Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.3 (2026)

Form of demand.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM CRIMINAL EXTRADITION ACT

Act 144 of 1937

780.3 Form of demand.

Sec. 3.

Form of demand. No demand for extradition of a person charged with a crime in another state shall be recognized by the governor unless in writing, accompanied by the following papers:

(1) Governor's requisition under the seal of the state;

(2) Prosecutor's application for requisition for the return of a person charged with crime, wherein shall be stated:

(a) The name of the person so charged;

(b) The nature of the crime;

(d) That the accused was present in demanding state at the time of commission of alleged crime;

(e) That he thereafter fled from the state;

(f) The state in which he is believed to be, including the location of the accused therein, at the time the application is made; certifying that, in the opinion of the said prosecuting attorney, the ends of justice require the arrest and return of the accused to the demanding state for trial, and that the proceeding is not instituted to enforce a private claim;

(3) Verification by affidavit of said application, which shall be accompanied by certified copies of the indictment returned, or information and affidavit filed, or of the complaint made to the judge or magistrate, and the warrant issued thereupon, stating the offense with which the accused is charged, or of the judgment of conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof, together with a statement by executive authority of the demanding state that the person claimed has escaped from confinement or has broken the terms of his bail, probation or parole. Affidavits or documents as the prosecutor may deem proper may be submitted with such application;

(4) Executive warrant, under the seal of the state, authorizing agent, therein named, to receive the person demanded;

(5) The indictment, information, or affidavit made before the magistrate must substantially charge the person demanded with having committed a crime under the law of that state; and the copy of indictment, information, affidavit, judgment or conviction or sentence must be authenticated by the executive authority making the demand.

History: 1937, Act 144, Eff. Oct. 29, 1937 ;-- CL 1948, 780.3

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1974–2013 · leading case: Michigan v. Doran, 439 U.S. 282 (1978).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Michigan v. Doran, 439 U.S. 282 (1978). · cites it 2× “That court construed "substantially charge" to mean there must be a showing of probable cause.”

Williams v. Wayne Cnty. Sheriff, 235 N.W.2d 552 (Mich. 1975). · cites it 4× “MCLA 780.3; MSA 28.1285(3). As noted above, in extradition cases where there is no serious challenge to the substantiality of the crime, the inquiry by the habeas court is generally limited to the face of the documents.”

In re Boynton, 840 N.W.2d 762 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “MCL 780.3, sets forth the required documents, and their necessary content, that must accompany an extradition demand in order for it to be recognized by the Governor.”

Robinson v. Block, 608 F. Supp. 817 (W.D. Mich. 1985). · cites it 2× “Section 780.3 of 7 C.F.R. Part 780 provides that any producer or participant may obtain a reconsideration of any initial determination made by the County or State committee or the Deputy Administrator.”

People v. Doran, 258 N.W.2d 406 (Mich. 1977). “MCLA 780.3; MSA 28.1285(3). (Emphasis added.”

People v. Simmans, 220 N.W.2d 311 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). “MCLA 780.3; MSA 28.1285(3). That section provides that the extradition application shall not be recognized unless accompanied by "a statement by executive authority of the demanding state that the person claimed has escaped from confinement or has broken the terms of his bail,…”

Deur v. Newaygo Cnty. Sheriff, 336 N.W.2d 852 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “Affidavits or documents as the prosecutor may deem proper may be submitted with such application; "(4) Executive warrant, under the seal of the state, authorizing agent, therein named, to receive the person demanded; "(5) The indictment * * * made before the magistrate must…”

In the Matter of Doran, 258 N.W.2d 406 (Mich. 1978). “MCLA 780.3; MSA 28.1285(3). (Emphasis added.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.3(2) — 1 case

Williams v. Wayne Cnty. Sheriff, 235 N.W.2d 552 (Mich. 1975). “MCLA 780.3; MSA 28.1285(3). As noted above, in extradition cases where there is no serious challenge to the substantiality of the crime, the inquiry by the habeas court is generally limited to the face of the documents.”

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.