Conditions.
The Governor may in his discretion surrender upon demand of the executive authority of
another state, any person found in this state, notwithstanding the fact that a criminal
prosecution or charges under the laws of this state are pending against such person, or
that such person has been convicted in this state and is serving a sentence in any penal
institution of this state. The Governor may condition the release of such prisoner to the
demanding state upon such terms as he may stipulate, including the condition that the
prisoner be returned to this state immediately after trial and before commencing the
service of sentence, if any, in the demanding state; provided, however, in no case shall
surrender of such prisoner be construed as a complete relinquishment of jurisdiction by
this state, but such prisoner shall forthwith be returned to the custody of this state at
expense of the demanding state, immediately after trial in the demanding state, or the
completion of sentence therein, as the case may be.
Effective: June 16, 1960
History: Created 1960 Ky. Acts ch. 135, sec. 20, effective June 16, 1960.
Notes of Decisions
Commonwealth v. Hale, 96 S.W.3d 24 (Ky. 2003).
· cites it 6× “Furthermore, in Davis the Court relied on KRS 440.330 for part of its rationale, ignoring the fact that the United States Government is not a signatory to the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, KRS 440.”
Commonwealth v. Hayes, 734 S.W.2d 467 (Ky. 1987).
· cites it 2× “There is authority, KRS 440.330, for the Governor to release a prisoner to another state for trial, conditioning such release upon his return to the custody of this State “immediately after trial in the demanding state, or the completion of sentence therein, as the case may be.”
Yost v. Smith, 862 S.W.2d 852 (Ky. 1993).
· cites it 2× “That is KRS 440.330. It provides: Extradition may be granted person accused or convicted in this state Conditions.”
Chick v. Commonwealth, 405 S.W.2d 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966).
· cites it 3× “It was the failure to observe the statutory procedures in the three cited cases that worked forfeiture of Kentucky’s right of prosecution.”
Balsley v. Commonwealth, 428 S.W.2d 614 (Ky. Ct. App. 1967).
“2d 147 (1962), that KRS 440.330 provides the only procedure under which a prisoner convicted in this state may be released conditionally for trial in another jurisdiction and that, given a liberal construction, the statute is broad enough to encompass a transfer on request of…”
Davis v. Harris, 355 S.W.2d 147 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962).
“The only such rule we have in this jurisdiction is KRS 440.330, enacted in 1960, which reads as follows: “The Governor may in his discretion surrender upon demand of the executive authority of another state, any person found in this state, notwithstanding the fact that a…”
Herndon v. Wingo, 404 S.W.2d 453 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966).
“Our case law on this question is based upon some idea of “forfeiture” or waiver in the construction of KRS 440.330, a statute headed: “Extradition may be granted persons accused or convicted in this state; conditions.”
Baldridge v. Commonwealth, 473 S.W.2d 847 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971).
· cites it 2× “KRS 440.330. The right to return him to confinement in a correctional institution of this state was expressly reserved.”
Herndon v. Wingo, 399 S.W.2d 486 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966).
· cites it 3× “Appellant was released by Tennessee authorities (just when and how is not shown); thereupon he returned to Calloway County, where he was arrested and committed to the penitentiary, upon the revocation of the probation granted to him by the Calloway Circuit Court.”
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.