Interstate agreement on detainers. Sec. 1. The agreement on detainers is hereby enacted into law and entered into by this state with all other jurisdictions legally joining therein in the form substantially as follows: THE AGREEMENT ON DETAINERS The contracting states solemnly agree that:
Interstate agreement on detainers. The term “penal or correctional institution of a party state,” as it is used in R.C. 2963.30, includes a county jail as well as a state prison or correctional facility. (Nos. 2013-0552 and 2013-0805—Submitted January 7, 2014—Decided February 19, 2015.) APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Ashland County, No. 12-COA-018, 2013-Ohio-976. Syllabus of the Court The term “penal or correctional institution of a party state,” as it is used in R.C. 2963.30, includes a county jail as well as a state prison or correctional facility. X’XXXXXX, X.X. {¶ 1} In this appeal, we resolve a conflict between the Fifth District Court of Appeals and the Eighth District Court of Appeals over whether the term “penal or correctional institution of a party state,” as used in the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, codified in R.C. 2963.30, includes a county jail. {¶ 2} We hold that the term “penal or correctional institution of a party state,” as it is used in R.C. 2963.30, includes a county jail as well as a state prison or correctional facility. Because our holding adopts the analysis of the Fifth District, we affirm. Relevant Background The Interstate Agreement on Detainers {¶ 3} The Interstate Agreement on Detainers (“IAD”) is a compact among 48 states, the District of Columbia, and the United States that establishes procedures for one jurisdiction to obtain temporary custody of a prisoner incarcerated in another jurisdiction for the purpose of bringing the prisoner to trial. Xxxxxx x. Xxxxx, 449 U.S. 433, 435, 101 S.Ct. 703, 66 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981), fn 1. Ohio adopted the IAD in 1969 and codified its provisions in R.C. 2963.30. Am.S.B. No. 356 (“S.B. 356”), 133 Ohio Laws, Part I, 1067. {¶ 4} The IAD arose from a report issued in 1948 that addressed difficulties that prisoners and state authorities faced regarding the use of detainers. United States x. Xxxxx, 436 U.S. 340, 349-350, 98 S.Ct. 1834, 56 L.Ed.2d 329 (1978); see also Xxxxxxx, Interstate Agreement on Detainers and the Rights it Created, 18 Akron L.Rev. 691 (1985). The Council for State Governments drafted the legislation in 1956 and included the draft with its Suggested State Legislation Programs for 1957. Id.; Xxxxxxxx x. Xxxx, 473 U.S. 716, 719, 105 S.Ct. 3401, 87 L.Ed.2d 516 (1985). In 1970, Congress enacted the IAD into law on behalf of the United States and the District of Columbia. Xxxxx at 353. For the states, the IAD is a congressionally sanctioned interstate compact under the Compact Clause, Arti...
Interstate agreement on detainers. When there is a provision in the Agreement on Detainers, where an agent(s) is designated to return an inmate to Florida for trial, Contractor shall ensure Attachment 3, Interstate Agreement on Detainers: Form VI is kept in the possession of the Transport Officer during transport of said inmate.
Interstate agreement on detainers. (IAD) Eligibility The System will have the capability to check for IAD eligibility and have edits to prevent recording ineligible speedy disposition requests. .
Interstate agreement on detainers. Temporary Custody of Prisoner. When a detainer based on pending criminal charges in one state is lodged against a person serving a prison sentence in another state, the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (“IAD”) provides for the transfer of the prisoner from the jurisdiction of incarceration to the “temporary custody” of the jurisdiction where charges are pending. That temporary custody is for the purpose of resolving those charges, after which the prisoner is returned to the place of incarceration. Temporary custody under the IAD does not encompass a commitment of the prisoner to the Department of Health under Maryland Code, Criminal Procedure Article, §3-112 (if the charges are resolved by a verdict of “not criminally responsible”) before the prisoner is returned to the state of incarceration.
Interstate agreement on detainers. Part 1. Contents of Agreement Agreement On Detainers -- Enactment And Text The contracting states solemnly agree that:
Interstate agreement on detainers. Res judicata—Court of appeals’ dismissal of petition affirmed. (No. 2013-1240—Submitted February 5, 2014—Decided February 12, 2014.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 12CA123, 2013-Ohio-3298.
Interstate agreement on detainers. Many prisoners in BOP custody have detainers for unresolved criminal charges pending against them in one or more jurisdictions. To facilitate programming designed for treatment and
