Overview

The Texas Interstate Compact for Juveniles (ICJ) Office is responsible for overseeing the transfer of juveniles on probation and parole supervision both into and out of the State of Texas, as well as the return of juveniles who have runaway, absconded or escaped from their home or demanding state. This page provides the most current information to assist Texas juvenile justice professionals in working with ICJ cases or responsibilities.

Knowledge Base

General Questions

How did the new Interstate Compact for Juveniles (ICJ) come about?

History

The Interstate Compact for Juveniles replaces the Interstate Compact on Juveniles, which was created in 1955 and signed into law in Texas in 1965. At that time, only a few hundred juveniles were being apprehended or supervised in states other than where they were residents or where their cases were adjudicated. Today, that number exceeds 20,000 juveniles annually nationwide.

The rewrite effort began in 1999 with a survey conducted by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), and published in June 2000. The survey determined that the language of the compact was antiquated, its rules and procedures not widely followed or understood, and its administrative structure inadequate. In December 2000, OJJDP asked The Council of State Governments (CSG), the organization responsible for the drafting and adoption of the original compact, to recommend a detailed course of action regarding the juvenile compact. CSG convened an advisory group consisting of twenty-four policy experts representing a broad and diverse group of stakeholder organizations with an interest in juvenile supervision issues. From the two advisory group meetings, it was determined that the outdated Interstate Compact on Juveniles should be rewritten. A drafting committee was formed of fifteen other policy experts who drafted a proposed new compact that largely tracked the language of the new adult interstate compact, Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (ICAOS), which was ratified in 2002. The new compact language was subject to critique and comment from a mailing to 200 individuals, agencies and associations. The new ICJ significantly updates the 50 year-old mechanism for tracking and supervising juveniles that move across state borders. Providing enhanced accountability, enforcement, visibility and communication, the new compact updates a crucial, yet outdated tool for ensuring public safety and preserving child welfare.

The primary changes to the 1955 Interstate Compact on Juveniles include:

  1. Requiring that all state legislation adopting the ICJ contain substantially the same language in their compact legislation. No amendment shall become effective and binding upon the Interstate Commission and the compacting states unless and until it is enacted into law by unanimous consent of the compacting states.1
  2. Establishing an independent compact operating authority to administer ongoing compact activity, including a provision for staff support.
  3. Providing for gubernatorial appointments of representatives for all member states on a national governing commission. The commission meets annually to elect the compact operating authority members and to attend to general business and rulemaking procedures.
  4. Rulemaking authority and provisions for sanctions to support essential compact operations.
  5. Mandatory funding mechanisms sufficient to support essential compact operations (e.g., staffing, data collection, training and education).
  6. Compelling the collection of standardized information.

The Texas legislation amended the CSG ICJ model language. The Bill Analysis for this legislation advises Article I titled Purpose was amended from the model language with the “purpose of restoring certain procedural protections that are present in the current compact and better delineating the rule-making authority that is delegated to the Interstate Commission for Juveniles.” However, Article I is further amended by the omission of the mandate to establish procedures to resolve pending charges (detainers) against juvenile offenders prior to transfer or release to the community which is Article I (I) in the model language.

The model language consists of 13 articles. The Texas legislation and Section 60.010 contains 12 articles. The missing article from the model language is Article IX titled The State Council. In addition, all references to the State Council in other articles are deleted in the Texas version of the ICJ. The State Council article requires each state to establish a state-level council to advise the state’s participation in compact activities (one representative from the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government, a victim’s group representative, the compact administrator and deputy administrator.) The Bill Analysis for this legislation advises that this requirement was deleted in the interest of cutting costs for non-essential activities.

The myriad of problems associated with amending the model language of a compact are best described in the following excerpt from “The Evolving Use and the Changing Role of Interstate Compacts: A Practitioner’s Guide”:

Interstate compacts are initiated by the adoption of enabling statutes by the legislatures of the member states. As formal agreements between states, they have the characteristics of both statutory law and contractual agreements. As both statutes and contracts, the substantive law of contracts is applicable to them.2 Using the contract law analysis, the proposed compact statute adopted by the first state to enact, and which invites other states to become a party to the agreement, constitutes the offer. As with any other contract, the inception of a compact must be in a form of an offer to make a binding agreement. Since a compact is an instrument that is also a statute, and always has the force and effect of any other statutory law, the offer must be made in a manner that produces such law in the jurisdiction in which the offer is made. The compact provisions typically identify the jurisdictions to which the enacting jurisdiction (offeror) offers to bind itself. The acceptance of the offer occurs when any subsequent state legislature (offeree) enacts the compact statute in substantially identical form to that contained in the offering state’s enactment. It is a fundamental requirement in the substantive law of contracts that no act constitutes an acceptance unless it is an acceptance of the offer that has been made. Consequently, the same problems raised by the variance in the terms of the offer and acceptance in the common law of contracts also can create similar problems in the negotiation of interstate compacts. Because compacts are statutes, it is impossible to enter into them orally or by an exchange of other communication that would otherwise lead to many of the troublesome controversies of other contractual agreements. However, care should be taken to enact the identical texts in the statutory law of all compacting jurisdictions. Where the statutory texts of a compact putatively entered into by eligible states have not been identical, the problem raised has been the customary one in contract law: Are the variations in the relevant statutory enactments sufficiently similar to permit a reasonable person to conclude that an agreement has been reached?4 The enabling legislation does not have to be uniform in each compact statute and can be utilized “to fit variations into the compactual pattern.” Provisions in the enabling legislation can be used to condition the impact of a compact in a state. Last-minute developments that inevitably arise during the legislative process can be handled through provisions in the enabling legislation in order to avoid the need for amendment of the compact statute. The only limitation on this approach is that a state is prohibited from making reservations in the enabling legislation that “materially change” a compact in the absence of specific consent by the other member states. There is no reason why a state cannot participate in a compact arrangement for certain of its purposes but not for others if the other member states subscribe to such limited participation. The state enabling legislation is another tool for adjustment of the compactual pattern.5 Extrinsic evidence may be considered by courts, when appropriate, to determine the intent of the parties to an interstate compact and to effectuate the desired purpose of the compact. As the Court stated in Oklahoma v. New Mexico, “The use of extrinsic evidence to interpret and enforce a compact arises from the dual nature of such agreements as both statutory and contractual in nature.6

(1) Texas Family Code, Chapter 60.010, Article IX Compacting States, Effective Date, and Amendment.
(2) Caroline N. Broun, Michael L. Buenger, Michael H. McCabe, Richard L. Masters, The Evolving Use and the Changing Role of Interstate Compacts, A Practitioner’s Guide, 128 (2006).
(3) Id. at 128-129.
(4) Id. at 129.
(5) Id. at 129-130.
(6) Id. at 132.

Why is the Texas ICJ Office part of TJJD?

Governor Appointments

In accordance with Chapter 60, Section Section 60.005 of the Texas Family Code, the Governor of Texas appoints the Executive Director of the Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD), as the Texas Compact Administrator. In consultation with the Compact Administrator, the Governor appoints the Deputy Compact Administrator and Commissioner from within TJJD. Daryl Liedecke is the current Texas Commissioner and Deputy Compact Administrator.

Role of the ICJ Office

The deputy compact administrator is responsible for the daily operations of the Office of the Texas Interstate Compact for Juveniles. The primary responsibilities of this office are varied and include: 1) ensuring that the statutory mandates of the compact are carried out in Texas; 2) representing the state in the Interstate Commission for Juveniles; 3) developing policies and procedures in compliance with statute: 4) establishing a liaison to other ICJ Offices and all local supervising jurisdictions; 5) providing education and training to juvenile justice professionals in Texas; 6) receiving and maintaining records of actions under the compact; 7) authorizing or rejecting cases for cooperative supervision for parole or probation; and 8) ensuring that all runaways, absconders, escapees or juveniles who are accused as delinquent are returned to the home or demanding state in accordance with the Compact. All of the paperwork needed to effectuate sending, retaking or receiving a juvenile probationer or parolee under the Interstate Compact flows through the respective ICJ offices. The Office of the Texas Interstate Compact for Juveniles at TJJD should be contacted to obtain the necessary forms and filing procedures. See TJJD’s website at http://www.tjjd.texas.gov/programs/icj.aspx for contact information.

Section 60.010, Article I (D) allows for the compacting states to make contracts for the cooperative institutionalization in public facilities of delinquent juveniles needing special services. This provision of the ICJ was brought forward from the previous compact. It is rarely used as many states do not have the capacity available to consider this type of placement. Family Code Section 162.102, contained in Subchapter B on the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC), deals with the interstate placement of delinquent juveniles in private or public institutions. The ICPC is administered through the Department of Family Protective Services (DFPS).

What is the Interstate Commission for Juveniles?

Interstate Commission for Juveniles

Section 60.010, Article III creates the Interstate Commission for Juveniles (ICJ). The Interstate Commission is a body corporate and joint agency of the compacting states. It is comprised of commissioners from each compacting state who are appointed by their respective appointing authority in accordance with the rules and requirements of each compacting state. Each state has an appointed commissioner who is entitled to one vote at any meeting of the Interstate Commission. Members are to vote in person and may not delegate a vote to another compacting state. In addition to the commissioners, the Interstate Commission includes individuals who are not commissioners but who are members of interested organizations. These non-commissioner members must include a member of the national organizations of governors, legislators, state chief justices, attorneys general, Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children, Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision, juvenile justice and juvenile corrections officials, and crime victims. These non-commissioner members are ex-officio (non-voting) members.

Section 60.010, Article IV specifies the Interstate Commission’s powers and duties that first and foremost are to: provide for dispute resolution among the compacting states, promulgate rules to effect the purposes and obligations of this compact which have the force and effect of statutory law, oversee, supervise and coordinate the interstate movement of juveniles subject to the terms of this compact, and enforce compliance with the compact provisions, the rules promulgated by the Interstate Commission.

Section 60.010, Article V provides the requirements of the organization and operation of the Interstate Commission.

Section 60.010, Article VIII authorizes the Interstate Commission to levy on and collect an annual assessment from each compacting state to cover the annual approved budget. The annual assessment amount is allocated based on a formula determined by the Interstate Commission that considers the compacting state’s population and the volume of interstate movement of juveniles in each compacting state. The formula is (population of the state/population of the United States) plus (number of juveniles sent from and received by a state/total number of juvenile offenders sent from and received by all states) divided by two. (ICJ Commission Rule 2-101) The Interstate Commission is responsible for annually reporting ICJ activity and any recommendations that may have been adopted to the executive, judicial and legislative branches, as well as the juvenile and criminal justice administrators of the compacting states.

ICJ Rules and Rule Questions

Rules*

Section 60.010, Article VI empowers the Interstate Commission to promulgate and publish rules to effectively and efficiently achieve the purposes of the compact. The Interstate Commission is to ensure the rulemaking substantially conforms to the principles of the “Model State Administrative Procedures Act,” 1981 Act, Uniform Laws Annotated, Vol. 15, p.1 (2000), or such other administrative procedures act, as the Interstate Commission deems appropriate consistent with due process requirements under the United States Constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. The proposed rules are to be published with the reason(s) for the proposed rules. The Interstate Commission is to allow and invite comments which are to be added to the record and made publicly available. A public informal hearing is held if petitioned by ten or more persons. The final rules are promulgated with the effective date. There is also provision for any person to file a petition for judicial review of a rule in either the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or in the federal district court where the Interstate Commission’s national office is located. If the court finds that the Interstate Commission’s action is not supported by substantial evidence in the rulemaking record, the court shall hold the rule unlawful and set it aside. In addition, if a majority of the legislatures of the compacting states rejects a rule, those states may, by enactment of a statute or resolution in the same manner used to adopt the compact, cause that rule to have no further force and effect in any compacting state. Further, the Interstate Commission has an emergency rule provision wherein when it is determined that an emergency exists, an emergency rule may be promulgated which becomes effective immediately upon adoption, with the usual rulemaking procedures applied retroactively as soon as practicable but no later than 90 days after the effective date of the rule. These rules have the force and effect of statutory law. The rules are published on the website of the Interstate Commission for Juveniles' Website: ICJ Commission Rules.

* The Rules referenced in this section were updated and effective March 1, 2012.

Enforcement

Section 60.010, Article VII authorizes the Interstate Commission to provide oversight, enforcement and dispute resolution in the administration and operations of the interstate movement of juveniles subject to the ICJ. The courts and executive agencies in each compacting state are to enforce the ICJ and take all actions necessary and appropriate to affect the compact’s purposes and intent. The provisions of this compact and the rules promulgated hereunder are to be received by all of the judges, public officers, commissions and departments of the state government as evidence of the authorized statute and administrative rules. All courts must take judicial notice of the compact and the rules. In the event of a judicial or administrative proceeding in a compacting state pertaining to the subject matter of this compact that may affect the powers, responsibilities or actions of the Interstate Commission, it is entitled to receive all services of process in any such proceeding and has standing to intervene in the proceedings for all purposes. The Interstate Commission, in the reasonable exercise of its discretion, is to enforce the provisions and rules of this compact using any or all of the means set forth in Article X of this compact.

What happens when there is a conflict between an individual state’s law and the compact law?

When State Law Conflicts with Compact Law

Section 60.010, Article VII authorizes the Interstate Commission to provide oversight, enforcement and dispute resolution in the administration and operations of the interstate movement of juveniles subject to the ICJ. The courts and executive agencies in each compacting state are to enforce the ICJ and take all actions necessary and appropriate to affect the compact’s purposes and intent. The provisions of this compact and the rules promulgated hereunder are to be received by all of the judges, public officers, commissions and departments of the state government as evidence of the authorized statute and administrative rules. All courts must take judicial notice of the compact and the rules. In the event of a judicial or administrative proceeding in a compacting state pertaining to the subject matter of this compact that may affect the powers, responsibilities or actions of the Interstate Commission, it is entitled to receive all services of process in any such proceeding and has standing to intervene in the proceedings for all purposes. The Interstate Commission, in the reasonable exercise of its discretion, is to enforce the provisions and rules of this compact using any or all of the means set forth in Article X of this compact.

Section 60.010, Article XII states that nothing prevents the enforcement of other laws that are not inconsistent with this compact. These provisions take precedence over conflicting laws except for state constitutional provisions or the provisions of other compacts to the extent of the conflict. As stated in the following excerpt from “The Evolving Use and the Changing Role of Interstate Compacts: A Practitioner’s Guide”:

Once entered, the terms of the compact and any rules and regulations authorized by the compact can, to the extent provided in the agreement, supersede any substantive state laws that may be in conflict, including even state constitutional provisions. Under the Compact Clause, the federal questions are the execution, validity, and meaning of federally approved state compacts. A compact controls over a state’s application of its own law through the Supremacy Clause and the Contracts Clause of the Constitution. As observed in West Virginia ex rel. Dyer v. Sims:

It has frequently been held that when a question is suitably raised whether the law of a State has impaired the obligation of a contract, in violation of the constitutional provision, this Court must determine for itself whether a contract exists, what are its obligations, and whether they have been impaired by the legislation of the State. While this Court always examines with appropriate respect the decisions of state courts bearing upon such questions, such decisions do not detract from the responsibility of this Court in reaching its own conclusions as to the contract, its obligations and impairments, for otherwise the constitutional guaranty could not properly be enforced

The contractual nature of the agreement and its federal standing, where applicable, trumps individual state statutory schemes because, through the compact, the member states cede individual state authority in favor of a multilateral resolution to a dispute or in favor of multilateral regulation of an interstate matter. The member states cannot take unilateral steps, such as the adoption of conflicting legislation or the issuance of executive orders or court rules that violate the terms of a compact. The standing of compacts, as contracts and instruments of national law applicable to the member states, generally nullifies any state action inconsistent with the terms and conditions of the agreement.

Supervision Questions

How do I put a referral packet together and what is required?

A referral packet consists of the following mandatory documents: Cover letter explaining circumstances regarding juvenile’s move, ICJ Form IV - Parole or Probation Investigation Request (signed by JPO and Texas ICJ Deputy Administrator), ICJ Form IA/VI - Application for Compact Services/Memorandum of Understanding and Waiver (signed by juvenile, with signatures witnessed, and adjudicating judge), ICJ Form V - Report of Sending State Upon Parolee and Probationer Being Sent to Another Jurisdiction (signed by JPO), ICJ Out-of-State Travel Permit Form (signed by juvenile, JPO, and a witness), LS-024 (9/12) - Youth’s Consent for Disclosure to Persons Other than Parents or Juvenile Court Officials (signed by juvenile), Adjudication and Disposition Orders, Conditions of Probation, Petition(s), Pre-Disposition Report, Social History, or Interagency Application for Placement, School Records, Updated Psychological Report, and Medical Records.

Do all signatures need to be obtained on the ICJ Form IA/VI before submitting a referral packet?

No. If juvenile has left the state, we can obtain those signatures from the receiving state. However, the ICJ Form IA/VI must be signed by your judge prior to being submitted with the packet. This is true for all submitted ICJ referrals, whether the youth remains in Texas or has left for the receiving state.

Once a youth turns 18, why do we have to continue supervision?

States differ widely on maximum age on probation and parole. ICJ Article II provides that “delinquent juvenile” means any juvenile who has been adjudged delinquent and who, at the time the provisions of this compact are invoked, is still subject to the jurisdiction of the court that has made such adjudication or to the jurisdiction of an agency or institution pursuant to an order of such court. Please refer to the Age Matrix, Texas Family Code Chapter 60, and Texas AG Dan Morales'Opinion #DM-147.

Can I issue a warrant for violation of probation on a youth that I am supervising for another state?

No. The sending state holds jurisdiction and is responsible for issuing the warrant. However, per ICJ Rule 4-104, the receiving state has the power to enforce the terms of parole/probation, including the imposition of detention time as a temporary sanction for violations of probation. Anytime violations occur, you would need to submit a violation report to your ICJ office detailing the violations and any actions taken to sanction those violations.

Am I allowed to close a ICJ supervision case from another state?

The sending state has sole authority to discharge/terminate its juveniles with the exception of when: ----a juvenile is convicted of a crime and sentenced under the jurisdiction of the adult court in the receiving state and the sentence is longer than the juvenile sentence. In such cases, the receiving state may close the ICJ case once it has notified the sending state, in writing, and provided the sending state with a copy of the adult court order. Cases terminate due to expiration of a court order or upon expiration of the period of parole. These cases may be closed by the receiving state without further action by the sending state. In such cases, the receiving state shall forward a summary report to the sending state, and notify the sending state in writing that, unless otherwise notified, the case will be closed due to the expiration of the court order. A juvenile on ICJ supervision absconds from placement and the sending state has issued a warrant or directive to apprehend, or if the juvenile has been on abscond for at least 10 days and the sending state has been notified of the abscond.

On ICJ Form V, whom do I list as the contact person?

You would list yourself, the juvenile probation officer, because the juvenile is to report to you by phone or by mail until the receiving state has accepted supervision. If the receiving sate has approved the home prior to the juvenile's departure the receiving state's assigned JPO should be listed as the contact person.

Can I begin supervising a youth in which his/her referral came directly from a sending state’s probation department?

The referral must come from your state’s ICJ office in order for it to be a legal referral. You are not responsible for supervising in this case, however, the decision will be yours to make as your community may be at risk. If you receive a referral directly from another state, please contact your ICJ office as soon as possible so they can request the referral through the proper channels.

How long is an ICJ Out-of-State Travel Permit valid?

Once approved, the ICJ Out-of-State Travel Permit is valid for a maximum of 90 days on Texas probationers and 14 days for TJJD youth.

Who is eligible for ICJ supervision?

All juveniles who are under juvenile court jurisdiction, as defined by the sending state and who have been assigned terms of supervision are eligible for services pursuant to the provisions of the ICJ, provided they also have: A plan inclusive of relocating to another state for a period exceeding ninety (90) consecutive days in any twelve (12) month period; and Who has more than ninety (90) days or an indefinite period of supervision remaining at the time the sending state submits the transfer request. Juveniles adjudicated delinquent and placed on probation and committed juveniles who are paroled are eligible for supervision and services under the ICJ. Juveniles on Deferred Prosecution or Deferred Adjudication are eligible for services under the ICJ, provided they have requirements for supervision. Also, juveniles as defined in Rule 1-101, eligible for transfer as defined by Rule 4-101, who have been accepted as full-time students at a secondary school, or accredited university/college, or state licensed specialized training program and can provide proof of enrollment, shall be considered for supervision by the receiving state. An individual's status as a juvenile depends on the law in the sending state and shall be provided supervision by the appropriate juvenile authority in the receiving state.

How long does it take to obtain a home evaluation from another state?

The normal timeframe for a response to a home evaluation request is 30 - 45 working days. This information is particularly crucial to those workers responsible for placement planning in institutional settings.

Who determines the suitability for Out-of-State placements?

ICJ offices shall determine each placement's suitability based on the home evaluation report, approve or disapprove the home, within the terms of the ICJ, and forward the home evaluation and approval or disapproval of the Compact Administrator to the sending ICJ office.

How often should I forward progress reports to the Texas ICJ office?

Progress reports are due on a quarterly basis. However, if there is a problem in the placement, please advise our office immediately. We will ask that you follow up in writing ASAP.

How do I request an emergency home evaluation?

Call first. If the emergency involves a pre-dispositional home evaluation we will ask that you send all available information along with a cover letter detailing the request and ICJ Form IV. When it appears necessary to request an emergency placement evaluation, the referring ICJ office shall be responsible for verifying that an emergency actually exists. If so, referral information should be provided to the receiving ICJ office expeditiously as possible, along with an explanation of the nature of the emergency. An ICJ travel permit needs to be completed and sent for all youth prior to their movement to the receiving state. The permit must be sent to the ICJ office as soon as possible. Send it to the ICJ office prior to submitting the referral packet.

What happens when another state directly sends us paperwork on a youth as a request to transfer jurisdiction?

Per ICJ Rule 4-101, no state shall permit the transfer of a Compact-eligible youth except as provided by the Compact and Rules, and that any youth not eligible for transfer under the Compact is not subject to ICJ rules. ICJ Rules expressly forbid the transfer of jurisdiction. ICJ Rules do not cover the actions to take when this is attempted by a state or county. When you receive these types of documents directly from another state, contact the Texas ICJ office. Upon receipt of information or documentation in a case like this, the ICJ office will: a) immediately notify the ICJ office of the youth’s home state and forward any information received; b) request that ICJ office contact the home county to advise them that this is not permitted and either submit a proper ICJ referral or concede to termination of probation and closure of the case. The ICJ office will enter the case for internal tracking purposes and give a one month deadline for a response from the sending state. The ICJ office will follow up with the sending state’s ICJ office at least bi-weekly for the month to get an update or response. At the end of the month, if the sending state ICJ office has not provided a response or taken action, the Texas ICJ office will close the case as it is not Compact eligible. We may open a new case should the sending state provide a proper referral through ICJ rules at a later date. We will keep you informed and let you know of any action you need to take.

Returns Questions

How many days does a home/demanding state have to return a juvenile from a holding state?

The state to which the juvenile is returned shall be responsible for the costs of transportation, for making transportation arrangements and for the return of the juvenile with five (5) working days of being notified by the holding state's ICJ office that the Form III has been signed. . That timeframe can be extended an additional five (5) working days with approval of both ICJ offices (Refer to ICJ Rule 7-101.)

Who is responsible for detention costs for holding another state's juvenile?

A holding state shall not be reimbursed for detaining a juvenile under the provisions of the ICJ law unless the home/demanding State ICJ Office does not demonstrate a good faith effort to effect the return of its juveniles within five (5) working days. (Refer to ICJ Rule 7-101.)

When I have a juvenile who is flying through Texas or another state, and he/she has a layover, is there a way to have someone watch him in the airport during his layover?

Yes. Airport supervision and assistance to unescorted juveniles can be accessed. The Texas ICJ office contracts for this service at the DFW airport. We require a minimum of 24 hours notice to schedule the airport supervision. If you feel the juvenile is a high risk to run, we have the ability to ask DPS officers to assist in the surveillance. Many states provide airport supervision in their major cities and require the same 24 hours notice up to 48 hours notice. To schedule airport supervision, please contact this office. (Refer to ICJ Rule 7-107.)

Who is responsible for transportation from the detention center to the airport if a state decided to return their juvenile via commercial airlines?

If you are the holding jurisdiction, you and your probation department are responsible for transporting the juvenile from your detention center to the airport upon the request from the ICJ office. Specific guidelines exist to prevent a juvenile from running from the transporter after the juvenile has exited the secure vehicle. Those guidelines are: Arrive 60-90 minutes prior to flight's departure, Verify that the ticket is prepaid with a record locator number or password, NEVER reschedule a flight for any reason without confirmation from your ICJ office, Bring our office number with you for immediate contact, It is good practice to have a mobile phone or calling card to make long distance calls to our office in the event of a problem, Remove any handcuffs or mechanical restraints prior to entering the airport terminal (escort the juvenile by the arm or shirt collar), Check in all baggage and medication, Provide the juvenile with a copy of his/her signed Form III, and Remain at the gate of departure until the plane physically leaves the ground.

