22 C.F.R. § 95.3
Procedures
(a) Decisions on extradition are presented to the Secretary only after a fugitive has been found extraditable by a United States judicial officer. In each case where allegations relating to torture are made or the issue is otherwise brought to the Department's attention, appropriate policy and legal offices review and analyze information relevant to the case in preparing a recommendation to the Secretary as to whether or not to sign the surrender warrant.
(b) Based on the resulting analysis of relevant information, the Secretary may decide to surrender the fugitive to the requesting State, to deny surrender of the fugitive, or to surrender the fugitive subject to conditions.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2005–2024 · leading case: Hedelito Garcia v. Linda Thomas, 683 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2012).
Hedelito Garcia v. Linda Thomas, 683 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2012). “” 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a). An extraditee may be surrendered only after the Secretary makes a determination regarding possible torture.”
Barapind v. Gov't of the Repub. of India, 50 F. Supp. 3d 1388 (E.D. Cal. 2014). “Specifically, under FARRA’s implementing regulations, 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (b), the defendants voluntarily agreed to the condition imposed by the Secretary of State on Mr.”
Mironescu v. Costner, 480 F.3d 664 (4th Cir. 2007). “” 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a) (2006). Amd, they provide that “[d]ecisions of the Secretary concerning surrender of fugitives for extradition are matters of executive discretion not subject to judicial review.”
Prasoprat v. Benov, 622 F. Supp. 2d 980 (C.D. Cal. 2009). “; (3) stating that "where allegations relating to torture are made or the issue is otherwise brought to the Depart-merit's attention, appropriate policy and legal offices review and analyze information relevant to the case in preparing a recommendation to the Secretary as to…”
Sumontinee Sridej v. Antony Blinken, 108 F.4th 1088 (9th Cir. 2024). “2 (b); see also 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (b). To fulfill the United States’s obligations under the CAT, the Department of State considers, when appropriate, “the question of whether a person facing extradition from the U.”
Juarez-Saldana v. United States, 700 F. Supp. 2d 953 (W.D. Tenn. 2010). “See 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a). Appropriate policy and legal offices are required to “review and analyze information relevant to the case in preparing a recommendation to the Secretary as to *962 whether or not to sign the surrender warrant.”
Hoxha v. Levi, 371 F. Supp. 2d 651 (E.D. Pa. 2005). “” 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a). Then, the Secretary is charged with surrendering the individual, denying surrender of the individual, or surrendering the individual subject to conditions.”
Garcia v. Benov, 715 F. Supp. 2d 974 (C.D. Cal. 2009). “See 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a) and (b), as quoted above.”
Hedelito Garcia v. Linda Thomas (9th Cir. 2012). “” 22 C.F.R. § 95.3 (a). An extraditee may be surrendered only after the Secretary makes a determination regarding possible torture.”
Kapoor v. Dunne (E.D.N.Y 2022). “22 C.F.R. § 95.3 . The Ninth Circuit has held that this procedure creates a “narrow liberty interest” under which the Secretary of State “must make a torture determination before surrendering an extraditee who makes a CAT claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.