Court Opinion

ID: 9825440
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 13:00:47.306548+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:49.983544
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
[3] The return of Sibeck, special agent of the state of Arkansas, makes the original warrant issued by the Governor of Alabama a part thereof, and this warrant, as set out in the record, shows that it was issued on the 25th day of February, 1920, and, although the return recites that it was issued on February 26, 1920, the date as shown by the warrant will govern. The copy attached to the petition and the original warrant itself shows this to be the correct date of the issuance of this warrant.
No objection appears to have been made by the petitioner to the introduction of the original warrant of the Governor of Alabama, on the ground that it bore a different date from that set out in the return, or that it was variant in any way from the warrant referred to in the return.
[4] Under the Governor of Alabama’s warrant the officers to whom it was directed were empowered to arrest the petitioner, as a fugitive from justice, and deliver him into the custody of W. F. Sibeck, the duly authorized agent of the state of Arkansas. In the absence of any showing to the contrary, so far as the arrest and delivery to Sibeck is concerned, it will in this proceeding be presumed to have been done in accordance with the mandate of the law. There is no authorization in the Governor’s warrant for Sibeck to make the arrest, and as stated before, it will be presumed that those with this authority did as a matter of fact, perform such service. Moreover, the return .on the Governor of Alabama’s warrant shows the arrest of petitioner by the sheriff of Morgan county, Ala., and his delivery to Sibeck.
Application overruled.