If I know the location of a juvenile in another state but he/she has not been arrested and detained, what is the process to get him picked up and detained?

  • Juvenile Classification: Probation Absconder - (Refer to ICJ Rule 6-103A)
  • Parole Absconder/Escapee - (Refer to ICJ Rule 6-103A) Non-Delinquent Runaway - (Refer to ICJ Rule 6-103)
  • Accused Delinquent - (Refer to ICJ Rule 6-103A)

If the juvenile is a probation absconder, you would follow these steps:

If the youth is not in custody but his/her whereabouts are known, the requisition will state the location of the youth. The judge in the asylum state will issue an order for the juvenile to be brought into custody. The following procedure applies: The requisition is addressed to the juvenile judge in the jurisdiction where the youth is located. This will be provided by the Texas ICJ Office at the time you are completing the requisition paperwork. The judge of jurisdiction signs the Requisition as the court requesting the youth’s return. The juvenile probation officer has his/her signature notarized as the requisitioner. Requisitions with original signatures must be accompanied by certified supporting documents, (i.e., adjudication and disposition orders, probation rules). The complete sets of original, notarized requisitions and certified supporting documents must be sent to Texas ICJ Office. The Texas ICJ Office forwards the paperwork to the state where the juvenile is located (holding state) via the electronic document transfer system. The holding state has the right to request the original documents be sent to them. The case is taken to court. If the paperwork is deemed to be in order by the court, youth is ordered to return to home state. The Texas ICJ Office facilitates and coordinates the juvenile's travel within five (5) working days. The county that has jurisdiction of the juvenile is responsible for the cost of the return arrangements. To obtain the appropriate forms, please refer to Form II.

If the juvenile is a TJJD parole absconder or TJJD escapee, you would follow these steps:

The TJJD home parole officer or caseworker contacts the Texas ICJ Office and advises of location. You would forward (via overnight mail) three (3) certified copies of the juvenile's commitment order to this office. The Texas ICJ Deputy Administrator completes and signs the Requisition as the Compact Official entitled to the youth’s return and has the signature notarized as the requisitioner. The Requisition is sent from the Texas ICJ Office to the holding state’s ICJ Office via the electronic transfer system. The case is taken to court. If the paperwork is deemed to be in order by the court, youth is ordered to return to Texas. The Texas ICJ Office arranges for youth’s travel within five (5) working days. To obtain the appropriate forms, please refer to Form II.

If the juvenile is a non-delinquent runaway, you would follow these steps:

If the juvenile is not in custody, but his/her whereabouts are known, the requisition will state the location of juvenile. The judge in the asylum state will issue an order for the juvenile to be brought into custody. If you are the parent, it is in your best interest to contact this office for more specific instructions. If you are a probation officer assisting a parent, the following will assist you in getting started. The requisition Form I with original signatures, Form A and accompanying certified documentation sent to the Texas ICJ Office. The Texas ICJ Office forwards the paperwork to the state where the juvenile is being held via the electronic data system (holding state). The case is taken into court. If the paperwork is deemed to be in order by the court, juvenile is ordered to Texas. The Texas ICJ Office facilitates and coordinates with the parent (s) for the juvenile’s return travel to Texas within five (5) working days. The return costs are the responsibility of the parent(s).

If the juvenile has been accused delinquent and is currently out-of-state, you would follow these steps:

If the youth is not in custody but his/her whereabouts are known, the requisition will state the location of the youth. The judge in the asylum state will issue an order for the juvenile to be brought into custody. The following procedure applies. The requisition is addressed to the juvenile judge in the jurisdiction where the youth is located. This will be provided to you by the Texas ICJ Office. The judge of the jurisdiction signs the Requisition as the court requesting the youth’s return. The juvenile probation officer has his/her signature notarized as the requisitioner. The requisitions with original signatures must be accompanied by certified supporting documents, (i.e., petitions, warrants, etc.). The complete sets of original, notarized requisitions and certified supporting documents must be sent to the Texas ICJ Office. The Texas ICJ Office forwards paperwork to the state where juvenile is located (holding state) via the electronic transfer system. The case is taken to court. If the paperwork is deemed to be in order by the court, youth is ordered to return to Texas. The Texas ICJ Office arranges for youth’s return within five (5) working days. Please refer to Form II.