Opinion ID: 2633743
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Meaningful Rights

Text: Since Kostic, a majority of the states considering the issue before us has recognized that in order to give effect to an alleged fugitive's right to counsel and his or her right to test the legality of the arrest, the alleged fugitive must have some level of competency. For example, the Massachusetts Supreme Court noted that the state legislature could have provided that once the Governor issues a rendition warrant the defendant must be returned summarily to the demanding state. Instead, it specifically gave the defendant the right to counsel and the right to challenge the legality of the proceeding. Having determined a judicial hearing is required, the statutory right to counsel is meaningless if the petitioner is so incompetent that he is unable to comprehend what is occurring and to assist counsel. Hinnant, Petitioner, 424 Mass. 900, 906-07, 678 N.E.2d 1314 (1997). Similarly, a New York court stated that the right to counsel would be rendered a meaningless formality because of an inability to understand the nature of the extradition proceeding or to assist [counsel] in either waiving or challenging extradition on the narrow grounds available in this summary proceeding. Welkes v. Brennan, 79 A.D.2d 644, 644, 433 N.Y.S.2d 817 (N.Y.1980); see also Ex Parte Potter, 21 S.W.3d 290, 296 (Tex.Crim.2000) (Given that an alleged fugitive is entitled to counsel and entitled to challenge the legality of his arrest and assert defenses on the basis of which the extradition warrant may be dismissed, the accused must be sufficiently competent to discuss with his counsel facts relating to the limited defenses that may be raised.); State ex rel. Jones v. Warmuth, 165 W.Va. 825, 836, 272 S.E.2d 446 (1980) ([I]n order to give meaning to a fugitive's right to test the legality of this arrest on the issue of his identity and presence in the demanding state at the time the crime was allegedly committed, and to give meaning to his right to have legal counsel, it is essential to due process that such person has sufficient mental competency to understand the proceeding and to consult with and assist his counsel in such proceeding.).