JOHN KOHLER, APPELLANT,
v.
JACK SANDSTROM, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION OF DADE COUNTY, 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.
John Kohler appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his detention pursuant to an extradition warrant issued by Florida's Governor in response to Connecticut's extradition demand. The court affirmed, holding that an extradition warrant constitutes prima facie evidence and the burden rests on the petitioner to overcome it with competent proof.
The petitioner bears the burden of overcoming by competent proof the prima facie case made by the extradition warrant. An extradition warrant issued by the Governor constitutes prima facie evidence, and the petitioner must submit a sworn petition, affidavits, or testify under oath to contest identity in a habeas corpus proceeding.
[1] In a habeas corpus proceeding contesting an extradition warrant, the accused bears the burden to overcome the prima facie case established by the warrant with competent p…
[2] A habeas corpus proceeding is civil in nature, requiring the petitioner to offer evidence to support their allegations.
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“In a habeas corpus proceeding contesting the validity and propriety of an extradition warrant issued by the governor, the accused has the burden to overcome by competent proof the prima facie case made by the extradition warrant.”
Establishes the central holding that the petitioner bears the burden of proof in extradition habeas corpus cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKohler was incarcerated pursuant to a Governor's warrant of arrest issued in response to Connecticut's extradition demand. Kohler filed a habeas corpu…
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
PER CURIAM.
The petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus.
The petitioner was incarcerated pursuant to a warrant of arrest issued by the Governor of Florida in response to a demand for extradition by the Governor of Connecticut. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he alleged he had been denied his right to counsel and that he had not been identified as the same person wanted in Connecticut. In his amended petition, the petitioner denied that he was the same person named in the extradition papers. The amended petition, however, was not sworn, nor were affidavits submitted with the petition or at the hearing, nor did the petitioner testify at the hearing to deny the identity.
The thrust of the petitioner’s argument on appeal is that the state failed to meet its burden of offering sufficient evidence as to the identity 'of the petitioner after the warrant and extradition documents were offered into evidence. The state contends that it was the petitioner’s burden to submit a sworn petition or affidavits, or offer evidence under oath, denying identity; and (that § 79.01, Fla.Stat. provides) that the state does not have to prove identity under these circumstances, because the extradition warrant is prima facie evidence and, therefore, the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. We agree with this contention on the aúthority of State ex rel. Sklaroff v. Purdy, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 723.
In a habeas corpus proceeding contesting the validity and propriety of an extradition warrant issued by the governor, the accused has the burden to overcome by competent proof the prima facie case made by the extradition warrant. State ex rel. Kimbro v. Starr, Fla.1953, 65 So. 2d 67. Inasmuch as a proceeding in habeas corpus is civil rather than criminal in nature, even though sought in behalf of one charged with or convicted of a crime,1 petitioner, as a plaintiff in civil proceedings, cannot prevail without offering evidence to support his allegations. He simply did not meet this burden.
The petitioner abandoned his argument as to denial of right to counsel as there is no indication in the record that he was so denied. In fact, the record of the preliminary hearing was not brought before this court.
The Court finding no error, the judgment is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
. State v. Buchanan, Fla.1966, 191 So. 2d 33.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kohler v. Sandstrom, 311 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1975)…Certiorari denied. 305 So. 2d 76. ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and BOYD, McCAIN, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.…
-
Mattern v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 707 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…rejudiced, let alone what,specific witnesses he intended to call together with their expected testimony. The burden of proof in a habeas corpus proceeding is on the petitioner, who must back up his allegations with evidence. See Kohler v. Sandstrom, 305 So. 2d 76, 77 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). General allegations are insufficient to demonstrate entitlement to relief. See Reaves v. State, 593 So. 2d 1150, 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The trial court also correctly determined that appellant was not entitled to appointe…
-
State v. Davila, 481 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…rson depicted in the photograph. In fact, the uncontradicted evidence established that the photograph accompanying the extradition documents was that of the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner simply failed to meet his burden.7 See Kohler v. Sandstrom, 305 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 311 So. 2d 669 (Fla.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 934, 96 S.Ct. 289, 46 L.Ed.2d 264 (1975). Finally, the testimony and evidence introduced by the petitioner to prove that he was in Florida at the time the crime was com…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Joel N. LEE v. Buchanan, 191 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 1966)
- State ex rel. Kimbro v. Starr, 65 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1953)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Martin Sklaroff v. Purdy, 219 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)