It’s an old cliche that when all else fails, US fugitives could take a hike to South America and retire on their ill-gotten gains in a sunny climate. But how true is that anymore? I looked up the Wiki page on extradition, which raised more questions than it answered. On the one hand, the US seems to have been working overtime to close down most of the Latin American fugitive havens; many are listed as having relatively recent treaties signed. On the other hand, much of the data given by the page is questionable; for example it lists treaties with Cuba predating the revolution there. And the Wiki article doesn’t get into details, like for instance I believe there are countries that have banned the death penalty and which might extradite for other crimes but refuse to turn over people facing the death penalty. IIRC, Castro’s Cuba agreed not to harbor skyjackers but I don’t know if they otherwise cooperate with the imperalist USA. Also IIRC, some countries will extradite US expatriates but not those with citizenship in that country. And of course there are countries that might not have extradition treaties with the US but in which a US fugitive would not be welcome (North Korea). And that doesn’t even count hell-holes like Afghanistan where no sane foreigner would want to have to stay.
So where in the world is Carmen Sandiego, wanted US felon, going to go?
It’s not that they outright refuse to turn over people facing the death penalty; it’s that they insist on being given an assurance from the U.S. that the death penalty will not be sought or imposed.
I recall a situation with France, where France refused to deport someone to (I think it was) Virginia. Even though the US said, it wouldn’t seek the death penalty, the French decided that the Federal government couldn’t guarantee that Virigina state government would follow that assurance, so they kept him in France
You may be thinking of Aylor-Davis -v- France, a 1994 case involving Texas rather than Virginia. Aylor-Davis argued that assurances fromt the Texan prosecuting authorities that the death penalty would not be sought, provided to the French government through diplomatic channels, did not as a matter of Texan law bind the Texas excutive or judicial authorities, and accordingly that there was not a sufficient guarantee that she would not face the death penalty and so she should not be extradited. The French authorities disagreed, and ordered her extradition, whereupon she appealed to the European Human Rights Commission. Sadly for Aylor-Davis, the Commission also disagreed, and she was extradited.