BOB WRIGHT, 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.
Wright, arrested as a fugitive pursuant to an extradition warrant from Texas, petitioned for habeas corpus challenging his identity as the person named in the warrant. The court held that identical names constitute prima facie evidence of identity in extradition cases, and Wright's assertion that "Bob Wright" is a common name does not overcome this presumption.
Identity of names alone constitutes prima facie evidence that the arrested person is the person named in the extradition warrant. This presumption is not overcome by the arrested person's refusal to admit his identity or by his assertion that the name is common.
[1] Identity of names in an extradition warrant and of the person arrested constitutes prima facie evidence that the arrested person is the person named in the warrant.
[2] A habeas corpus petition for extradition should be denied when the arrested person's name matches the warrant and there is no evidence presented to overcome the prima fac…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“evidence that the arrested person's name is identical to the name contained in the extradition warrant is prima facie evidence that the person arrested is the person named in the warrant”
Establishes the legal standard for identity in extradition cases based on name correspondence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWright was picked up as a fugitive pursuant to a Governor's warrant in response to a Texas extradition request. The warrant and Florida paperwork iden…
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 Extradition cases and more on FLexlaw
NIMMONS, Judge.
Wright was picked up as a fugitive pursuant to a warrant by the Governor’s office responding to a request for extradition from Texas. The paperwork and warrants identified the person to be picked up as “Bob Wright.” A petition for writ of habe-as corpus was filed and a writ was issued. At the hearing, the state introduced the warrant from Texas and the Florida paperwork which merely identified Wright by name. The state attempted to introduce an affidavit of identification which was objected to and admission was denied “for the time being” by the judge who then ruled that the identity of names was sufficient in the absence of any evidence that the defendant was not the person sought. Wright’s petition was denied and this appeal followed.
Wright has made no showing, even on the face of his petition, that he is not the “Bob Wright” sought by the warrant. In the absence of any evidence that he is not the person whose name is identical to his, he cannot prevail. State ex rel Sklaroff v. Purdy, 219 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1969). As the court said in State v. Perrera, 443 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), the case relied on by appellant:
While it is generally held that the State has the burden of proving the identity of a person arrested for extradition as the person for whom the warrant was issued, evidence that the arrested person’s name is identical to the name contained in the extradition warrant is prima facie evidence that the person arrested is the person named in the warrant. [Footnote omitted] Obviously the strength of the inference of identity arising from the identity of names varies with the rarity of the names and their combination. However, when the name of the person in custody is the same as that on the warrant the prima facie evidence is not overcome by the mere refusal of the arrested person to admit he or she is the same person named in the warrant and a petition for habeas corpus should be denied. [Citations omitted]
Thus, appellant’s reliance upon his assertion of the commonness of the name “Bob Wright” is unavailing.
AFFIRMED.
JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Martin Sklaroff v. Purdy, 219 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- State v. Perrera, 443 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)