Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 19-4506 (2026)

Extradition of persons not present in demanding state at time of commission of crime. 

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Extradition of persons not present in demanding state at time of commission of crime. 

The governor of this state may also surrender, on demand of the executive authority of any other state, any person in this state charged in such other state in the manner provided in section 19-4503, Idaho Code, with committing an act in this state, or in a third state, intentionally resulting in a crime in the state whose executive authority is making the demand, and the provisions of this chapter not otherwise inconsistent shall apply to such cases, even though the accused was not in that state at the time of the commission of the crime, and has not fled therefrom.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1960–1978 · leading case: Struve v. Wilcox, 579 P.2d 1188 (Idaho 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Struve v. Wilcox, 579 P.2d 1188 (Idaho 1978). · cites it 2× “— If from the examination before the judge or magistrate it appears that the person held is the person charged with having committed the crime alleged and that he probably committed the crime, and, except in cases arising under section 19-4506, that he has fled from justice, the…”
In re Martz, 357 P.2d 940 (Idaho 1960). · cites it 2× “That section makes no mention of “information” or “affidavit” as a basis for extradition thereunder. The Vi-dean case does not support petitioner’s contention that a “complaint” sworn to before a magistrate may not serve as an “affidavit” in compliance with I.”
Derr v. Wilcox, 487 P.2d 684 (Idaho 1971). · cites it 6× “§ 7-1052 1 , a section of the Idaho Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, is inconsistent with general extradition statutes of this state, specifically I.C. § 19-4506 2 , and is therefore invalid.”
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.