LITTLE
v.
CIUROS, COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION OF NEW YORK CITY, ET AL.
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.
Little sought a stay of extradition to North Carolina based on the specialty principle, which prohibits a country from prosecuting an extradited individual for crimes other than those for which extradition was granted. The Supreme Court denied the application because the specialty principle, as established in United States v. Rauscher, applied only to treaty-based extraditions, and no treaty governed the extradition at issue in this case.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Marshall, Circuit Justice.
The application for a stay in this case was denied by the Court on June 5,1978. Ante, p. 943.
This new application is based on the following allegation:
“Following this Court’s denial on June 5, 1978, of Petitioner’s original application for the aforesaid stay, counsel for Petitioner has been informed that the Office of the Attorney General of the State of North Carolina has stated publicly that it intends to prosecute Petitioner for the crime of escape upon her return to said jurisdiction.”
In support of this new application it is stated:
“Under the principle of specialty, a demanding country may not try an individual who has been extradicted [sic] for any offense other than that for which extradition was granted, unless the alleged offense was committed after extradition. United States v. Rauscher, 119 U. S. 407 (1886).”
It just so happens that United States v. Rauscher was controlled by a treaty between the United States and Great Britain. Needless to say, there is no treaty involved here.
The application is, therefore, without legal support and is
Denied.