No demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state shall be recognized by the governor unless the demand is in writing alleging, except in cases arising under section 2963.06 of the Revised Code, that the accused was present in the demanding state at the time of the commission of the alleged crime, and that thereafter he fled from the state, and unless the demand is accompanied by:
(A) 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;
(B) 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 his bail, probation, or parole. 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. The copy of indictment, information, affidavit, judgment of conviction, or sentence must be authenticated by the executive authority making the demand.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2025 · leading case: Carpenter v. Jamerson, 432 N.E.2d 177 (Ohio 1982).
Carpenter v. Jamerson, 432 N.E.2d 177 (Ohio 1982). · cites it 2ד18 explicitly mandates otherwise in its statement: “The guilt or innocence of an accused as to the crime of which he is charged may not be inquired into by the governor or in any proceeding after a demand for extradition accompanied by a charge of crime under section 2963.03 of…”
In re Extradition of Adams, 579 N.E.2d 752 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1989). · cites it 6ד06, an exception to the rule set forth in R.C. 2963.03, which requires that a suspect be a fugitive from justice before Ohio will permit extradition.”
State ex rel. Gilpin v. Stokes, 483 N.E.2d 179 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1984). · cites it 2דIt is noteworthy that the issue in that case was the factual question whether the petitioners were “present in the demanding state at the time of the commission of the alleged crime,” R.C. 2963.03, that fourteen witnesses said they were not while two said they were, that other…”
State v. Johnson, 2016-Ohio-7036. “404, not the IAD statute R.C. 2963.03. Id. at ¶ 17, fn. 2. {¶ 30} The court further stated: As is stated above, appellee was never given written notice by the Florida Warden of the Delaware County indictment against him or of his right to make a request for final disposition of…”
Bonds v. Dep't of Rehab. & Corr., 687 N.E.2d 300 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1996). “The trial court erred as a matter of law in not finding that there was an intervening justification for Walter Sayre’s confinement because there was a valid *148 demand for extradition pursuant to R.C. 2963.03, Florida notified Ohio of its intent to extradite Sayre, and the…”
In re Hollander, 441 N.E.2d 824 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1981). “18; R.C. 2963.03 lays out the requirements for extradition “of a person charged with a crime in another state.”
Hanson v. Smith, 587 N.E.2d 345 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1990). · cites it 5ד, the Ohio Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, sets forth the requirements for a demand of extradition to be recognized by the Governor of Ohio in R.C. 2963.03: "No demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state shall be recognizedby the governor unless…”
Goree v. Cunningham, 480 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1985). · cites it 2ד, whether the absence of a copy of an arrest warrant from the demand documents of Georgia rendered such documents defective so as to preclude extradition, appellant relies on R.C. 2963.03. This statute provides that no demand for extradition be recognized unless the demand is in…”
In re Lamont, 2013-Ohio-3199. · cites it 4ד{¶16} To interpret Article IV(a) to require the attachment of a copy of the complaint—which is not required by Article IV(a)’s plain language—is to incorporate this requirement from the Extradition Act, which, in relevant part, prohibits Ohio’s governor from recognizing another…”
Philpott v. City of Stow, No. 5:24-cv-00580 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 25, 2025). “22, at 5 (“Defense clearly didn’t follow extradition laws regarding the under ORC 2963.03 & 18 U.S.C. § 3182 .”).) He alleges that, after his arrest, “Miller & Quiner discussed that Las Vegas ‘removed the warrant from the System,’” and that “Las Vegas PD did not provide any…”
Harris v. Sweeney, 170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 151 (Ohio 1959). · cites it 2ד06, Revised Code, reads as follows: “The Governor may 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 2963.03 of the Revised Code with committing an act in this state, or…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2963.03(A): 2 cases
Goree v. Cunningham, 480 N.E.2d 446 (Ohio 1985). “, whether the absence of a copy of an arrest warrant from the demand documents of Georgia rendered such documents defective so as to preclude extradition, appellant relies on R.C. 2963.03. This statute provides that no demand for extradition be recognized unless the demand is in…”
In re Lamont, 2013-Ohio-3199. “{¶16} To interpret Article IV(a) to require the attachment of a copy of the complaint—which is not required by Article IV(a)’s plain language—is to incorporate this requirement from the Extradition Act, which, in relevant part, prohibits Ohio’s governor from recognizing another…”
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.