Compton v. State of Alabama

Citation16 Ann.Cas. 1098,53 L.Ed. 885,214 U.S. 1,29 S.Ct. 605
Decision Date17 May 1909
Docket NumberNo. 175,175
PartiesJ. D. COMPTON, Plff. in Err., v. STATE OF ALABAMA
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Mr. John M. Chilton for plaintiff in error.

[Argument of Counsel from page 2 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Alexander M. Garber and Thomas W. Martin for defendant in error.

[Argument of Counsel from page 3 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice Harlan delivered the opinion of the court:

By an affidavit, proper in form and substantially sufficient in its statement of facts, made before a notary public of Fulton county, Georgia, Compton, the plaintiff in error, was charged with having committed the offense of being a common cheat and swindler. The solicitor of the criminal court of Atlanta officially notified the governor that the accused had been so charged and had fled to Alabama, and a requisition on the governor of Alabama was asked for the extradition of Compton, to the end that he might be brought back to Georgia, to be tried according to law for the offense charged.

The governor of Georgia thereupon made a requisition on the governor of Alabama, who, having received the requisition, issued his warrant for the arrest of Compton, if to be found in Alabama, and his delivery into the custody of the agent of Georgia. Having been arrested under that warrant by a sheriff, the accused sued out a writ of habeas corpus before the judge of the city court of Montgomery, Alabama, and sought discharge from custody upon the ground that he was illegally restrained of his liberty. The return by the sheriff to the writ justified the detention of Compton under the requisition of the governor of Georgia and the warrant of arrest issued by the governor of Alabama.

Upon the hearing of the case before the judge of the Montgomery city court, the accused demurred to the return, and the demurrer having been overruled, he was ordered into the custody of the agent of Georgia for extradition pursuant to law. From that order Compton prosecuted an appeal to the supreme court of Alabama, and that court affirmed the order of the Montgomery city court.

It is contended that the affidavit upon which the governor of Georgia based his requisition, although certified by him to be authentic, was not in compliance with the Revised Statutes of the United States; that the proceedings in Georgia were not sufficient to authorize the governor of Alabama to issue his warrant of arrest; and that the proceedings on the hearing of the petition for habeas corpus did not show that there had been an indictment against Compton or such an affidavit before a magistrate of Georgia, charging the accused with crime, as is required by the statutes of the United States.

In our judgment the only material question not substantially covered by the former decisions of this court is that raised by the objection that the affidavit in Georgia on which the governor of that state based his requisition was made before a notary public, and not before a 'magistrate,' as required by the Revised Statutes of the United States, enacted in the execution of the constitutional provision relating to fugitives from justice. This specific objection was raised by the assignments of error for the supreme court of the state, but that court did not seem to have regarded it as of sufficient gravity to be specially noticed in its opinion. But, as the objection is covered by the assignment of errors for this court, and as it asserts a right under the laws of the United States, we deem it appropriate to meet and dispose of it.

The proceedings against Compton were had under § 5278 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3597), as follows: 'Whenever the executive authority of any state or territory demands any person, as a fugitive from justice, of the executive authority of any state or territory to which such person has fled, and produces a copy of an indictment found or an affidavit made before a magistrate of any state or territory, charging the person demanded with having committed treason, felony, or other crime, certified as authentic by the governor or chief magistrate of the state or territory from whence the person so charged has fled, it shall be the duty of the executive authority of the state or territory to which such person has fled to cause him to be arrested and secured, and to cause notice of the arrest to be given to the executive authority making such demand, or to the agent of such authority appointed to receive the fugitive, and to cause the fugitive to be delivered to such agent when he shall appear. If no such agent appears within six months from the time of the arrest, the prisoner may be discharged. All costs or expenses incurred in the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
89 cases
  • Ullom v. Davis
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • October 30, 1933
    ... ... him under the constitution and laws of the land ... Corbin ... v. State, 99 Miss. 486, 66 So. 43; Johnson v. State, ... 108 Miss. 709, 67 So. 177; Haggett v. State, 99 ... against the laws of the State of California ... Compton ... v. State of Alabama, 214 U.S. 1, 16 Ann. Cas. 1098; In re ... Fetter, 23 N. J. L. 320; Ex ... ...
  • Williams v. Wayne County Sheriff
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • November 25, 1975
    ...also its sufficiency as a charge of crime.' 210 U.S. 387, 404, 28 S.Ct. 714, 719, 52 L.Ed. 1113, 1121. In Compton v. Alabama, 214 U.S. 1, 29 S.Ct. 605, 53 L.Ed. 885 (1909), the accused challenged the supporting documents on the grounds that the charging affidavit was made before a notary pu......
  • Michigan v. Doran
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1978
    ...24 How. 66, 107, 16 L.Ed. 717 (1861), the courts of an asylum state are bound by Art. IV, § 2, cf. Compton v. Alabama, 214 U.S. 1, 8, 29 S.Ct. 605, 607, 53 L.Ed. 885 (1909), by § 3182, and, where adopted, by the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act. A governor's grant of extradition is prima fa......
  • Draper v. Coombs
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • June 24, 1986
    ...of which makes the demand.Roberts v. Reilly, 116 U.S. 80, 95, 6 S.Ct. 291, 299, 29 L.Ed. 544 (1885); see Compton v. Alabama, 214 U.S. 1, 6, 29 S.Ct. 605, 606, 53 L.Ed. 885 (1909); Hyatt v. People ex rel. Corkran, 188 U.S. 691, 709, 23 S.Ct. 456, 458, 47 L.Ed. 657 (1903). In determining whet......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT