LEIGH S. WILSON, AS SHERIFF OF BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. ROBERT TARTER, 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.
In an extradition proceeding under the Uniform Interstate Extradition Act, the appellate court reversed a trial court's discharge of a defendant, holding that Florida's Governor's rendition warrant and attached papers sufficiently complied with statutory requirements and established the jurisdictional prerequisites for extradition to Ohio.
The Governor's rendition warrant and attachments met the statutory requirements and established the jurisdictional prerequisites for extradition. The use of the term 'allied papers' was sufficiently definite, and the authenticated documents attached to the warrant clearly showed that appellee was charged with a crime in Ohio, was present there on the relevant date, had been indicted, and had fled the jurisdiction.
[1] A rendition warrant issued by a governor under the Uniform Interstate Extradition Act is sufficient if it incorporates by reference the accompanying authenticated documen…
[2] In habeas corpus proceedings arising from extradition cases, the inquiry is limited to whether the jurisdictional prerequisites for extradition have been met.
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“the papers attached to appellant's return clearly show the jurisdictional prerequisites which are the exclusive subject of inquiry in habeas corpus proceedings arising from extradition cases”
Establishes the standard for reviewing extradition cases on habeas corpus—courts need only examine whether jurisdictional prerequisites are met
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Governor of Florida issued a rendition warrant for appellee's arrest and extradition to Ohio pursuant to an interstate extradition demand. The war…
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 Probable Cause For Arrest Warrant cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to Part I of the Uniform Interstate Extradition Act (Chapter 941.01— 941.42, F.S.1973) the Governor of Florida issued a rendition warrant for the arrest and extradition of appellee to the State of Ohio. Appellee filed a petition for writ of ha-beas corpus alleging his unlawful detention because:
(1) the papers from Ohio were not properly authenticated;
(2) identity had not been established;
(3) his presence in Ohio at the time of the crime had not been established;
(4)the papers accompanying the request for extradition were insufficient to show probable cause for the issuance of an arrest warrant or to show that appellee was substantially charged with a crime in Ohio. The trial court discharged appellee from custody for the reason that the warrant issued by the Governor of Florida was void for failure to comply with § 941.-07, F.S.1973, in that the rendition warrant was insufficient to recite the facts required by that statute, since the term “allied papers” appearing in the rendition warrant “is so vague as to fail to incorporate any document by reliable reference.”
We have examined the record in detail and find the rendition warrant and attachments issued by the Governor of Florida meet the statutory requirements. The warrant, under the hand of the Governor and Seal of the State of Florida, states that the Governor has received “a copy of Demand, Affidavit, Indictment and Allied Papers” from the Governor of Ohio charging appellee with the commission of a crime in the State of Ohio. The papers attached to appellant’s return clearly show the jurisdictional prerequisites which are the exclusive subject of inquiry in habeas corpus proceedings arising from extradition cases. State v. Cox, Fla.App.1974, 306 So. 2d 156; State v. Gale, Fla.App.1975, 312 So. 2d 824. Those authenticated papers show that appellee was charged with the commission of a crime in the State of Ohio, was present in that state on the date in question, had been indicted for the crime, and had fled that jurisdiction. In his petition appellee does not question the validity of the papers attached to appellant’s return; he simply alleges that the Governor’s warrant and attachments are insufficient to support extradition.
We concede that the papers from the Governor of Florida could have been more adroitly prepared and identified, and we would recommend a more definite detailed description of the attached papers. However, the use of the term “allied papers” has been approved in an analogous situation under the Uniform Interstate Extradition Act in Clonts v. Stynchcombe, 229 Ga. 672, 194 S.E. 2d 94 (1972).
Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is reversed and the case is remanded with directions to enter an order delivering appellee to the appropriate agent for the State of Ohio. Reversed and remanded.
CROSS, MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. COX, 306 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
- State v. Hobart Zeno Gale, 312 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)