Collins v. Stynchcombe

Supreme Court of Georgia

Collins v. Stynchcombe

177 S.E.2d 682, 226 Ga. 776, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 682

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 8, 1970

Docket26044

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 177 S.E.2d 682 (Collins v. Stynchcombe) 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

Collins v. Stynchcombe, 177 S.E.2d 682, 226 Ga. 776, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 682 (Ga. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Justice.

A court in the asylum State has three issues before it in examining any extradition by way of habeas corpus: (1) whether a crime has been properly charged in the demanding State; (2) whether the fugitive in custody is the person so charged; and (3) whether the fugitive was in the demanding State at the time the crime alleged was committed. Johnson v. Matthews, 182 F2d 677, 679, cert. denied 340 U. S. 828; Sweeney v. Woodall, 344 U. S. 86 (73 SC 139, 97 LE 114); Tucker v. Donovan, 321 F2d 114; Woods v. Cronvich, 396 F2d 143 (5th Cir., 1968). It is fundamental' to our Federal system that neither the courts of the asylum State nor Federal courts sitting in that State seek to determine the constitutionality of incarceration in the demanding State from which a fugitive has fled. Sweeney v. Woodall, supra.

Accordingly, where the appellant escaped from a Texas prison, where he was serving a life imprisonment sentence imposed by the Texas courts under that State’s recidivist statutes, and where all of the above three issues were admitted adversely to the appellant and were not raised in the present case, the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga., did not err *777 ■in its judgment refusing to pass on the. constitutionality of appellant’s sentence and in denying the writ of habeas corpus.

Submitted September, 17, 1970 Decided October 8, 1970. John Kirby, Andrew A. Smith, for appellant. Lewis' R. Slaton, District Attorney, Tony H. Hight, Carter Goode, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Felton, Justice.

A court in the asylum State has three issues before it in examining any extradition by way of habeas corpus: (1) whether a crime has been properly charged in the demanding State; (2) whether the fugitive in custody is the person so charged; and (3) whether the fugitive was in the demanding State at the time the crime alleged was committed. Johnson v. Matthews, 182 F2d 677, 679, cert. denied 340 U. S. 828; Sweeney v. Woodall, 344 U. S. 86 (73 SC 139, 97 LE 114); Tucker v. Donovan, 321 F2d 114; Woods v. Cronvich, 396 F2d 143 (5th Cir., 1968). It is fundamental' to our Federal system that neither the courts of the asylum State nor Federal courts sitting in that State seek to determine the constitutionality of incarceration in the demanding State from which a fugitive has fled. Sweeney v. Woodall, supra.

Accordingly, where the appellant escaped from a Texas prison, where he was serving a life imprisonment sentence imposed by the Texas courts under that State’s recidivist statutes, and where all of the above three issues were admitted adversely to the appellant and were not raised in the present case, the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga., did not err *777 ■in its judgment refusing to pass on the. constitutionality of appellant’s sentence and in denying the writ of habeas corpus.

Submitted September, 17, 1970 Decided October 8, 1970. John Kirby, Andrew A. Smith, for appellant. Lewis' R. Slaton, District Attorney, Tony H. Hight, Carter Goode, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 S.E.2d 682, 226 Ga. 776, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-stynchcombe-ga-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack