walk through this scenario – September Client tests positive and referred for evaluation- What do you do with this information? (Correct Answer- complete Progress report) September 2015-enters intensive outpatient and complets on October 31, What do you do? (Correct Answer- complete progress report) Remember that a progress report is also to report positive behavior. Now see that there is a 6 month period with no behavior to report April misses 3 tests and 2 office appts., then tests positive for alcohol. The agent response is to seek an updated evaluation. What do you do? (Correct answer-Progress Report) May Results are back from eval and offender enters and completes short term residential What do you do? (Progress Report) Notice 5 months go by November Offender relapses, an A and D is issued. What do you do? (Progress Report) PR PR

4/21/2018 Scenario December 2016-offender continuing in treatment, misses two tests, alcohol use suspected, entry into halfway house facility with ongoing programming following March offender completes halfway house programming, enters transitional living facility, continuing outpatient treatment September Offender leaves living facility and is absent from the facility for three days. Referral for updated evaluation. October 2017—Offender misses 2 appointments and refuses to follow evaluation recommendations, reports he is done with treatment and being clean - PR PR PR December moves to HWH now, what do you do? (Progress report) March 2016-successfully completes HWH, what do you do? (Progress Report) September leaves facility- what do you do? (Progress Report) October Is this the last straw? If so, then what do you do? (Violation Report- Behavior Requiring Retaking) VR

4/21/2018 VR violation submitted--VR sent to IA with complete documentation that tells the story of non-compliance and case management interventions, services applied, therapeutic responses. How likely is this scenario we just went through? Where does the complete documentation come from on the Violation Report? (Correct answer- all of the progress reports tell the story- copy and paste to violation report) Do you think the sending state has a case for revocation based on the information provided?

Rule 4.101 Receiving state’s responsibility to supervise compact offenders consistent with local offenders INCLUDING programs, sanction/interventions Do EVERYTHING you would for instate offender EXCEPT extend supervision or revoke Treating the offender the same may not be as much of an issue as documenting and reporting to the other state. That is a change to how violations are currently reported. What do you currently put in the violation report to the court on an instate offender and a violation report in ICOTS? From a compact office viewpoint, we see that the rules that are violated are listed and the basic behavior that substantiates the rule violations, but not much in the way of description while under supervision. But, at a revocation hearing, what must you as an agent discuss? (overall adjustment under supervision, interventions attempted, etc.)

ICAOS Requirements Excerpt from Benchbook
4/21/2018 ICAOS Requirements Excerpt from Benchbook ‘Participation in the ICAOS ensures not only the controlled movement of offenders under community supervision, but also that out-of-state offenders will be given the same resources and supervision provided to similar in-state offenders including the use of incentives, corrective actions, graduated responses and other supervision techniques’ Excerpt from Benchbook 2.8-New slide. Thoughts? After a sending state grants permission to an offender meeting the mandatory acceptance criteria to relocate, the receiving state must assume supervision over the offender and treat the offender in the same manner as in-state offenders. This principle applies to both the quality and quantity of supervision as well as access to rehabilitative programs . We say can only impose conditions that would impose on own offenders, but it is also an obligation the receiving state to supervise the same

Compact Review Required
4/21/2018 Compact Review Required Nothing leaves without the compact approval Ensure documentation is adequate before it leaves our state. The compact office is required to review the workflow activities before forwarding on to the other state. I know we may seem picky at times, but we are trying to ensure that the other state does not return due to missing or inadequate information and delay the process further.

Offender Application/Waiver
Transfer is a privilege Manner of supervision determined by the receiving state Transfer of supervision to another state is not a “right”, it is a privilege. The sending state determines the length of sentence, but the receiving state determines how the offender will be supervised. How do we as a receiving state determine manner of supervision? (answer-consistent with how we supervise similar in state cases) Offender agrees to what is essentially dual supervision and to the conditions of both states on the application.

New Look for Website Generated Application
4/21/2018 New Look for Website Generated Application New Website Generated ICOTS Generated You can begin to use the new form as soon as possible from the website generated form. The ICOTS generated form will be available on June 1st when the enhancements are complete. Compact offices will accept either form for a period of time. There is no specific date that the old form will no longer be accepted, but I would recommend that we use the new form and eliminate the old form from anywhere that you might have saved it. We cannot “recreate” the form in any way in our systems. We must use the pdf when we cannot access ICOTS, or use the ICOTS version. Note: Both new and old applications are acceptable beginning May 1st. States will have a reasonable time to distribute the new website application for use

Rule 1.101 Definitions It’s not about ‘Special conditions’…..
No distinction between standard and special conditions any longer. MN will upload all conditions, even special conditions such as sex offender, interstate, etc. under conditions.

