Gfactor
December 5, 2005, 2:32pm
41
Canada would deal with New York for extradition, I think, since there was no federal kidnapping (IIRC, kidnapping across state lines, which this wasn’t, is federal)
Gfactor
December 5, 2005, 4:03pm
43
Canada would deal with New York for extradition, I think, since there was no federal kidnapping (IIRC, kidnapping across state lines, which this wasn’t, is federal)
This is an international extradition. It is done according to a treaty with Canada. Treaties are federal law. And there is a Federal statute spelling out the procedure:
§ 3184. Fugitives from foreign country to United States
Whenever there is a treaty or convention for extradition between the United States and any foreign government, or in cases arising under section 3181 (b), any justice or judge of the United States, or any magistrate judge authorized so to do by a court of the United States, or any judge of a court of record of general jurisdiction of any State, may, upon complaint made under oath, charging any person found within his jurisdiction, with having committed within the jurisdiction of any such foreign government any of the crimes provided for by such treaty or convention, or provided for under section 3181 (b), issue his warrant for the apprehension of the person so charged, that he may be brought before such justice, judge, or magistrate judge, to the end that the evidence of criminality may be heard and considered. Such complaint may be filed before and such warrant may be issued by a judge or magistrate judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia if the whereabouts within the United States of the person charged are not known or, if there is reason to believe the person will shortly enter the United States. If, on such hearing, he deems the evidence sufficient to sustain the charge under the provisions of the proper treaty or convention, or under section 3181 (b), he shall certify the same, together with a copy of all the testimony taken before him, to the Secretary of State, that a warrant may issue upon the requisition of the proper authorities of such foreign government, for the surrender of such person, according to the stipulations of the treaty or convention; and he shall issue his warrant for the commitment of the person so charged to the proper jail, there to remain until such surrender shall be made.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00003184----000-.html
The extradition is not based on a violation of US domestic law (although the act must be illegal here) but on a violation of Canadian law.
Oh. For some reason I thought that most extradition was dealt with through the states. My error.
Gfactor
December 6, 2005, 4:28pm
45
No problem. As an aside, I note that federal kidnapping laws do indeed apply here:
(a) Whoever unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for ransom or reward or otherwise any person, except in the case of a minor by the parent thereof, when—foreign commerce , regardless of whether the person was alive when transported across a State boundary if the person was alive when the transportation began;
(Emphasis added.)
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001201----000-.html
I was all set to go off on the double criminality requirement, too. Anyway, yeah, why not ask for extradition. Even if extradition is denied, the request will send a message. The US would if the situation were reversed.