Chapter 4.4 Retaking/Rendition


As previously noted, Article I of the Revised ICJ and ICJ Rule 5-103(3) authorize officers of a sending state to enter a receiving state or a state to which a juvenile has absconded for purposes of retaking the juvenile.  With limited exceptions, the decision to retake a delinquent juvenile rests solely in the discretion of the sending state, which also has the discretion to initiate the compact transfer process. See ICJ Rules 5-103(3), 4-101 (Interstate Comm’n for Juveniles 2020); In re Welfare of Z.S.T., No. A09–324,  2009 WL 4910319, at *3 (Minn. Ct. App.,2009) (“First, we note that under Article II of the Compact, the decision to transfer probation is discretionary with the “sending state.” Minn. Stat. § 260.51, art. VII(a) (2008)).  However, it is important to note that under the provisions of the Revised ICJ Rules, if the juvenile is suspected of having committed a criminal offense or an act of juvenile delinquency in the receiving state, the sending state may not retake the juvenile without prior consent from authorities in the receiving state, until discharged from prosecution, or other form of proceeding, imprisonment, detention, or supervision. See ICJ Rules 5-103(3) (Interstate Comm’n for Juveniles 2020).

In cases where the ICJ transfer of supervision has failed, as determined under the provisions of ICJ Rule 5-103(3), officers of the sending state are permitted to enter the receiving state, or any other state to which the juvenile has absconded, in order to retake the juvenile. See discussion infra Section 4.5.5.  Under the Compact and pursuant to ICJ Rule 5-103 where there has been a waiver of formal extradition proceedings, officers need only establish their authority and the identity of the juvenile.  Once the authority of the sending state’s officers is established, authorities in a receiving state may not prevent, interfere with or otherwise hinder the transportation of the juvenile back to the sending state.  See ICJ Rules 5-103.  Interference by court officials would constitute a violation of the Revised ICJ and its Rules.