Court Opinion

ID: 9770598
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:11:25.832089+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:18.686409
License: Public Domain

*514on appellant’s motion for rehearing.
DAVIDSON, Judge.
Appellant contends that we were in error in holding that the extradition in the instant case was authorized by Section 5 of the Support Act. His contention is that, since the requisition or demand of the Governor of Oklahoma, by its terms, recited that in issuing the same he was acting by virtue of the Constitution and laws of the United States, these proceedings should be judged as to their legality upon the quoted authority and no more.
He contends that Section 5 of the Support Act and Section 6 of the Extradition Act (Art. 1008a, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P.) may not be considered by this court, since the Governor of Oklahoma did not predicate his requisition upon them by name or number or other allegation.
We are not here passing upon the authority under which the Governor of Oklahoma acted but must confine this inquiry as to the legality of the ruling of the trial court in honoring the executive warrant of the Governor of Texas.
The authority under which the Governor of Oklahoma acted is not an issue at such hearing.
Remaining convinced that we properly disposed of this cause originally, appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the court.