Broughton v. Griffin

Supreme Court of Georgia

Broughton v. Griffin

271 S.E.2d 864, 246 Ga. 464, 1980 Ga. LEXIS 1162

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 2, 1980

Docket36569

StatusPublished

This text of 271 S.E.2d 864 (Broughton v. Griffin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Broughton v. Griffin, 271 S.E.2d 864, 246 Ga. 464, 1980 Ga. LEXIS 1162 (Ga. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Jordan, Presiding Justice.

Daniel Lee Broughton appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus in an extradition proceeding. The request for extradition issued by the Governor of the State of North Carolina states that a Daniel Lee Broughton had been indicted for breaking, entering and larceny, forgery and uttering in Craven County, North Carolina.

Appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying his petition because there was insufficient evidence that he is “the person named in the request for extradition.” Michigan v. Doran, 439 U. S. 282 (99 SC 530, 535, 58 LE2d 521) (1978).

At the habeas corpus hearing, however, appellant admitted that he was the Daniel Lee Broughton indicted by the State of North Carolina for “larceny and forgery of several checks.”

Accordingly, we hold that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the trial court’s conclusion that the appellant is the person named in the request for extradition.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. John W. Andre, Jr., for appellant. Andrew J. Ryan, III, District Attorney, Robert M. Hitch, III, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. Carl Griffin, pro se.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI