WILLIAM E. MILES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE HONORABLE RUHIN O'D. ASKEW, APPELLEES
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 E. Miles appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a Governor's warrant for his extradition to California on perjury charges. The Florida appellate court affirmed the denial, finding the extradition warrant and supporting documents sufficiently charged a crime under California law and that Miles had adequate opportunity to challenge the merits in California.
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus, holding that the date discrepancy was a mere typographical error as the correct date appeared elsewhere in the record, the complaint sufficiently charged perjury under California law by stating the oath was taken before the Superior Court of Alameda County, and the court lacks authority in extradition habeas proceedings to inquire into the merits or probable cause—its role is limited to determining the sufficiency of the papers and identity of the prisoner.
[1] A typographical error in the date of an alleged offense does not invalidate an extradition warrant if the correct date is otherwise ascertainable from the record.
[2] An affidavit supporting an extradition warrant is sufficient if it substantially charges the demanded person with committing a crime under the law of the demanding state,…
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 indictment, information, or affidavit made before the magistrate must substantially charge the person demanded with having committed a crime under the law of that state”
Establishes the statutory standard for sufficiency of extradition documents under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiles was arrested in Dade County, Florida on May 23, 1975 for a traffic infraction and subsequently held on information that he was wanted for crimes…
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 Governor'S Warrant cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by William E. Miles from an order discharging a petition for writ of habeas corpus from a rendition warrant issued by the Governor of the State of Florida for extradition to the State of California. *
William E. Miles was arrested in Dade County, Florida, on May 23, 1975, for a traffic infraction. Following a police check, Miles was taken into custody on the information that he was wanted for crimes allegedly committed in California. Miles was released on bond pending the issuance of a Governor’s warrant. On August 6, 1975, Miles was arrested pursuant to a Governor’s warrant which was defective in that it stated that Miles was wanted by the State of South Carolina. Subsequently, a second warrant was issued and Miles filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging: that the application for requisition to the Governor of California was defective on its face in that it stated that Miles committed perjury in California on February 4, 1975, when, in fact, he was in Florida on and about that date; that the application for requisition to the Governor of California and its supporting papers were defective due to vagueness and lack of specificity, in that the requisition, complaint and affidavit fail to contain any information as to the caption, style or presiding judge of the California case in which Miles is alleged to have perjured himself; and that the affidavit filed in support of the complaint for perjury was at fatal variance with the complaint and did not support probable cause for the issuance of a warrant for the arrest of Miles for the crime of perjury. After oral argument, the trial judge denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, and entered an order discharging the petition. This appeal ensued.
After having reviewed the briefs, the record and the points made by counsel at oral argument, we find that no error is shown on appeal. First, although the application for requisition states that the alleged perjury was committed on February 4,1975, the correct date, February 4, 1974, appears in several places in the record, and it is clear that this was merely a typographical error. Second, Section 941.03, Florida Statutes (1975), provides in pertinent part:
. The indictment, information, or affidavit made before the magistrate must substantially charge the person demanded with having committed a crime under the law of that state; . (emphasis supplied)
Miles contends that the complaint is insufficient and fails to substantially charge a crime under applicable California law in that it fails to allege before whom the allegedly false oath was taken. We find this argument to be without merit as the complaint on its face states that he took
. an oath that he would testify truly before the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Alameda, a competent tribunal, in a case in which an oath by law may be administered .
Neither do we find merit in the remaining point, that the complaint and its supporting affidavit fail to set forth probable cause. As stated in Kurtz v. State of Florida, 22 Fla. 36, 45, 1 Am.St.Rep. 173 (1886),
The courts in a Habeas Corpus proceeding of this kind, where the prisoner is arrested for extradition, cannot go into a trial of the merits of the cause. The proceeding is only an initiatory step to a trial in another State. As to the guilt of the prisoner, they are not allowed to inquire. Their judicial powers are limited to a determination on the sufficiency of the papers and the identity of the prisoner. . .
Affirmed.