Interstate rendition and the governor's warrant, the limited issues a court may consider, waiving the process, the compact that governs a prisoner already serving a sentence elsewhere, the speedy trial deadlines a detainer starts, international extradition and dual criminality, the rule of specialty, and provisional arrest.
Dual criminality asks whether the acts charged abroad would constitute a crime under the law of the requested state, without requiring identical elements or identical names. Older treaties list extraditable offenses; modern treaties define extraditability by a penalty threshold and apply the conduct comparison. Differences in criminalization, fiscal offenses, inchoate liability and extraterritorial reach produce most of the disputes.
Federal law conditions surrender on the existence of an extradition treaty, with a narrow statutory exception. A request travels through diplomatic channels, a federal prosecutor files a complaint, and a judge or magistrate judge hears evidence of criminality. Certification passes the matter to the Secretary of State, who holds the surrender decision. Commitment beyond two calendar months permits application for discharge.
The Constitution obliges a state to deliver up a person charged in another state who is found within its borders, and federal statute supplies the mechanism. The demand must allege presence and flight and must attach a certified indictment, information supported by affidavit, affidavit before a magistrate, or judgment. If no agent appears within thirty days of arrest, the prisoner may be discharged.
Provisional arrest is authorized by treaty for urgent cases where waiting for the full documentary request would risk flight. A federal complaint under oath supports a warrant, and the requesting state must transmit the formal request within the treaty's stated period. Release on expiry does not bar re-arrest once the papers arrive, and bail in extradition requires a showing of special circumstances.
A person arrested as a fugitive may consent in writing, before a judge, to return to the demanding state without a governor's warrant. The judge must first explain the right to require the warrant and the right to seek habeas corpus. Waiver surrenders only the asylum state proceeding, not any defense, and a request for final disposition under the detainer compact operates as a waiver by statute.
A facially valid governor's warrant creates a presumption that the person in custody is the person named in the demand. The person held must overcome it, and most courts demand a showing that leaves no reasonable doubt. Fingerprint comparison is the strongest evidence available in either direction, and the statutes permit inquiry into guilt only so far as it bears on identifying the person as the one charged.
Fugitive status requires physical presence in the demanding state at the time of the alleged offense and subsequent absence from it. Intent to avoid prosecution plays no part, and a person who left for entirely innocent reasons is a fugitive. Where the person was never present, the uniform act permits surrender on a different theory for acts committed elsewhere that intentionally resulted in a crime in the demanding state.
Specialty confines the receiving state to the offenses for which extradition was granted, together with lesser included offenses and, under many treaties, offenses the surrendering state later consents to. The rule rests on treaty text and reciprocity rather than on constitutional protection, which is why standing to enforce it is contested and why the surrendering state's consent cures a violation.
The Interstate Agreement on Detainers gives a prisoner the right to demand final disposition of untried charges in another party state within one hundred eighty days, and gives a prosecutor temporary custody with an obligation to try the case within one hundred twenty days of arrival. Returning the prisoner before trial requires dismissal with prejudice, and failure to meet either deadline does the same.
A rendition warrant is signed by the asylum state's governor, sealed, and directed to any peace officer. State enactments of the uniform act require it to substantially recite the facts necessary to the validity of its issuance. A facially valid warrant establishes a prima facie case for surrender, and the person held must then overcome it on one of a short list of grounds.
The Supreme Court confined asylum state review to whether the extradition documents are facially in order, whether the person has been charged with a crime in the demanding state, whether the person held is the one named, and whether the person is a fugitive. Guilt, the sufficiency of the evidence, the motives of the demanding state and the conditions awaiting the person are all outside the inquiry.
