Docstoc

50 State Enforcement of Pre-signed Waivers of Extradition

Document Sample
50 State Enforcement of Pre-signed Waivers of Extradition Powered By Docstoc
					50 State Enforcement of Pre-signed Waivers of Extradition Chart
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Virgin Islands Washinton West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming No law on subject. No law on subject. Attorney General’s policy disfavors seeking enforcement. Yes. ARIZONA REV. STAT. §13-3865.01. No law. Practice favors enforcement. Yes. CAL. PENAL CODE §1555.2. Yes. COLO. REV. STAT. 16-19-126.5 No law on subject. Yes. Reed v. State, 251 A.2d 549 (Del. 1969) No law on subject, but policy disfavors enforcement. Yes. FLA. STAT. §941.26(3). No law on subject, but depends on the judge. No law on subject, but courts tend to favor enforcement Yes. HAWAII REV. STAT. §832.25. No law specifically on subject, but policy favors since most Idaho courts impose such conditions. Yes, but may depend on the judge. Attorney General Opinion 84-005. No law on subject, but policy and practice favors enforcement. No law on subject, but policy disfavors enforcement. Yes. Hunt v. Hand, 352 P.2d 1 (Kan.1960). No law on subject, but Attorney General’s policy favors seeking enforcement. Yes. LA. CODE OF CRIM. PROC. Art. 273. Yes. 15 MAINE REV. STAT. §226. Yes. White v. Hall, 291 A.2d 694 (Md. 1972). No law on subject. Yes. MICH. COMP. LAW §780.25(a). Yes. State ex rel. Swyston v. Hedman, 179 N. W.2d 282 (Minn. 1970); State ex rel. Morris v. Tahash, 115 N.W. 2d 676 (Minn. 1962). No law on subject, but practice disfavors enforcement. Yes. MONT. CODE §46-30-226. Schwartz v. Woodahl, 487 P.2d 300 (Mont. 1971). Yes. State v. Lingle, 308 N.W.2d 531 (Neb. 1981). Yes. NEV. REV. STAT. 179.22 §3. Yes. N.H. REV. STAT §612.5-a, Yes. State v. Maglio, 459 A.2d 1209 (N.J. 1988); State v. Arundell, 650 A.2d 845 (N.J. 1944). Enforcement of pre-signed waivers in interstate probation/parole compact cases only. N.Y.S. Exec. Law §259-m. No law on subject, but policy and informal Attorney General Opinion favors enforcement. No law on subject, but policy favors waivers because North Dakota courts and parole authorities impose extradition waivers as release conditions. No law on subject, but depends on judge. Yes. Wright v. Page, 414 P.2d 570 (Ok. 1966). Yes. ORE. REV. STAT. 133.843. Yes. 42 PA. C.S. §9146.1. No law on subject, but prosecutors seek enforcement. No law on subject. Yes, by Executive Order. No law on subject. Yes. Attorney General Opinion No. 589. Yes. Ex parte Johnson, 610 S.W.2d 757 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). No law on subject, but depends on the judge. Attorney General and Governor will seek enforcement. No law on subject. No law on subject, but depends on the judge. Prosecutors will seek enforcement. No law on subject. Yes. REV. CODE WASH. 10.88.415. Yes. W.VA. CODE §5-1-11c. No law on subject. No law on subject, but depends on the judge.

Note: This list is simply a starting point or guide. Laws change, local rules often apply, and judges interpret and apply laws differently. Verify all information before writing a bond in any state. Lexington National accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information in this chart.


				
DOCUMENT INFO