clearskies1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2014
- Messages
- 3,892
- Reaction score
- 29,374
I could be reading this wrong but -- I think under Pennsylvania law, a state (Idaho, for example) can only successfully extradite someone if that state (Idaho) either (1) alleges/proves that the person was in that state (Idaho) when the crime was committed; or (2) alleges that the person was in Pennsylvania or another third state and did something intentional to cause the crime in Idaho. Here, it seems Idaho is going with the first option, and maybe the public defender is conceding that BK was in Idaho at the time of the offense??? JMO.I don’t understand the attorneys point when he refers to where BK was that night since they likely have data showing the border of Idaho/Washington. What does that mean and why would he say this in an interview with a reporter? Why would he even ask that Q? He won’t be defending BK in a murder trial. Confused.
My understanding is the only extradition issue is whether he is, in fact, the individual named in the fugitive warrant.
2010 Pennsylvania Code Title 42 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
Chapter 91 - Detainers and Extradition 9124 - Form of demand. 2010 Pennsylvania Code :: Title 42 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE :: Chapter 91 - Detainers and Extradition :: :: 9124 - Form of demand.
2010 Pennsylvania Code Title 42 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
Chapter 91 - Detainers and Extradition9127 - Extradition of persons not present in demanding state at time of commission of crime 2010 Pennsylvania Code :: Title 42 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE :: Chapter 91 - Detainers and Extradition :: :: 9127 - Extradition of persons not present in demanding state at time of commission of crime.