Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 440.250 (2026)

Procedure upon arrest

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No person arrested upon such warrant shall be delivered over to the agent whom the executive authority demanding him shall have appointed to receive him unless he shall first be taken forthwith before a judge of a Circuit Court or District Court in this state, who shall inform him of the demand made for his surrender and of the crime with which he is charged, and that he has the right to demand and procure legal counsel; and if the prisoner or his counsel shall state that he or they desire to test the legality of his arrest, the judge of such court shall fix a reasonable time to be allowed him within which to apply for a writ of habeas corpus. When such writ is applied for, notice thereof, and of the time and place of hearing thereon, shall be given to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which the arrest is made and in which the accused is in custody, and to the said agent of the demanding state. Effective: January 2, 1978 History: Amended 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 14, sec. 453, effective January 2, 1978. -- Created 1960 Ky. Acts ch. 135, sec. 11, effective June 16, 1960.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1969–1993 · leading case: Kellems v. Buchignani, 518 S.W.2d 788 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974).
Kellems v. Buchignani, 518 S.W.2d 788 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “250 that the court before which a person *789 is brought following his arrest under an extradition warrant "shall inform him of the demand made for his surrender and of the crime with which he is charged, and that he has the right to demand and procure legal counsel; and if the…”
Yost v. Smith, 862 S.W.2d 852 (Ky. 1993). “On January 9, 1989, the state of Louisiana filed a request for temporary custody of appellant under Article IV of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD).”
Shull v. Wingo, 446 S.W.2d 645 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). “) Appellant contends that the state did not follow the procedure set forth in the “Uniform Criminal Extradition Act”, particularly KRS 440.250 and 440.330. Those statutes relate to extradition procedures involving fugitives from justice.”
Commonwealth, Corr. Cabinet v. Ramsey, 828 S.W.2d 662 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991). “While the IAD granted no pretransfer hearing, the UCEA does under KRS 440.250. Cuyler was explicit in this regard: [Ramsey] is thus entitled to assert any right he might have had under the Extradition Act [UCEA] (or any other state law applicable to interstate transfer of…”
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.