Light v. Cronin

Supreme Court of Colorado

Light v. Cronin

621 P.2d 309, 1980 Colo. LEXIS 790

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedDecember 8, 1980

Docket79SA121

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 621 P.2d 309 (Light v. Cronin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Light v. Cronin, 621 P.2d 309, 1980 Colo. LEXIS 790 (Colo. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

ERICKSON, Justice.

A hearing on a writ of habeas corpus formulated -the issues in this extradition proceeding. The district court discharged the writ, and ordered that the petitioner, Thomas H. Light, be extradited to Pennsylvania. The petitioner appeals. We affirm.

The petitioner was charged with being a fugitive from justice, when he fled from Pennsylvania after he was charged with committing the Pennsylvania statutory crimes of conspiracy, robbery, theft by unlawful taking, and reckless endangerment on or about May 1, 1978. Section 16-19-103, C.R.S. 1973.

Thereafter, he was arrested in Denver, Colorado, and counsel was appointed. Requisition documents were subsequently submitted by the Governor of Pennsylvania. Petitioner’s counsel obtained a writ of habe-as corpus, which was discharged after a full hearing. The sole error raised on appeal relates to the issue of identity. The petitioner asserts that the requisition documents must establish probable cause to believe that he committed the crimes charged. Renton v. Cronin, 196 Colo. 109, 582 P.2d 677 (1978). We agree with his statement of the law. However, in this case the record is sufficient to show that he was the same Thomas H. Light referred to in the requisition documents.

First, the issuance of a governor’s warrant by the governor of the asylum state creates a presumption that the person sought to be extradited was in the demanding state at the time the crime was committed. The burden then shifts to the person *310 whose extradition is sought to show by clear and convincing evidence that he was not in the demanding state at the time the crime was committed. Allen v. Cronin, 189 Colo. 540, 543 P.2d 707 (1976). A prima facie showing of identity is made when the name of the person is identical to that appearing in the requisition documents. Thereafter, the petitioner must shoulder the burden of disproving the prima facie showing of identity. Samples v. Cronin, 189 Colo. 40, 536 P.2d 306 (1975). At the hearing on the writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner remained silent, and no evidence supports his contention that he is not the Thomas H. Light sought by Pennsylvania. Dominguez v. Bray, 188 Colo. 72, 532 P.2d 950 (1975); Dilworth v. Leach, 183 Colo. 206, 515 P.2d 1130 (1973).

The remaining issues raised by the petitioner are without merit.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court.

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

ERICKSON, Justice.

A hearing on a writ of habeas corpus formulated -the issues in this extradition proceeding. The district court discharged the writ, and ordered that the petitioner, Thomas H. Light, be extradited to Pennsylvania. The petitioner appeals. We affirm.

The petitioner was charged with being a fugitive from justice, when he fled from Pennsylvania after he was charged with committing the Pennsylvania statutory crimes of conspiracy, robbery, theft by unlawful taking, and reckless endangerment on or about May 1, 1978. Section 16-19-103, C.R.S. 1973.

Thereafter, he was arrested in Denver, Colorado, and counsel was appointed. Requisition documents were subsequently submitted by the Governor of Pennsylvania. Petitioner’s counsel obtained a writ of habe-as corpus, which was discharged after a full hearing. The sole error raised on appeal relates to the issue of identity. The petitioner asserts that the requisition documents must establish probable cause to believe that he committed the crimes charged. Renton v. Cronin, 196 Colo. 109, 582 P.2d 677 (1978). We agree with his statement of the law. However, in this case the record is sufficient to show that he was the same Thomas H. Light referred to in the requisition documents.

First, the issuance of a governor’s warrant by the governor of the asylum state creates a presumption that the person sought to be extradited was in the demanding state at the time the crime was committed. The burden then shifts to the person *310 whose extradition is sought to show by clear and convincing evidence that he was not in the demanding state at the time the crime was committed. Allen v. Cronin, 189 Colo. 540, 543 P.2d 707 (1976). A prima facie showing of identity is made when the name of the person is identical to that appearing in the requisition documents. Thereafter, the petitioner must shoulder the burden of disproving the prima facie showing of identity. Samples v. Cronin, 189 Colo. 40, 536 P.2d 306 (1975). At the hearing on the writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner remained silent, and no evidence supports his contention that he is not the Thomas H. Light sought by Pennsylvania. Dominguez v. Bray, 188 Colo. 72, 532 P.2d 950 (1975); Dilworth v. Leach, 183 Colo. 206, 515 P.2d 1130 (1973).

The remaining issues raised by the petitioner are without merit.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

621 P.2d 309, 1980 Colo. LEXIS 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/light-v-cronin-colo-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack