18 U.S.C. § 3188
Time of commitment pending extradition
Whenever any person who is committed for rendition to a foreign government to remain until delivered up in pursuance of a requisition, is not so delivered up and conveyed out of the United States within two calendar months after such commitment, over and above the time actually required to convey the prisoner from the jail to which he was committed, by the readiest way, out of the United States, any judge of the United States, or of any State, upon application made to him by or on behalf of the person so committed, and upon proof made to him that reasonable notice of the intention to make such application has been given to the Secretary of State, may order the person so committed to be discharged out of custody, unless sufficient cause is shown to such judge why such discharge ought not to be ordered.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases, 1978–2020 · leading case: McElvy v. Civiletti
McElvy v. Civiletti (1981)
“First, at the time of the filing of the petition petitioners prayed for immediate release from custody pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3188 , arguing that the statute limits periods of custody pending extradition to two months and that incarceration in the instant case exceeded the…”
Ziyad Abu Eain v. Peter Wilkes, United States Marshal for the Northern District of Illinois (1981)
“18 U.S.C. § 3188 ; Jimenez v. U. S. Dist.”
In the Matter of the Extradition of Errol Lloyd Barrett. Errol Lloyd Barrett v. United States (1978)
“February 21,1978 Barrett notified Secretary of State of his intention to seek release under 18 U.S.C. § 3188 (1976). February 23,1978 Barrett filed petition for habeas corpus.”
Hababou v. Albright (2000)
“For reasons discussed herein, the Court finds that the deadline for extradition pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3188 , which provides that an individual ordinarily must be delivered to the demanding government within two months of surrender, must be applied in light of the governing…”
Lars Erik Gustav Lindstrom v. Jerome F. Graber, Warden (2000)
“The argument was based on 18 U.S.C. § 3188 , which authorizes the district court to order the release of the committed individual if he has not been removed from the United States within two months after the issuance of the order.”
In Re United States of America, in the Matter of the Extradition of Paul Allen. Paul Allen v. George P. Schultz, Secreta (1983)
“§ 3188 provides: Time of commitment pending extradition Whenever any person who is committed for rendition to a foreign government to remain until delivered up in pursuance of a requisition, is not so delivered up and conveyed out of the United States within two calendar months…”
Matter of Extradition of Mainero (1997)
“Respondent also cites Title 18 U.S.C. § 3188 for a similar proposition.”
Sidali v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1996)
“On December 15, 1995, he filed a motion for a stay of his extradition pending review, which this court subsequently granted, and respondents cross-moved for dismissal of petitioner’s claims against the INS, for summary judgment on his habeas corpus petition, and for revocation…”
Wroclawski v. United States (2009)
“The Court has already resolved Petitioner’s Motion for Emergency Stay of Extradition pending resolution of his habeas corpus petition — that motion was denied as moot because 18 U.S.C. § 3188 automatically tolls the Certificate during the pendency of Petitioner’s habeas corpus…”
Beukes v. Pizzi (1995)
“Beukes’ claim implicates 18 U.S.C. § 3188 , which requires that persons “committed for rendition to a foreign government” must be “delivered up” and “conveyed out” of the United States within two calendar months after such commitment, unless “sufficient cause is shown .”
Vincent John Liberto v. R. Emery, Sheriff of Montgomery County (1983)
“Liberto’s contention that he is entitled to be set free because the government did not convey him out of the United States within two calendar months after his extradition commitment, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3188 (1976), is not properly before us because it was not raised in…”
Taylor v. Jackson (1979)
“Thus, the two-month period for persons held by the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 3188 , does not apply. Moreover, the period for removal of petitioner from Canada did not commence until April 6, 1978, when the order of extradition was finally adjudicated by dismissal of the…”
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.