Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

habeas corpusextradition
extradition

Related Cases

Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So.2d 693, 27 Fla. L. Weekly S891
View Case »
Ah Sin v. Wittman, 198 U.S. 500, 25 S.Ct. 756, 49 L.Ed. 1142
View Case »
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S.Ct. 1710, 173 L.Ed.2d 485, 77 USLW 4285, 09 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4732, 2009 Daily Journal D.A.R. 5611, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 781, 47 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 657
View Case »
Benitez v. United States, 471 U.S. 1137, 105 S.Ct. 2679 (Mem), 86 L.Ed.2d 698
View Case »
California v. Beheler, 463 U.S. 1121, 103 S.Ct. 3517, 77 L.Ed.2d 1275
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Bassing v. Cady, 208 U.S. 386, 28 S.Ct. 392, 52 L.Ed. 540, 13 Am.Ann.Cas. 905

Facts

Jacob Bassing was charged with grand larceny in New York and was extradited to New York in March 1907. After being arraigned, the indictment was dismissed due to insufficient evidence. Bassing returned to Rhode Island, but a second indictment was issued against him in June 1907, leading to a new extradition warrant from the governor of Rhode Island. Bassing filed for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming his detention was unlawful as he was not a fugitive from justice.

Jacob Bassing was charged with grand larceny in New York and was extradited to New York in March 1907. After being arraigned, the indictment was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.

Issue

Whether the governor of Rhode Island was authorized to issue a second extradition warrant for Bassing based on a second indictment for the same offense after the first indictment was dismissed.

Whether the governor of Rhode Island was authorized to issue a second extradition warrant for Bassing based on a second indictment for the same offense after the first indictment was dismissed.

Rule

The court applied the principle that a person is considered a fugitive from justice if they leave the state where they are charged with a crime, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their departure.

The court applied the principle that a person is considered a fugitive from justice if they leave the state where they are charged with a crime, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their departure.

Analysis

The court determined that Bassing had not been put in jeopardy by the first indictment's dismissal, allowing the governor of Rhode Island to honor the second requisition from New York. The court found that the warrant issued by the governor of Rhode Island established Bassing's status as a fugitive from justice, as there was no evidence presented to contradict this presumption.

The court determined that Bassing had not been put in jeopardy by the first indictment's dismissal, allowing the governor of Rhode Island to honor the second requisition from New York.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that Bassing was lawfully detained under the extradition warrant.

The court affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that Bassing was lawfully detained under the extradition warrant.

Who won?

The State of Rhode Island prevailed in the case, as the court upheld the legality of the extradition warrant and Bassing's status as a fugitive from justice.

The State of Rhode Island prevailed in the case, as the court upheld the legality of the extradition warrant and Bassing's status as a fugitive from justice.

You must be