Progress Report Progress Reports sent for a purpose rather than fulfilling a due date! Ability to add new conditions imposed Documentation on compliant & non-compliant behavior that DOES NOT require retaking Report New Arrest & Violation of Conditions Listed here are all the reasons for completing a progress report. A yearly progress report is no longer a requirement of the national office. You can still request a progress report when needed. MN will still require a progress report yearly but only if no other activity has occurred for a year or longer. That will ensure that cases aren’t falling through the cracks. Please note that compliant behavior should be reported on as well. We want to know when the offender is doing well.

Progress Reports Sending States Receiving States Ask for them
4/21/2018 Progress Reports Sending States Receiving States Ask for them REVIEW them Respond when necessary via Compact Action Request Rules allow for discretionary retake Obligation to describe and document supervision practices Be clear in recommendations Report both compliance and non-compliance of conditions of supervision to the sending state Make sure you review the progress report coming in, you may want to re take even if not on a violation report or the recommendation of the receiving state. Respond as necessary via CAR Progress reports are now meant to open up the communication between the two states and be more of a joint supervision effort. Communication!!!

Managing Conditions View conditions imposed previously
4/21/2018 Managing Conditions View conditions imposed previously Add new conditions of supervision Can view conditions previously imposed This is where you would add new conditions of supervision

Reporting Status of Conditions
4/21/2018 Reporting Status of Conditions This is where you can report compliance/non-compliance on conditions of supervision and attach documentation. In this example the receiving state is sending the certificate of completion of treatment

Reporting an Arrest DEMO-Progress Report 4/21/2018
If you are reporting on both the status of conditions and a new arrest, you should submit 2 separate progress reports, it gets very difficult to manage within ICOTS and is easier to create 2.

Incentives/Sanctions
4/21/2018 Incentives/Sanctions This is where you will report incentives or sanctions. You can choose as many as you would like from the menu, or describe in free text in “other.”

4/21/2018 Recommendations This is where you recommend actions/non-action to be taken by the sending state: Consider early termination Remove conditions based on good behavior Review status with appropriate authorities for possible extension or additional recommendations Await outcome of new/pending charges Notification only, continue supervision Other

Discretionary Retaking
Sending State retains authority to retake or order the return of an offender at ANYTIME unless offender is charged with a new felony or violent crime in the receiving state. Offender charged with a new criminal offense cannot be retaken: until charges have been dismissed sentence has been satisfied offender released to supervision for new offense sending and receiving state mutually agree to retake/return Rule & Retaking requires a warrant and detainer. You also have the option to order the return of the offender unless the receiving state has asked for you to retake under one of the mandatory retaking reasons.

Rule Definitions ‘Behavior requiring retaking’ replaces ‘significant violation’ Report BEYOND what the offender did Receiving States must DOCUMENT all responses and outcome of responses Go over definition and ask questions. Requires additional information as we have been repeating over and over throughout the training.

Rule 4.109-Violation Report Requiring Retaking
Documentation Including incentives, corrective actions and graduated responses (supervision techniques) 30 days Discovery or determination Confirmed or established responses are exhausted-supported by documentation when applying the rule TOTAL PICTURE! What do you think determination means? Go back to the scenario we had up earlier, the violations started to occur more than a year before we decided to complete a violation report. So in that scenario, once we determined that we would pursue revocation that starts our 30 day clock. What if you receive a VR without any previous progress reports? -as long as all details are there, it can be valid and no reason to reject, however, it is much more highly desirable to have the sending state informed along the way -completing the progress reports along the way, the agent doesn’t have to go back and create all the events, can copy and paste. -you must inform the sending state of new conditions imposed. -sending state may have retaken offender based on their standards even if receiving state didn’t require it -can be one act, isn’t always a progression of behavior

Violation Report Requiring Retaking
Previous violation reports will still show up in ICOTS Will only change ‘significant violation’ section. Absconder and new conviction remain the same in the drop down Detail the act or pattern of behavior that has resulted in the request for revocation/retaking Detail how incentives or corrective actions failed to bring about offender change. Can attach a word document as well.

Be sure to use addendums for ALL subsequent violation correspondence
Violation Reports Receiving State Sending State Screen shot of what the new violation report will look like. Only change is from significant violation to “behavior requiring retake” and then the options after that. Still a mandatory retake for new felony conviction and absconder. Nothing changes there. Please note that if PC is no at this point, you have the option to request PC Be sure to use addendums for ALL subsequent violation correspondence

Violation Reporting Considerations
The sending state is only going to know what you tell them Use the same detail if reporting to your own authorities Specifics on how the behavior was determined to be revocable Clearly describe the options of working with the offender (e.g. intervention) been exhausted How do you support a violation report to the court on in state offenders? Do you report on the offender’s overall progress, the interventions you attempted, etc? You now do the same with the violation report to the sending state. This will assist in building a solid case on the offender. Remember, retaking might be required, but will the offender eventually return to MN because they are a MN resident? So, if the sending state isn’t able to revoke, the offender will return shortly anyhow.

Violation Report Checklist
Violation reported is revocable behavior “violation would rise to level of revocation because…” Reported timely Requesting return/retake Availability status accurate Ensure no pending charges exist Supporting documentation included “Story” provided on why supervision is not successful Supervision practices/responses CLEARLY articulated Review offender profile to ensure consistency/accuracy TOTAL PICTURE! This is what we will be looking for at the compact office level before sending to the other state. So, as I said earlier, I know we are picky at the compact level but we must ensure all this is included before we can forward on. The offender profile will show previous activities so it is a good opportunity to look back to make sure that we are including all of the information and not contradicting any previously reported information. For example, you don’t want to indicate a long history of violating behavior when a progress report was recently submitted saying everything was going well without explaining that.

When it appears something is missing or not right……
4/21/2018 When it appears something is missing or not right…… Ask us - We can help! We are here to help you get through the processes of IC. We can assist through the entire process. When necessary, the DCA or the commissioner can also reach out via phone to the other state to make requests, discuss concerns, come to some resolution without a lengthy delay of going back and forth through ICOTS. If the two compact offices cannot come to a resolution, then the national office can assist.

4/21/2018 Probable Cause Jan 2015-Jan 2017: 28,287 ‘significant violations’ of conditions of supervision reported. 12% (3367) indicated PC was established 46% (12,951) resulted in retake/return by Sending State 16% (2004) indicated PC was established prior to retake/return Just a heads up that this has become a concern of the national office and they will be looking into this further in the near future. Review of documents. Shows there is still some significant training issues to be addressed. Documents unsigned, hearing reports not in compliance with (e.g. unsigned, important elements missing (who was there, clear concise summary of testimony), illegible reports, waivers-does offender clearly know they have a right to a hearing prior to signing a waiver? Note: Random review of documents also shows significant # of hearing reports/waivers do NOT comply w/requirements

4/21/2018 Why is this an issue? Offenders have a RIGHT to PC hearing (per Rule 5.108) when violations MAY result in revocation Receiving States should EXPECT to provide PC hearing when recommending revocation/MUST when offender is in custody Sending States should ENSURE PC is established prior to retake Possible related issues Delays in retaking process Offenders returning immediately after retake Judges (sending state authority) deeming ‘not enough evidence’ to address violation RS officers subpoenaed for revocation hearing Only when it is known the offender is in no danger of revocation and will simply be retaken/returned to be supervised in the sending state, PC hearing is not necessary. Receiving state’s shouldn’t always rely on the sending state to ask for a PC hearing…doing on the front end can speed up the retaking process. Commission is keeping a close eye on some of these issues and expects to provide training on PC hearing and report some of its findings at the ABM. It is expected the new ICOTS changes and comprehensive documentation will bring positive changes to the violation processes as well. Mindy note: pulling some hearing report examples, ICAOS legal has some concerns about the hearings and reporting processes. If you aren’t sure your state is consistent in being compliant with Rule 5.108, consult with your commissioner and local legal.

When a Compact Offender is Entitled to a PC Hearing
Custodial detention based on violations initiated by either the receiving or sending state Violations committed in receiving state may form basis for revocation of supervision Absconder apprehended in the receiving state Authority to Arrest and Detain Rule Warrant from Sending State The offender is in custodial detention in the receiving state based on violations of supervision that occurred in that state or based on a request from the sending state that the offender be detained OR A PC hearing is not required when there is a new criminal conviction, the judgment of conviction is conclusive Authority to Arrest and Detain Rule Warrant from Sending State Authority to arrest and detain An offender in violation of the terms and conditions of supervision may be taken into custody or continued in custody by the receiving state. (Only if you have the authority to arrest in-state offenders without a warrant from the Court.) Can occur under three broad categories Committing a new offense in the receiving state Upon request of sending state based on its intent to retake. Violations that physically occur in the receiving state. (May or may not be a new charge. Sending state may or may not initiate retaking.) Fulfills critical purpose of public safety and protecting rights of crime victims. The sending state does not have to issue a warrant when a request for probable cause is made Some states have the ability to issue warrants on offenders from other states It is up to the receiving state to get the offender into custody if that is required for the PC hearing. Rule OR The alleged violations of supervision in the receiving state may form the basis of revocation of supervised release by the sending state and geographical distance may prevent the offender from adequately presenting a defense including calling witnesses or presenting exculpatory evidence The inquiry is more depth and is in the nature of a probable cause, fact finding proceeding. When there is a risk of revocation a PC hearing shall be conducted. Since the receiving state does not know what the sending state may do once the offender is returned, the process usually starts with a request from the sending state. Sending states should not be asking for a pc hearing if they have no intention of revoking. Some states such as Minnesota may have their own PC requirements in Statute. For example, if MN takes an interstate offender into custody on a MN warrant a PC hearing has to be conducted within 12 days. Third reason OR If an offender who has absconded is apprehended on a sending state’s warrant within the jurisdiction of the receiving state If an offender who has absconded is apprehended on a sending state’s warrant within the jurisdiction of the receiving state that issued the violation report and case closure, the receiving state shall, upon request by the sending state, conduct a probable cause hearing as provided in Rule (d) and (e) unless waived as provided in Rule (b). Must conduct PC even if case is closed in ICOTS.

When an Offender is not Entitled to a PC Hearing
No intention for revocation by the sending state New conviction Rule 5.102 5.102 covers mandatory retake for felony conviction and violent crime convictions New Rule is not referencing a PC hearing, but rather a violation hearing for the new conviction. Allows for a discretionary process (based on the sending state’s capabilities) to address a violation of a new conviction and allow a new sentence imposed by the sending state to be satisfied or partially satisfied while incarcerated Or, if an absconder was picked up in another state as an absconder (not in either sending or receiving state) So, an offender from MN to Iowa absconds and is picked up in Nebraska. Nebraska does not need to do PC. Offender will be returned to MN per nationwide warrant. The fact that the offender was picked up in another state is proof that they absconded from their state of supervision.

Entitlements of Offenders at Probable Cause Hearing
Close proximity to where the violations occurred An “administrative” hearing – not to determine guilt/innocence and level of due process is less than that of a revocation hearing Conducted by a “neutral and detached” person Rule 5.108 Entitled to hearing when there is a danger of the sending state revoking. Close proximity so evidence and witnesses are available to the offender. This is not a full judicial hearing. The rule does not impose on the receiving state any timeframe for initiating the probable cause hearing. Be sure to check your own state’s policies. What is MN’s timeframe? (answer is 12 days) 34

Rights of Offenders at Probable Cause Hearing
Written notice of the alleged violation(s) of conditions imposed by either the sending or receiving state Rule requires notification of conditions imposed Disclosure of non-privileged or non-confidential evidence The opportunity to be heard in person, present witnesses and evidence The opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, unless the hearing officer determines that a risk of harm to a witness exists Right to consult with legal counsel per Benchbook Rule 5.108 Some states provide public defenders per local statute. Be sure to check with local policy for conducting a probable cause 35

Report Requirements Within 10 business days of the hearing the receiving state shall send a written report including: The date, time and location of the hearing. Parties present at the hearing. A clear and concise summary of the testimony taken. Evidence relied upon in rendering the decision, to include the decision that PC was found or not. PC found on which conditions or violations admitted to. Even if the offender is exonerated after the probable cause hearing, the receiving state must transmit the report to the sending state. Rule 5.108 The report or waiver needs to clearly indicate what conditions the offender has either admitted to or had PC found on which conditions. If the offender is found guilty of a condition that the sending state had not been notified of they are not obligated to act on that violation. 36

