Document: 439 U.S. 282 99 S.Ct. 530 58 L.Ed.2d 521 State of MICHIGAN, Petitioner,v.Harold William DORAN. No. 77-1202. Argued Oct. 4, 1978. Decided Dec. 18, Syllabus After respondent had been arrested in Michigan and charged with receiving concealing stolen property (a truck driven from Arizona) notified Arizona authorities, theft, an Justice the Peace issued arrest warrant reciting, accordance law, that there was "reasonable cause" to believe committed offense. Thereafter, Governor a requisition for respondent's extradition accompanied by warrant, supporting affidavits, original complaint; ordered extradition. Upon being arraigned on petitioned writ habeas corpus, alleging invalid because it did not comply Uniform Criminal Extradition Act effect Michigan, petition denied. The Supreme Court reversed denial relief release ground failed show factual basis its finding probable cause support charge, judicial other documents found deficient this respect. Held: Once asylum has acted based demanding State's determination existed, no further inquiry may be issue State. Pp. 286-290. (a) Interstate intended summary mandatory executive proceeding derived language Clause United States Constitution, which requires fugitive justice another delivered he fled demand authority, never contemplated conduct kind preliminary traditionally intervening between initial trial. P. 288. (b) courts are bound Clause, implementing federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3182, and, where adopted, Act. granted extradition, such grant prima facie evidence constitutional statutory requirements have met, court considering corpus can do more than decide whether their face order, petitioner crime State, is person named request, fugitive. 288-289. (c) Court's holding finds record read light law overlooks "conclusory language" criminal charges ordinarily cast. 289-290. 401 Mich. 235, 258 N.W.2d 406, remanded. Robert A. Derengoski, Lansing, Mich., petitioner. Kathleen M. Cummins, Detroit, respondent. Mr. Chief BURGER opinion Court. 1 We certiorari determine state nullify charge supported cause. 435 967, 98 1604, 56 (1978). 2 (1) 3 On December 1975, Doran property. Mich.Comp.Laws 750.535 (1970). rested Doran's possession bearing California license plates, Arizona. authorities sent them photograph taken day his arrest. January 7, 1976, sworn complaint filed Peace, charging theft described motor vehicle, Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. §§ 13-661 13-663, 13-672(A) (Supp.1957-1977), or, alternatively, embezzlement, 13-682 (Supp.1957-1977). stated she offense(s) were [Doran] . ." 4 While pending, 12 as A magistrate extended detention provide time receive expected request Arizona.1 February 11 Attached two based. ordered. 5 March 29. He then arraigning contending 780.1 780.31 Cf. 13-1301 13-1328 twice denied corpus; Appeals application leave appeal dismissed corpus. People v. Doran, Nos. 28507 (May 1976) 30516 (Nov. 22, 1976). Court, however, first petition. 397 886 (1976). review, trial court's order mandated immediate release. In re rehearing denied, 402 951 (1977).2 6 (2) 7 reasoned significant impairment liberty occurred whenever one extradited must preceded showing crime. addition relying Gerstein Pugh, 420 103, 95 854, 43 54 (1975),3 conclusion Act, 780.3 (1970), affidavit "substantially charge"4 having under state. That construed charge" mean 8 essence review action governor process re-examine accompanies state.5 concluded: 9 "In case at bar, indictment or document reflecting prior both phrased conclusory simply mirrors pertinent statutes. More importantly, affidavits fail set out facts could justify Fourth Amendment crime." 240-242, N.W.2d, 408-409 (footnotes omitted). 10 assumed warrants without since said happen often Michigan. view, neither generated nor recitals officer sufficient disagree we reverse. (3) turn question power made Article IV, 2, cl. Constitution subject clear explicit: 13 "A Person any Treason, Felony, Crime, who shall flee Justice, Demand Authority fled, up, removed Jurisdiction Crime." 14 To implement provision see Innes Tobin, 240 127, 131, 36 290, 291, 60 L.Ed. 562 (1916); Prigg Pennsylvania, 16 Pet. 539, 617, 1060 (1842), Congress provided: 15 "Whenever authority Territory demands justice, District produces copy before Territory, demanded treason, felony, crime, certified authentic chief whence so him secured, notify making demand, agent appointed fugitive, when appear." 3182 (emphasis added).6 enable each bring offenders swiftly possible alleged offense committed. Biddinger Commissioner Police, 245 128, 132-133, 38 41, 42, 62 193 (1917); Appleyard Massachusetts, 203 222, 227, 27 122, 123, 51 161 (1906). purpose preclude becoming sanctuary fugitives thus "balkanize" administration among several states. It articulated, language, concepts comity full faith credit, immediately preceding clause Art. IV. like Commerce served important national objectives newly developing country striving foster unity. Compare Biddinger, supra, McLeod Dilworth Co., 322 327, 330, 64 1023, 1025, 88 1304 (1944). less trade commerce, unity thought de-emphasizing lines certain purposes, impinging essential autonomy. 17 Constitution. 132, 42; Strauss, 197 324, 332, 25 535, 537, 49 774 (1905); R. Hurd, Treatise Right Personal Liberty Writ Habeas Corpus 598 (1858). Near century after acknowledging possibility persons give false information police prosecutors prosecuting attorney act "either wantonly ignorantly," 19 "While will always endeavor attempted wrong successful, hand, care burdened make practically valueless. but step securing presence defendant tried, manner determines guilt." 332-333, 537. 20 Whatever scope discretion vested state, cf. Kentucky Dennison, 24 How. 66, 107, 717 (1861), Compton Alabama, 214 1, 8, 29 605, 607, 53 885 (1909), governor's met. Bassing Cady, 208 386, 392, 28 393, 52 540 (1908). order; state; extradition; (d) These historic readily verifiable. 21 Under felony prosecutions commenced either filing officer. Ariz.Rule Crim.Proc. 2.2 (1973). peace whom if determined reasonable committed.7 required directed traditional grounds Erdman Superior 102 Ariz. 524, 433 P.2d 972 (1967); Currier, 86 394, 347 (1959). Here Arizona, concluding accused them." 22 held recite This provisions law. Moreover cast otherwise. Ex parte Reggel, 114 642, 651, 1148, 1153, 250 (1885). 23 accept state's proceedings clothed presumption regularity. short, neutral exists, determination. Section companion established principles merge conclusion. allow plenary issues fully litigated would defeat plain purposes procedures authorized 2. See, e. g., Sweeney Woodall, 344 86, 90, 73 139, 140, 97 (1952); Marbles Creecy, 215 63, 69-70, 30 32, 33-34, 92 (1909); Pierce 210 387, 404-405, 714, 719-720, 1113 hold once Accordingly, judgment reversed, remanded inconsistent opinion. 26 Reversed BLACKMUN, BRENNAN MARSHALL join, concurring result. I am willing, appears me be, bypass readily, almost ignore, significance context. mentioned all discussion portion (part (3)) therefore assume view little consequence determining what type contrast apparent position, feel necessary squarely arrive principal result case. * presented one, only issue: "Did misconstrue challenge lack Amendment, collateral courts?" Cert. 2.1 31 deeply divided.2 Despite obvious importance issue, refuses opportunity afforded clarify interstate Instead, avoids that, even does apply requirements, case, satisfied. Ante, 285 n. 3. convenient assumption, my perpetuates confusion area clarification uniformity urgently needed. 32 If, whatsoever satisfied, agree unnecessary, strictly speaking, applies. But really cannot know satisfied examining procedural protections provides interests stake, weighing those against ones furthered Constitution.3 33 applies context, use affords articulate, guidance courts, proper accommodation Clause. II 34 analysis, fear, rests cases standards proceedings. basic assumption these early cases—that left virtually complete control over procedures4—has tenable Wolf Colorado, 338 25, 27-28, 69 1359, 1361, 93 1782 (1949), through Fourteenth subsequent conform same Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 81 1684, 1081 (1961); Ker California, 374 23, 83 1623, 726 (1963); Beck 379 89, 85 223, 142 (1964). propounded "[n]ear century," ante, 288, longer considered isolation Amendment.5 35 also relies describes "clear explicit" 286. equally explicit": "The right people secure unreasonable seizures, violated, Warrants upon cause, Oath affirmation, particularly describing seized." 37 words distinction "seizures" seizures purpose. Neither they distinguish usual warrant. Indeed, "security one's privacy arbitrary intrusion police—which core Amendment," U.S., 27, undiminished force occurs context pretrial spelled (1975). said, "requires prerequisite restraint following arrest."6 Id., 114, 863. confinement "may imperil suspect's job, interrupt source income, impair family relationships. When stakes high, detached furnish meaningful protection unfounded interference liberty." Ibid. 39 involves "extended arrest" severe accompanying within single involves, minimum, administrative processing forced transportation between. surely "significant For me, therefore, Amendment's "charge" something indictment, magistrate, need unless made. course, burden demonstrating. 40 Having this, recognize prompt rendition minimum friction States. See 227-228, 123-124, Constitution's concern efficiency seriously jeopardized examine probable-cause already State.7 go far permit delve into niceties underpinnings determination, obliged returned enough papers submitted facially If do, province appellate probe sufficiency finding. conducted due course State.8 III 41 sufficient. An specifically: "I App. 26a. equate recital "probable parlance. sure, phraseology conclusory, still Clause-Fourth purposes. should allowed scrutinize ascertain here. Any create potential frustration obstruction Clause.9 42 concur deference pending At release, custody months them. counsel moved dismiss mootness her inability locate motion Eagles ex rel. Samuels, 329 304, 306-308, 67 313, 314-316, 91 308 (1946). "the arrest." Because provided requested terms appear derive Munsey Clough, 196 364, 373, 282, 284, 515 (1905): "If substantially trial, [extradition] proceeding." Pearce Texas, 155 311, 116, 117, 164 (1894); 3, U.L.A. (1974). Kirkland Preston, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 148, 385 F.2d 670 (1967). remains unchanged version enacted 1793. Stat. 302. Rev.Stat. 5278; 662 (1940 ed.). may, necessary, subpoena additional witnesses issuing 22-311 (1975); Ariz.Rules 2.4, 3.1, 3.2 (1973 Supp.1978-1979). Rules Procedure require reciting 3.1 rephrased, change substance, petitioner's brief merits. Brief Petitioner counterstatement question: legitimately encompasses scrutiny jurisdiction reflect hence Respondent 1-2. Opposition 1. side regards significance. One leading number followed general line analysis Kirkland. Grano Anderson, 446 272 (CA3 1971); Montague Smedley, 557 (Alaska 1976); Pippin Leach, 188 Colo. 385, 534 1193 Brode Power, Conn.Supp. 411, 332 A.2d 376 (Super.Ct.1974); Tucker Virginia, 783 (D.C.App.1973); Clement Cox, 118 N.H. 246, 841 (1978); Cooper Lombard, 45 A.D.2d 928, 357 N.Y.S.2d 323 (1974); Locke Burns, W.Va., 238 S.E.2d 536 (1977). some rejected Golden, 65 Cal.App.3d 789, 135 Cal.Rptr. 512, app. cert. sub nom. Golden 434 805, 35, 63 (1977); Kubala Woods, Ill.2d 48, 284 N.E.2d 286 (1972); McEwen 224 So.2d 206 (Miss.1969); Ault Purcell, Or.App. 664, 519 1285, 419 858, 106, Commonwealth Marshall Gedney, 237 Pa.Super. 372, 352 528 Salvail Sharkey, 108 R.I. 271 814 sides exhibit variety theories positions. Further, least Massachusetts South Dakota, nullified decisions supreme refused Ierardi Gunter, 929 (CA1 1976), Ierardi, 366 Mass. 640, 321 921 (1975), Wellington 413 F.Supp. 151 (SD S.D., 499 As understand today's ruling, extent present willing governed requires, liberty. holds prohibits reviewing adequacy properly erred took place approved indicated made, contrary impression own evaluation affidavits. nevertheless find implications passages troublesome. says, "once state." seems imply papers, role matter. implication ibid., determination." earlier passage, 289, says "is met." This, suggestion rebuttable note seem disregard proposition Full Faith Credit sister enforce foreign penal judgment." Nelson George, 399 224, 229, 90 1963, 1966, 578 287-288, 290. seemingly indicate principled way appropriate giving consideration values stake. explicit 331, 536, (1905), quoted 288: "Under procedure." interest conflict recognized, long ago suggested interpreted avoid conflict. Taney, speaking discussed Clause's requirement "charged" "Treason, term accord accepted governing roles departments. concluded return "was regular proceedings." 104. noted "an 'fair face,' 'properly constituted grand jury,' conclusively existence issuance inquiry. States, 287 241, 250, 129, 77 283 (1932)." 117 19, 865. Other types entail delay. indicates, itself contemplates "historic verifiable," identity "charge." There nothing routine led process. limitation perhaps limit fugitive's rights, justifying usually restricted. 115, 864. Nevertheless, governors compromise, limiting provisions. nature Nor involve circumstances apply. obvious, Arizona's procedure measured fact—if fact—that

Category: 0