18 U.S.C. § 3196
Extradition of United States citizens
If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been requested by that country if the other requirements of that treaty or convention are met.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1992–2019 · leading case: United States v. Ivo Knotek, 925 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2019).
United States v. Ivo Knotek, 925 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2019). “citizens, and 18 U.S.C. § 3196 cannot prevail over the Treaty.”
Hilario v. United States, 854 F. Supp. 165 (E.D.N.Y 1994). “Although the Convention does not, by its own terms, empower the Secretary of State to surrender a United States citizen to Portugal, such power is clearly *167 conferred by 18 U.S.C. § 3196 (Supp.1994). Petitioner’s constitutional and legal challenges to that statute are without…”
Sacirbey v. Guccione, 589 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2009). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3196 ("If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been…”
Lopez-Smith v. Hood, 121 F.3d 1322 (9th Cir. 1997). “18 U.S.C. § 3196 . Likewise, 18 U.S.C. § 3186 says that the Secretary of State “may” order the person to be delivered to an agent of the foreign government to be tried.”
In Re the Extradition of Nava Gonzalez, 305 F. Supp. 2d 682 (S.D. Tex. 2004). “18 U.S.C. § 3196 . Therefore, regardless of Respondent’s true citizenship or nationality, extradition is wholly warranted based on the evidentiary showing made by the Mexican government.”
Gouveia v. Vokes, 800 F. Supp. 241 (E.D. Pa. 1992). “Gouveia has raised a serious constitutional question about a provision in the International Narcotics Control Act of 1990, now codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3196 , that seeks specifically to amend the extradition treaty that has existed between the United States and Portugal since…”
United States v. Nipper, 198 F. Supp. 2d 818 (W.D. La. 2002). “In other words, only a country without an extradition treaty “lacks the ability to lawfully secure the person’s return” as required by Section 1119(c)(2).”
In Re Extradition of Munguia, 294 F. Supp. 2d 893 (S.D. Tex. 2003). “18 U.S.C. § 3196 . IV. Certificate of Summary Extraditability Having determined that Armando Munguia has validly agreed to be extradited to the United Mexican States, extradition should occur without further proceedings, and the United States of America shall take all measures…”
Sacirbey v. Guccione (2d Cir. 2009). “§ 3196 (“If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been requested by…”
Nezirovic v. Holt, 990 F. Supp. 2d 606 (W.D. Va. 2014). “1994), the court rejected the argument that Hilario, a United States citizen, could not be extradited to Portugal because his criminal conduct predated the enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 3196 , a statute authorizing extradition of United States citizens.”
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.