In Re Fabricant

California Court of Appeal Apr 16, 1981 No. Crim. 10997Published

Before: Evans

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an asylum state court lacks jurisdiction to quash an extradition warrant based on alleged violations of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, as such claims must be adjudicated by the courts of the demanding state.

Issues

Whether a trial court in an asylum state may quash an extradition warrant based on violations of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers.
Whether the judiciary in an asylum state has the authority to inquire into matters beyond the four limited criteria established in Michigan v. Doran.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Any other judicial inquiry in the asylum state into the matter exceeds the court’s jurisdiction.”

“The trial court erroneously attempted to exercise its judgment on the question of violation of Fabricant’s rights under the interstate agreement on detainers, which are exclusively reserved to the demanding state.”

Opinion

EVANS, J.

The trial court’s order quashing California’s extradition warrant is reversed. We do so because of the primacy of the provisions of article IV, section 2, clause 2, of the United States Constitution which provides: “A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.” The trial court order effectively denied the State of Florida this constitutional guarantee. The order was predicated upon an erroneous interpretation of the provisions of the interstate agreement on detainers (Pen. Code, § 1389), which codifies an agreement between this state and a majority of the others, including Florida, and the federal government for disposing of charges lodged against persons incarcerated in other jurisdictions.

A preface to our disposition of the matter is the following brief summary of the chronology of events and statement of statutory provisions.

In August 1976, petitioner Fabricant was arrested in Florida on a charge of attempted murder, aggravated battery, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Before trial in Florida on those charges, Fabricant was charged and convicted in California, and on August 25, 1978, was imprisoned at the California Institute for Men (at Chino). On September 9, 1978, Florida forwarded its warrant to Chino as a detainer. On September 27, 1978, a memorandum advising Fabricant of the detainer was apparently prepared and according to the records at Chino, delivered to him.

On March 21, 1979, Florida requested temporary custody of Fabricant for purposes of trial on the Florida charges. Apparently, California failed to process the request and Fabricant was subsequently paroled on August 31, 1979. Upon his

[118]

release he was immediately taken into custody on the Florida detainer. On September 27, 1979, the Florida Governor executed a formal demand for extradition, and on October 24, 1979, the California Governor complied and issued an extradition warrant.

In Re Fabricant

AI Brief

EVANS, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief