§ 4946. Extradition of person not in demanding state at time crime committed
The Governor of this State may also surrender, on demand of the executive authority
of any other state, any person in this State who is charged in such other state in
the manner provided in section 4943 of this title with committing an act in this State, or in a third state, intentionally resulting
in a crime in the state whose executive authority makes the demand; and the provisions
of this subchapter not otherwise inconsistent shall apply to such cases, notwithstanding
that the accused was not in that state at the time of the commission of the crime,
and has not fled therefrom.
In re Ropp, 541 A.2d 86 (Vt. 1988). · cites it 5ד3, that even if petitioner had not been present in Wisconsin when the felony nonsupport occurred, he might still be subject to extradition under 13 V.S.A. § 4946, a provision of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act not based on the Constitution, which has been adopted in Vermont…”
In re Ropp, 541 A.2d 84 (Vt. 1987). “Petitioner conceded both in the district court and in his petition below that even if he was not present in Wisconsin when the felony nonsupport commenced, he still would have to demonstrate why he was not subject to extradition under 13 V.S.A. § 4946, which does not require…”
In re Hval, 539 A.2d 537 (Vt. 1987). “” Even if petitioner were to succeed on this claim, extradition might still be possible under 13 V.S.A. § 4946 at the discretion of the Vermont Governor, a point petitioner appears to concede in arguing that he could only be extradited under § 4946.”
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.