Printable Format22-2710. Rights of accused person; application for writ of habeas corpus; notice. No person arrested upon such warrant shall be delivered over to the agent whom the executive authority demanding him shall have appointed to receive him unless he shall first be taken forthwith before a judge of a court of record in this state, who shall inform him of the demand made for his surrender and of the crime with which he is charged, and that he has the right to demand and procure legal counsel; and if the prisoner or his counsel shall state that he or they desire to test the legality of his arrest, the judge of such court of record shall fix a reasonable time to be allowed him within which to apply for a writ of habeas corpus. When such writ is applied for, notice thereof, and of the time and place of hearing thereon, shall be given to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which the arrest is made and in which the accused is in custody, and it shall be the duty of the prosecuting attorney to notify said agent of the demanding state.
History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-2710; L. 1973, ch. 143, § 1; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
62-736.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Right to counsel, see 22-4503.
Attorney General's Opinions:
Role of sheriff involved in taking custody of person wanted by another state; taking custody on property of federal prison; payment of costs; authority of requesting state. 96-6.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Accused in extradition proceeding entitled to counsel if indigent; appellant not prejudiced by refusal. Woody v. State, 215 Kan. 353, 357, 524 P.2d 1150.
2. Hearing hereunder; successive 60-day continuances under K.S.A. 22-2717 upheld. Odom v. State, 215 Kan. 456, 457, 524 P.2d 217.
3. Jurisdiction of Kansas court in criminal trial does not depend on how defendant came to be in Kansas. State v. Ulriksen, 210 Kan. 795, 798, 799, 504 P.2d 232 (1972).
4. State established prima facie case of identity, habeas corpus procedure is appropriate vehicle to challenge extradition; reversed. State v. Smith, 232 Kan. 128, 130, 131, 132, 652 P.2d 703 (1982).
5. Where petitioner awaiting extradition is being held as accommodation to counsel, release not mandatory under 18 U.S.C. 3182. Breckenridge v. Hindman, 10 Kan. App. 2d 50, 51, 54, 691 P.2d 405 (1984).
6. Cited; 6 th Amendment does not entitle one to court-appointed counsel while being held on fugitive warrant before prosecution. In re Habeas Corpus Application of Sanders, 10 Kan. App. 2d 489, 492, 704 P.2d 386 (1985).
7. Statutes put police chief and officers on reasonable notice that using sting operation to lure suspect across state line violates extradition act. Ortega v. City of Kansas City, Kansas, 659 F. Supp. 1201 (1987).
8. Habeas corpus proper remedy for challenging trial court's pretrial denial of double jeopardy claim. In re Habeas Corpus Petition of Mason, 245 Kan. 111, 112, 775 P.2d 179 (1989).
9. Criminal suspect has no prearrest extradition rights violation of which can give rise to cause of action under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983; reversing 659 F. Supp. 1201 (1987). Ortega v. City of Kansas City, Kan., 875 F.2d 1497, 1499 (1989).
10. Whether failure to hold hearing required by section after issuance of second warrant violated due process examined. Kennon v. Hill, 44 F.3d 904, 907 (1994).
11. Fugitive may challenge ability to consult with attorney with reasonable degree of rational understanding on certain extradition issues. State v. Patton, 285 Kan. 779, 780, 789, 176 P.3d 151 (2008).