STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. WILLIAM GANDERT, III, APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIAM T. ROBERTS, SHERIFF OF PINELLAS COUNTY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
William Gandert challenged his extradition to Michigan on a habeas corpus petition, arguing that Michigan's governor's demand was defective because it failed to allege his presence in Michigan at the time of the alleged crime. The court reversed the denial of habeas corpus, holding that the demand must itself contain such an allegation and that unverified documents cannot supply the missing element.
The court held that Section 941.03, Florida Statutes requires the written demand from the governor of the demanding state to allege that the accused was present in that state at the time of the alleged crime. The demand here was fatally defective because it contained no such allegation, and unverified documents cannot cure this deficiency—extradition papers not certified as authentic by the executive authority of the demanding state are illegal and void.
[1] A demand for extradition is fatally defective if it fails to allege that the accused was present in the demanding state at the time of the alleged crime.
[2] An application for requisition attached to an extradition demand must be certified as authentic by the governor of the demanding state to satisfy statutory requirements.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The provisions of Section 941.03, Florida Statutes (1979), require that the written demand from the governor of the demanding state must allege that the accused was present in the demanding state at the time of the alleged crime.”
Establishes the statutory requirement that the governor's demand itself must contain an allegation of the accused's presence in the demanding state.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGandert was arrested in Tarpon Springs as an alleged fugitive from Michigan on charges of making, drawing or uttering three insufficient fund checks. …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Uniform Criminal Extradition Act cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Judge.
William Gandert appeals from the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus.
Gandert was arrested in Tarpon Springs as an alleged fugitive from Michigan on a charge of making, drawing or uttering three insufficient fund checks. Michigan sought his extradition under the provisions of Chapter 941, Florida Statutes, the Uniform Interstate Extradition Act. Attached to the governor of Michigan’s written demand are copies of a Michigan complaint against appellant for the alleged offenses and a warrant for his arrest, both of which are certified to be authentic by the Michigan governor. Also accompanying the demand are an application for requisition and an affidavit sworn by the prosecuting attorney in Sanilac County, Michigan, neither of which is authenticated by the governor of Michigan.
Appellant argues that because the demand from the governor of Michigan incorporates by reference only two items accompanying the demand, i. e., the complaint and warrant, neither of which alleges appellant’s presence in Michigan at the time of the alleged offenses, appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus should have been granted. We agree and reverse.
The provisions of Section 941.03, Florida Statutes (1979), require that the written demand from the governor of the demanding state must allege that the ac-. cused was present in the demanding state at the time of the alleged crime. The demand by the governor of Michigan does not contain such an allegation, and thus is fatally defective under the holding in Hattaway v. Culbreath, 57 So. 2d 661, 663 (Fla.1952).
The State argues that because appellant’s presence in Michigan-at the time of the commission of the alleged offense may be ascertained from the application for requisition attached to the Michigan governor’s demand, the demand satisfies the requirements of Section 941.03. We would agree if the attached application for requisition, which alleges the accused’s presence, had been certified by the governor of Michigan to be authentic. See Blackburn v. Munson, 155 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963); Pecnik v. Blackburn, 132 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961). However, such is not the case. Extradition papers not certified as authentic by the executive authority of the demanding state are illegal and void. Palmer v. State, 312 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
BOARDMAN, Acting C. J., and' OTT, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wheaton v. State, 420 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…completely satisfies the statute’s authentication requirement. While we agree that without the Governor’s authentication, extradition could not be upheld, Sullivan v. State ex rel. Pardew, 49 So. 2d 800 (Fla.1951); State ex rel. Gandert v. Roberts, 381 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Palmer v. State, 312 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), the issue here is whether the prima facie case for extradition which the Governor’s authentication arguably establishes is overcome by the fact that a supporting document, that…
-
Darwin Delbert Payne v. State of Fla. ex rel. William T. Roberts, 383 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…PER CURIAM. Reversed under the authority of State ex rel. Gandert v. Roberts, 381 So. 2d 1191, (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). RYDER, Acting C. J., and DANAHY and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Pecnik v. Blackburn, 132 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)
- Blackburn v. Munson, 155 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Palmer v. State, 312 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)