In re Letcher
Synopsis
Extradition—Regularity of Proceedings—Beview upon Habeas Corpus.—In extradition proceedings, where the indictment in the state to which the extradition is sought charges a public offense within its statute, the regularity of the proceedings had before the extradition is not reviewable upon habeas corpus.
Id.—Fugitive prom Justice—Construction op Federal Constitution —Decision op United States Supreme Court.—The question as to whether or not the petitioner is a fugitive from justice within the meaning of the federal constitution having been settled by the decision of the supreme court of the United States, its decision on that question is absolutely binding upon this court.
THE COURT. The indictment charges a public offense within the statute of the state of Ohio. The regularity of the proceedings had in that state before extradition is not reviewable by us in this proceeding.
Upon the proposition as to whether or not the petitioner is a fugitive from justice within the meaning of the constitution of the United States, that question seems to be absolutely decided against petitioner’s contention by the supreme court of the United States in Roberts v. Reilly, 116 U. S. 80, and the decision of that court upon this constitutional question is absolutely binding upon this tribunal. Whether or not the facts in the case of petitioner are such as to call for a modification of the views expressed in Roberts v. Reilly is a question which can only be decided by the federal courts, whose writs and processes are open to petitioner.
The petitioner is remanded.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)