State v. Norman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Norman

362 So. 2d 467

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 19, 1978

DocketNo. II-468

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 362 So. 2d 467 (State v. Norman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Norman, 362 So. 2d 467 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The State appeals an order granting ap-pellee’s habeas corpus petition in an extradition proceeding. We agree that the court erred and reverse. It is well established that the scope of inquiry in this type of a proceeding is limited to a determination of whether the jurisdictional prerequisites to the issuance of the extradition warrant exist. State v. Cox, 306 So.2d 156 (Fla.2d DCA 1974). Here it is clear from the record that the jurisdictional requirements for extradition were met and the matters urged by appellee exceeded the proper scope of inquiry. Therefore, the order granting appellee’s petition for habeas corpus is reversed and the case is remanded with directions to enter an order delivering appellee to the appropriate agent for the State of Arkansas.

McCORD, Chief Judge, and MILLS and BOYER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The State appeals an order granting ap-pellee’s habeas corpus petition in an extradition proceeding. We agree that the court erred and reverse. It is well established that the scope of inquiry in this type of a proceeding is limited to a determination of whether the jurisdictional prerequisites to the issuance of the extradition warrant exist. State v. Cox, 306 So.2d 156 (Fla.2d DCA 1974). Here it is clear from the record that the jurisdictional requirements for extradition were met and the matters urged by appellee exceeded the proper scope of inquiry. Therefore, the order granting appellee’s petition for habeas corpus is reversed and the case is remanded with directions to enter an order delivering appellee to the appropriate agent for the State of Arkansas.

McCORD, Chief Judge, and MILLS and BOYER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

362 So. 2d 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-norman-fladistctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack