July 2017: Non Voluntary Return - Accused Delinquent

The holding state was wanting to drop youth's dependency. They wanted to pick youth up from an in-state program and drop him off at the holding/demanding mutual border at which point the holding state would terminate dependency. Also were wanting to not have the youth and judge sign a form III. However, once this was learned it was explained that this plan would preclude ICJ in either state from being involved as it would not meet criteria for an ICJ extradition. Then the youth was properly returned by ICJ rules.

Advisory Opinion 2-2009

Whether Ex-Officio members of the Interstate Commission for Juveniles or its' committees may make motions or cast votes?

Whether 'designees' or 'proxies' who are temporarily substituting for a commissioner at a meeting of the Commission or its' committees may make motions or cast votes?

Advisory Opinion 3-2009

Whether the failure or refusal of an Idaho county official to properly process the lawful transfer of supervision of a juvenile from Idaho to another state and the failure or refusal of the same Idaho county, in another case, to supervise a juvenile whose supervision was properly transferred to Idaho from another state constitutes a violation(s) of the ICJ which would result in potential liability of the County and/or State of Idaho.

Subscribe to