133.753 Form
of demand. No
demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state
shall be recognized by the Governor unless in writing and accompanied by a copy
of an indictment found or by an 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 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 security release, 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;
and the copy of indictment, information, affidavit, judgment of conviction or
sentence must be authenticated by the executive authority making the demand. [Formerly
147.030; 1999 c.1051 §246]
133.755 [1961 c.521 §1; repealed by 1973
c.836 §358]
Notes of Decisions
State ex rel. Groves v. Mason, 575 P.2d 679 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 2× “The statutory requirements for extradition are set out in ORS 133.753. 1 A demand is sufficient if it is accompanied by documentary proof that the person is duly charged with a "crime” in the demanding state and is subject to arrest there or that he has been convicted (or…”
State ex rel. Eggleston v. Hatrak, 636 P.2d 1017 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 4× “In the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, plaintiff alleged that he was being imprisoned as a result of the governor’s warrant and that his imprisonment was illegal because (1) the statutory requirements regarding form of an extradition demand under ORS 133.753 1 had not been…”
Betschart v. Spinden, 20 P.3d 202 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“See ORS 133.753 (authenticated copy of judgment of conviction or sentence will support extradition demand).”
State ex rel. Hansen v. Skipper, 904 P.2d 1079 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 8× “ORS 133.753 provides: “No demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state shall be recognized by the Governor unless in writing and accompanied by a copy of an indictment found or by an information supported by affidavit in the state having…”
Grant v. Shobe, 524 P.2d 550 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
“*190 Oregon sets out the form a demand for rendition shall take in ORS 133.753: “No demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state shall be recognized by the G-overnor unless in writing and accompanied by a copy of an indictment found or by an…”
Naisbitt v. Raichl, 917 P.2d 59 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“ORS 133.753 provides, in part: “No demand for the extradition of a person charged with crime in another state shall be recognized by the Governor unless in writing and accompanied * * * by a copy of a judgment of conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof, together…”
Perry v. Brown, 552 P.2d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff contends first that the copy of the sentence accompanying the Washington governor’s demand for extradition was not properly authenticated as required by ORS 133.753. Among the documents accompanying this demand is an Order of Probation with an attached Schedule A…”
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.