CHARLES HENRY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Charles Henry challenges his extradition to New York on a parole violation charge, arguing that the extradition demand lacked required statutory documentation. The Florida appellate court reversed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, finding that the supporting documents failed to comply with Florida's extradition statute.
Where a person has been tried, convicted, and sentenced, a demand for extradition must be supported by a copy of a judgment of conviction or sentence as required by § 941.03, Fla.Stat. (1985). The trial court erred in denying Henry's habeas corpus petition because the extradition documents did not comply with statutory requirements. The court did not address the state's argument regarding waivers since that issue was not raised below.
[1] A demand for extradition of a person who has been convicted and sentenced must be supported by a copy of a judgment of conviction or sentence.
[2] A trial court errs in denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus when the documents supporting a demand for extradition do not comply with statutory requirements.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Where, as here, a person has been tried, convicted and sentenced, a demand for extradition must be supported by a "copy of a judgment of conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof." § 941.03, Fla.Stat. (1985).”
Establishes the core statutory requirement for valid extradition demands
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHenry was arrested on July 1, 1985 as a fugitive from New York. The Governor of New York sought his extradition for parole violation, supported by aut…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fugitive From Justice cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
Appellant Charles Henry appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Henry was taken into custody on July 1, 1985 on a charge that he was a fugitive from justice in the state of New York. The Governor of New York sought to extradite him for violation of his parole. The demand for extradition was supported by authenticated copies of an indictment and endorsement sheet and a certificate of release to parole supervision. The supporting documents did not include a copy of a judgment of conviction or sentence. On September 17, 1985, the Governor of Florida signed a rendition warrant directing that Henry be surrendered to New York authorities. Henry filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus contending the New York warrant and supporting documents failed to comply with Florida law. The trial judge denied his petition and this appeal ensued.
Where, as here, a person has been tried, convicted and sentenced, a demand for extradition must be supported by a “copy of a judgment of conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof.” § 941.03, Fla.Stat. (1985). Since the documents accompanying the demand for extradition of Henry did not comply with the statutory requirements, the trial court erred in denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See Britton v. State, 447 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).1 The state argues that documentation to support a demand for extradition is not necessary in the case of an absconding parolee where, as here, the parolee executed a waiver of his right to resist extradition as a condition of his release on parole. This issue was not raised below, hence we do not reach the contention here.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order without prejudice to the state producing the necessary documents required to support the demand for extradition or presenting the waiver issue for consideration by the trial court.
DANAHY, C.J., and GRIMES, J., concur. . The state contends that our decision in Britton is incorrect in holding that a certificate of conviction signed by the clerk of a New York court does not comply with the requirement of sec tion 941.03. The case before us furnishes no occasion to revisit that requirement in Britton because, in this instance, New York did not even include a certificate of conviction signed by the clerk.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reniewicz v. State, 734 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…pus, challenging an arrest based on an extradition warrant. The proper vehicle for review of a trial court’s ruling on a petition for habeas corpus in this circumstance is by appeal, and we have treated his petition as an appeal. See Henry v. State, 496 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (reviewing appeal from trial court’s denial of habeas petition). The petition served as Reniewicz’s initial brief; the State filed a response to the petition; and Reniewiez replied to the State’s response. Reniewiez filed the pe…
Authorities Cited
- Britton v. State, 447 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)