California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 122 Cal.App.3d 939, 176 Cal.Rptr. 261 (Cal. App. 1981):
As the People correctly argue, in a habeas corpus proceeding challenging a grant of extradition, the only issues which a court may examine are: "... (a) whether the extradition documents on their face are in order; (b) whether the petitioner has been charged with a crime in the demanding state; (c) whether the petitioner is the person named in the request for extradition; and (d) whether the petitioner is a fugitive...." (Michigan v. Doran, supra, 439 U.S. 282, 289, 99 S.Ct. 530, 535, 58 L.Ed.2d 521; Pacileo v. Walker, 449 U.S. 86, 101 S.Ct. 308, 66 L.Ed.2d 304.) Clearly real party's habeas corpus petition did not challenge extradition on the first three permissible grounds. It is equally clear, however, that real party did challenge his status as a fugitive and that the People mischaracterized real party's argument as one based upon his right to a speedy trial.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.