Extradition is an act where one jurisdiction delivers a person accused or convicted of committing a crime in another jurisdiction, over to their law enforcement. It is a cooperative law enforcement process between the two jurisdictions and depends on the arrangements made between them. Besides the legal aspects of the process, extradition also involves the physical transfer of custody of the person being extradited to the legal authority of the requesting jurisdiction.
Gary McKinnon is a Scottish systems administrator and hacker who was accused in 2002 of perpetrating the "biggest military computer hack of all time," although McKinnon himself states that he was merely looking for evidence of free energy suppression and a cover-up of UFO activity and other technologies potentially useful to the public. On 16 October 2012, after a series of legal proceedings in Britain, Home Secretary Theresa May blocked extradition to the United States.
Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution forbade state government officials to force a crowd to disperse when they are otherwise legally marching in front of a state house.
United States v Burns [2001] 1 S.C.R. 283, 2001 SCC 7, was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in which it was found that extradition of individuals to places where they may face the death penalty is a breach of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The decision reached this conclusion through a discussion of evidence regarding the arbitrary nature of execution, although the Court did not go so far as to say execution was also unconstitutional under section 12 of the Charter, which forbids cruel and unusual punishments.
In law, rendition is a "surrender" or "handing over" of persons or property, particularly from one jurisdiction to another. For criminal suspects, extradition is the most common type of rendition. Rendition can also be seen as the act of handing over, after the request for extradition has taken place.
Extradition law in the United States is the formal process by which a fugitive found in the United States is surrendered to another country or state for trial, punishment, or rehabilitation. For foreign countries, the process is regulated by treaty and conducted between the federal government of the United States and the government of a foreign country. The process is considerably different from interstate or intrastate extradition. Florida, Alaska, and Hawaii do not extradite for a misdemeanor conviction that was committed in the US, as of 2010. Some felonies are an exception in American law such as a crime that is violent in nature, or a sexual offense, or felony driving while intoxicated; they will entail extradition from all states in the United States. Theft charges and small drug crimes are the exception; for instance, if a minor crime is committed in Florida, a person apprehended in Idaho will not be extradited back to the original crime's jurisdiction. Federal charges are governed by US federal law and most states, with the exceptions of South Carolina and Missouri, have adopted the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act. In practice, Florida, Alaska, and Hawaii typically do not extradite if the crime in question is not a felony because of the associated costs of transporting the suspect and the housing fees that must be paid to the jurisdiction in which the accused is held until transported.
Canada v Schmidt, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 500, is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on the applicability of fundamental justice under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on extradition. While fundamental justice in Canada included a variety of legal protections, the Court found that in considering the punishments one might face when extradited to another country, only those that "shock the conscience" would breach fundamental justice.
Paul Charlton was a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico from 1911 to 1913.
The Court of Claims was a federal court that heard claims against the United States government. It was established in 1855, renamed in 1948 to the United States Court of Claims, and abolished in 1982. Then, its jurisdiction was assumed by the newly created United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and United States Claims Court, which was later renamed the Court of Federal Claims.
United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that: 1) the enactment by Congress of a law allowing the Sioux Nation to pursue a claim against the United States that had been previously adjudicated did not violate the doctrine of separation of powers; and 2) the taking of property that was set aside for the use of the tribe required just compensation, including interest. The Sioux have not accepted the compensation awarded to them by this case, valued at over $1 billion as of 2011.
Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (1886), is a U.S. Supreme Court case. It held that a fugitive kidnapped from abroad could not claim any violation of the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.
Soering v United Kingdom 161 Eur. Ct. H.R. (1989) is a landmark judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) which established that extradition of a young German national to the United States to face charges of capital murder violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guaranteeing the right against inhuman and degrading treatment. In addition to the precedence established by the judgment, the judgment specifically resulted in the United States committing to not seek the death penalty against the German national involved in the case, and he was eventually extradited to the United States.
Fellers v. United States, 540 U.S. 519 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel.
Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519 (1952), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that kidnapping of suspects by State authorities is constitutional if done so to take the suspect from one jurisdiction to another for criminal trial. The defendant was tried in Michigan after being abducted by Michigan authorities in Chicago, Illinois. The case was related to the previous case of Ker v. Illinois (1886). Both cases together created the Ker-Frisbie Doctrine, which is used to validate the reasoning behind seemingly illegal and unconstitutional extradition and abduction from other countries or from state to state, on the basis of a prosecution being brought against the individual.
Valentine v. United States, 299 U.S. 5 (1936), is known in the study of international criminal law for its contribution to the concept that while it is permissible for the United States to receive an accused without a treaty-based extradition, the United States itself will not extradite without authority found in statute or treaty.
Porter Charlton was the son of a Puerto Rican federal judge who in 1910 confessed in New York, United States to murdering his wife at Lake Como in Italy and sinking the body in a trunk in the lake. He was extradited to Italy.
Spaziano v. Florida was two United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the imposition of the death penalty. In the first case, 454 U.S. 1037 (1981), the Supreme Court, with two dissents, refused Spaziano's petition for certiorari. However, the Florida Supreme Court would reverse Spaziano's death sentence based on the judge's receipt of a confidential report which was not received by either party. On remand, the judge reimposed the death penalty and the Florida Supreme Court upheld the sentence. In the second case, 468 U.S. 447 (1984), the Court heard Spaziano's appeal of his death sentence.
A political offence exception is a provision which limits the obligation of a sovereign state under an extradition or mutual legal assistance treaty or statute. Such provisos allow the state whose assistance has been requested to refuse to hand over a suspect to — or to gather evidence on behalf of — another state, if the requested party's competent authority determines that the requesting party seeks assistance in order to prosecute an offence of a political character.
Sidney L. Jaffe is a U.S.-born Canadian businessman who was kidnapped from outside his Toronto home in 1981 by American bounty hunters Timm Johnsen and Daniel Kear and transported to Florida after failing to appear for a trial there on charges of land sales fraud. His conviction on the fraud charges was overturned on appeal; his conviction on an additional charge of failure to appear for trial was upheld, but he was paroled after two years and returned to Canada. At the request of the Canadian government, Jaffe declined to appear at a new Florida trial on further land fraud charges in 1985. Johnsen and Kear were extradited to Canada and convicted of kidnapping in 1986, but were set free pending appeal, and their sentences were reduced to time served in 1989, after which they returned to the United States. The Jaffe incident caused significant tensions in Canada–United States relations, and resulted in a 1988 exchange of letters between the two countries on cross-border kidnappings.
