NRS
179.183 Form of demand. No
demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state
shall be recognized by the Governor unless it is:
1. In writing alleging, except in cases
arising under NRS 179.189, that the
accused was present in the demanding state at the time of the commission of the
alleged crime, and that thereafter the accused fled from the state; and
2. Accompanied by a copy of an indictment
found or by information supported by affidavit in the state having jurisdiction
of the crime, or by a copy of an affidavit made before a magistrate there,
together with a copy of any warrant which was issued thereupon; or
3. Accompanied by a copy of a judgment of
conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof, together with a
statement by the executive authority of the demanding state that the person
claimed has escaped from confinement or has broken the terms of the person’s
bail, probation or parole.
Ê 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 of conviction or sentence must be authenticated by the executive
authority making the demand.
(Added to NRS by 1967,
1098)
Notes of Decisions
Sheriff, Clark Cnty. v. Thompson, 452 P.2d 911 (Nev. 1969).
· cites it 2× “Both the federal law and NRS 179.183 require the presentation of certain documents by the demanding state which “substantially charge” the person demanded with having committed a crime under the law of that state.”
Martinez v. Sheriff of Clark Cnty., 527 P.2d 1200 (Nev. 1974).
“NRS 179.183 requires that the presentation of certain documents of the demanding state “substantially charge” the person demanded with having committed a crime under the law of that state.”
Ewing (Christopher) Vs. State C/W 77671 (Nev. 2019).
“Extradition documents are in order when the demand for extradition is in the form required by NRS 179.183. State ex rel. Gilpin v. Stokes, 483 N.”
Ewing (Christopher) Vs. State C/W 77671 (Nev. 2019).
“Extradition documents are in order when the demand for extradition is in the form required by NRS 179.183. State ex rel. Gilpin v. Stokes, 483 N.”
Marshall v. Sheriff, 488 P.2d 1157 (Nev. 1971).
“197, before his delivery to the demanding authority can be accomplished.”
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.