Case ID: ala-app_3/html/0221-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WALKER, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Brewer v. The State.
    
      Habeas Corpus.
    
    (Decided Jan. 12, 1912.
    57 South. 386.)
    
      Habeas Corpus; Detention; Prima Facie Case. — Where the return to the habeas corpus shows a requisition for the prisoner made by the Governor of the state, from which he is alleged to have filed, a copy of the affidavit made before the proper officer charging him with a crime, and certified by the Governor making the requisition as authentic, and the warrant of the Governor of this state authorizing an arrest, a prima facie case of detention in properly made out.
    Appeal from Montgomery City C’onrt.
    Heard before Hon. Gaston Gunter.
    Habeas corpus by H. F. Brewer to secure his discharge from arrest under extradition proceedings. From an order denying relief petitioner appeals.
    Affirmed.
    L. A. Sanderson, for appellant.
    No brief reached the Reporter.
    B. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, and John V. Smith, for appellee.
    The order of the court should be affirmed on the authority of Ex parte Mohr, 73 Ala. 504; Barrierre v. The State, 142 Ala. 78; Loao v. The State, 56 Sfouth. 79.
   WALKER, P. J.

The return to the writ of habeas corpus and the evidence offered in support of it showed: (1) A demand or requisition for the petitioner (the a.p pella.nt), made by the Governor of the state of California, from which he is alleged to have fled, upon the Governor of this state; (2) a'copy of an affidavit made before a magistrate, charging the petitioner with the commission of the crime of murder in the state of California, arid certified as authentic by the Governor of that state; and (3) the warrant of the Governor of Alabama authorizing the arrest of the petitioner. The papers showing these facts were regular on their face, and were not subject to any of the objections interposed to their admission in evidence. There was no error in the order or judgment appealed from.—Barriere v. State, 142 Ala. 72, 39 South. 55.

Affirmed.