In Re Jackson

California Court of Appeal May 5, 1927 No. Docket No. 1496.Published

Before: Conrey

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the extradition proceedings were valid because the preliminary warrants issued by the Alabama probate judge were lawful, and the petitioner failed to prove he was not a fugitive from justice or that the complaining witness was an accomplice.

Issues

Whether the extradition warrants were invalid due to a lack of jurisdiction by the Alabama probate judge.
Whether the petitioner successfully proved he was not a fugitive from justice.
Whether the extradition proceedings were invalid because the complaining witness was an alleged accomplice.

Disposition. remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The complaint before the magistrate and warrant of arrest issued by him relate only to preliminary proceedings and are not violative of the constitutional provision against prosecutions by information, of indictable offenses.”

“While the verified complaint before the magistrate would not be accepted in this proceeding as conclusive proof that petitioner was in Baldwin County, Alabama, at the date of the alleged offense, it is prima facie evidence of the fact”

“The writ is discharged and the prisoner is remanded to custody.”

CONREY, P. J.

— In response to petition of John M. Jackson, now in custody of the sheriff of Los Angeles County, a writ of

habeas corpus

was issued, to which return was duly made by the sheriff, and a traverse thereto by petitioner. Evidence was presented, and the matter was then argued and submitted for decision.

The subject matter hereof rests upon an extradition proceeding. Petitioner has been arrested and is in custody pursuant to four certain warrants of arrest issued by the Governor of California, in accordance with representations and requisitions proceeding from the Governor of Alabama.

The petition herein alleged that said executive warrants and extradition papers are insufficient, and that the Governor of California was without jurisdiction to issue said warrants for arrest of petitioner as a fugitive from justice in this, that there was no evidence presented to the Governor of California or to the Governor of Alabama showing or tending to show that petitioner was a fugitive from justice; and in this, that no legal criminal proceedings have been instituted against petitioner in the state of Alabama as required by law, and that the judge of probate court in Alabama by whom the original warrant of arrest was issued in that state had no jurisdiction to issue a warrant in a felony case, and that the judge of said probate court has no criminal jurisdiction.

The requisitions presented to the Governor of California were accompanied by copies of the several affidavits, complaints, and warrants, all of which were by the Governor of Alabama certified to be authentic in accordance with the laws of that state. In each case the affidavit of the complaining witness charged against said John M. Jackson the commission of a felony in the county of Baldwin, state of Alabama, on the seventh day of July, 1926, and that said John M. Jackson on said date, and at the time of the com

[721]

mission by him of said offense, was physically present in said county of Baldwin. On the basis of that complaint, sworn to and subscribed before the judge of probate of the county of Baldwin, that judge issued his warrant of arrest. On the basis of those proceedings the Governor of Alabama issued his requisition, and on the same foundation, through said authenticated copies of the affidavits, complaints, and warrants, the Governor of California ordered the arrest of petitioner as a fugitive from justice.

In Re Jackson

AI Brief

CONREY, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief