# Inter-state arrest warrants **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 1, 2014, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126 "2014-04-01T23:13:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2014, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/21 "2014-04-02T22:16:56Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > Not to my knowledge. The “pick up” radius is at the SOLE discretion of the issuing agency, although I am sure Murder Warrants are typed in as a Nationwide pickup/hold. > > Some confine themselves to INTRA state only, etc., but as I stated, not for Murder. > > I seem to remember in the back of my mind about the Ohio Revised Code (??) entering the state with a foreign warrant is a crime in and of itself? Or I read that in some state (s) somewhere?? I am not a lawyer, but this seems to prove the state sovereignty issue. It is up to the state to decide how hard to work to retrieve the prisoner. If Texas wants to spend the money they can come get anyone. If California is easy, then the other states can’t tell California to come get their man/women. The sovereign state gets to choose. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2014, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/22 "2014-04-02T23:14:48Z")
> [@Canadjun](#): > > Thanks! Maybe I’ll get you guys figured out one of these days! **pkbites** - you are hilarious! “…vapor-locked right in front of me and assumed room temperature…”?! I had to think about that one!😕😃 Yeah, the incomprehensible LEO jargon in a mainstream message board is just so entertaining I had to stop reading it. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/23 "2014-04-03T01:52:28Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Another time I did an FI on a guy that was looking inside car windows in a parking lot. He has a warrant out of Iowa for attempted murder via arson. But the warrant specified they would only extradite if he was taken into custody in a county that borders the state of Iowa, which Milwaukee does not. So I ended up having to let him go. Attempted murder? WTF does a guy gotta do to get into prison in Iowa?! USA Today had an article on how surprisingly common it is for states to give low priority to recovering interstate fugitives: [http://www.usatoday.com/longform/news/nation/2014/03/11/fugitives-next-door/6262719/?AID=10709313&PID=6149191&SID=s5cc3l2a8vje](http://www.usatoday.com/longform/news/nation/2014/03/11/fugitives-next-door/6262719/?AID=10709313&PID=6149191&SID=s5cc3l2a8vje) ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/24 "2014-04-03T01:58:20Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > I believe the US Marshals only deal with fugitives from the federal courts. If you’re extradited from California to New York, a New York police officer must go to California to collect the prisoner. The US Marshal’s also have a fugitive task force which works with local authorities to track and arrest particularly dangerous criminals who abscond. They have been doing a lot of work in the Chicagoland area lately. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/25 "2014-04-03T12:52:46Z")
> [@Capt\_Kirk](#): > > We have a national database and basically every Law Enforcement Agency has access. This will have all the info about an alleged perp in it and will include info on where this person has ties or relatives. If a LEO runs your car plates, ID card, know alias etc, the database will alert that LEO. The computer in the police car is connected in most cases. > > For really serious crimes, the FBI will assist. The RCMP has access as well and will happily arrest you as you cross the Border. > > Then comes extradition. > > I am sure others here know more but this is what I know off the top of my head. The system is called the National Criminal Information System or Center, I forget which. > > **Capt** Center > [@lawbuff](#): > > I seem to remember in the back of my mind about the Ohio Revised Code (??) entering the state with a foreign warrant is a crime in and of itself? Or I read that in some state (s) somewhere?? Missouri has a similar statute, I wouldn’t be surprised if other states do as well. It’s kind of interesting how it works, it took a couple of explanations before I finally caught on. If a person has a warrant from another state and is located here, they aren’t technically arrested on the warrant; they’re arrested for having an outstanding warrant from another state and residinng in Missouri. While they’re being held on that charge, extradition proceedings begin for the issuing state to pick up the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/26 "2014-04-03T13:50:35Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > Not to my knowledge. The “pick up” radius is at the SOLE discretion of the issuing agency, although I am sure Murder Warrants are typed in as a Nationwide pickup/hold. > > Some confine themselves to INTRA state only, etc., but as I stated, not for Murder. > > I seem to remember in the back of my mind about the Ohio Revised Code (??) entering the state with a foreign warrant is a crime in and of itself? Or I read that in some state (s) somewhere?? > [@Sicks\_Ate](#): > > Center > > Missouri has a similar statute, I wouldn’t be surprised if other states do as well. > > It’s kind of interesting how it works, it took a couple of explanations before I finally caught on. > > If a person has a warrant from another state and is located here, they aren’t technically arrested on the warrant; they’re arrested for having an outstanding warrant from another state and residinng in Missouri. While they’re being held on that charge, extradition proceedings begin for the issuing state to pick up the subject. That’s how it works here. There is a statute against being a fugitive from justice. That is what you are arrested and detained for. As pk mentioned earlier most of the out of state warrants state the extradition limits. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/27 "2014-04-03T18:45:58Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > This is not at all true. The United States is a sovereign country. States are not sovereign countries; that are parts of a sovereign country. Cite? I have one: > [@Supreme Court](#): > > The Alabama Supreme Court noted that “[p]rosecutions under the laws of separate sovereigns do not improperly subject an accused twice to prosecutions for the same offense,” citing this Court’s cases applying the dual sovereignty doctrine. Id., at 906. The court acknowledged that this Court has not considered the applicability of the dual sovereignty doctrine to successive prosecutions by different States. It reasoned, however, that “\*f, for double jeopardy purposes, Alabama is considered to be a sovereign entity vis-a-vis the federal government then surely it is a sovereign entity vis-a-vis the State of Georgia.” Ibid. > . > . > . > The dual sovereignty doctrine, as originally articulated and consistently applied by this Court, compels the conclusion that successive prosecutions by two States for the same conduct are not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. States are, in fact, separately sovereign from the federal government. I grant they are not _countries_, but they are sovereign entities. If you’re hanging your hat on “country,” then I agree with you. But if you meant to deny dual sovereignty, I’d ask for a cite. ---
**Author:** ![Canadjun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@Canadjun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Canadjun)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/28 "2014-04-03T20:54:41Z")
Like wow man! I didn’t expect that my question about arrest warrants for someone that buggered off who knows where would stimulate such a lively conversation! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/29 "2014-04-03T21:15:14Z")
I don’t see the relevance of “…and the authorities don’t know what state”. How is that any different from a criminal fleeing to a location unknown to the authorities within the same state? If you don’t know where the guy is, you can’t arrest him: That’s just a matter of reality, independent of the law. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/30 "2014-04-03T21:27:31Z")
I recall an article about something similar in Canada. The law is country-wide federal responsibility, but justice and the courts are a provincial responsibility. (Caution - some simplification from/for non-lawyers). Ontario was accused of effectively “exiling” petty offenders. They would issue a warrant and then not bother to chase the person when they left the province. A lot of those types went to BC, and the British Columbia government was getting ticked at being the dumping ground for Ontario trash. BC would arrest someone on an outstanding warrant, and the Ontario authorities would say “we’re not going to bother to send a policeman there to escort him back. He’s your problem.” But, if the offender was found in Ontario, he was warned, he would be tossed in jail - along with the easy to prove charge of failure to appear. As a result, theyw ere effectively told to leave and on’t come abck. BC eventually got to the point where _they_ would pay for the escort back to Ontario to get rid of some of these problem offenders. ---
**Author:** ![Canadjun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@Canadjun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Canadjun)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/31 "2014-04-03T21:35:30Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I don’t see the relevance of “…and the authorities don’t know what state”. How is that any different from a criminal fleeing to a location unknown to the authorities within the same state? If you don’t know where the guy is, you can’t arrest him: That’s just a matter of reality, independent of the law. Not sure if you were replying to my OP or to one of the other respondents. In case you meant the former, I didn’t know that state arrest warrants were automatically enforceable in other states (arrest warrants in Canada are not necessarily Canada wide). ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/32 "2014-04-03T22:02:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But if you meant to deny dual sovereignty, I’d ask for a cite. OK, this has gone to the point of being rather sublimely silly. It’s like a bunch of adults insisting that Santa Claus is real, or that swimming less than an hour after eating is a path to certain cramping death, long after the kids are beyond such notions. _You’re_ hanging your hat on a word that’s been taken so far from its original (and still customary) meaning that insisting on it once the reality has been pointed out is worse than pedantry: Even pedantry insists on facts which are correct in the usual meaning of the term. And I’m not even being pedantic. A pedant would insist on sovereignty being taken as an absolute, and insist that there’s no way for a government to be ‘a little bit sovereign’ any more than a person can be ‘a little bit pregnant’. I’m willing to accept France as sovereign, even though the treaties it’s signed to be part of the EU (and etc.) limit what it’s capable of doing even within its own borders. But Texas, for example, has so much less effective control over what it can do on its own that insisting it’s sovereign is an exercise in redefining the word. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/33 "2014-04-03T23:01:26Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > I’m willing to accept France as sovereign, even though the treaties it’s signed to be part of the EU (and etc.) limit what it’s capable of doing even within its own borders. But Texas, for example, has so much less effective control over what it can do on its own that insisting it’s sovereign is an exercise in redefining the word. So what you’re saying is that one is an extremely dark gray and the other is an extremely light gray, and we can all agree that they are shades of gray. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2014, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/34 "2014-04-03T23:22:54Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > . . . there are not and can never be border checkpoints at state borders, among other things. . . . . Unless you’re entering California, in which case you’d [better not be packing fruit](http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders.html). ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126/35 "2014-04-04T00:07:47Z")
> [@Keeve](#): > > So what you’re saying is that one is an extremely dark gray and the other is an extremely light gray, and we can all agree that they are shades of gray. Right? More like, “Stop pretending pure white is a shade of gray when we can all see it’s whiter than new-fallen snow.” You might be able to defend it based on a very technical definition if you ignore the intent of the words, but insisting on using the word when everyone else has accepted that it doesn’t really fit is perverse. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/inter-state-arrest-warrants/685126.md?page=1)