Waiver of Probable Cause Hearing
No waiver of a PC Hearing shall be accepted unless accompanied by an admission to one or more violations. Rule 5.108 In place of a probable cause hearing a receiving state can offer the offender a PC waiver. The PC waiver needs to include an admission to at least one violation. 37

Transition Information
4/21/2018 Transition Information ICOTS updates (ALL) May 31st, 2017 Activity Handling Created, but not submitted: Deleted Submitted, but not transmitted (VR Only): Withdrawn Transmitted (VR Only): Respond Any Progress or violation report that was created prior to May 31st but not submitted will disappear. VR has to be re-submitted as the non transmitted will be withdrawn If transmitted, then you can respond as normal. More information may be coming regarding any other specifics as the migration occurs. All other activities will not be affected, only progress and violation reports.

Demographics in ICOTS Photo:
4/21/2018 Demographics in ICOTS Photo: (1) the offender’s face is recognizable and visible; (2) the photo is displayed in ‘portrait’ view (height is greater than width); (3) the photo is in color and is sharp with no visible pixels or printer dots; and (4) the background does not detract from the offender’s face. MN will be audited on these items within ICOTS. Please ensure that the photo meets the above criteria and the data information is included if known.

4/21/2018 Good Photos Bad Photos

Gang Affiliation-only if confirmed
Demographics Data Elements FBI Number Race SSN National Origin Gang Affiliation-only if confirmed State ID

Resources interstatecompact.org 4/21/2018
There are many national resources at interstatecompact.org. There are ondemand trainings available, you can also get copies of the rules, the judge’s benchbook, advisory opinions, forms, etc.

Minnesota Resources Interstate Compact Unit: 651-361-7321
Minnesota ICOTS Webpage: ELM Registration: Interstate Compact Unit: Or

Interstate Compact Staff
4/21/2018 Tracy Hudrlik Deputy Compact Administrator Amy Davids REA/Compliance/Violations Marisa Williams Outgoing Parole A-J Monaie Hebert Outgoing Parole K-Z Sarah Payton General and RI’s A-K Rebecca Hillestead General and RI’s L-Z Melissa Heller General

4/21/2018 Questions

4/21/2018 Scenario Offender has been doing well under supervision for the past 1 ½ years. Offender is on for felony assault and has a history of chemical use, but no evidence of recent use. Agent recently completed Progress Report indicating no issues and offender doing well. June 1, 2017: Offender misses an office appointment. Agent calls offender’s employer and is informed that offender did not show up for work the last several days and has been fired. Offender does not respond to phone messages left for him. June 2, 2017: Agent attempts home visit. Offender is visibly under the influence and threatens to assault agent if agent doesn’t leave his home. Agent leaves and issues A and D. Offender is taken into custody. June 2, 2017: Offender’s girlfriend calls and states offender physically assaulted her yesterday, police were not called and no charges filed. She will not allow him to return home. PR Okay, here is another scenario- Offender has been doing very well under supervision. On June 1st we have some minor issues, possibly do a progress report, but you are probably going to wait until you get hold of the offender or get more information. June 2nd- Now what are you going to do? Right, violation report. That would be revocable behavior even though the offender had been doing well up to that point. VR

4/21/2018 Review Questions Only ‘behavior requiring retaking’ in which the behavior or infraction would rise to a level in which the receiving state recommends revocation should be reported on an offender violation report. True False True

Review Questions I am supervising an offender who has been missing appointments, I would not request a revocation in my state. I am concerned about this continued behavior and want the sending state to know about it, plus I plan to give the offender a sanction. I would report this information in ICOTS through: Violation Report Compact Action Request Progress Report Send an to the sending state agent or call Answer is C You should always go through ICOTS for communication and never directly with the other state.

4/21/2018 Review Questions An offender misses 2 appointments to report to the probation office. A violation report may be submitted to the sending state. True False False—Is that revocable in MN? If not, how would you appropriately report it? (Progress Report)

4/21/2018 Review Questions Although the sending state has received only progress reports notifying of non-compliant behavior with conditions of supervision, the sending state may retake the offender from the receiving state for any reason so long as no pending violent crime or felony charges exist. True False True

4/21/2018 Review Questions How many days from the date of discovery or determination do you have to report a violation? A) 10 days B) 15 days C) 30 days D) 45 days C- 30 days Go over again what discovery and determination mean

Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Interstate Compact Behavior Requiring Retake"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback