Krutka v. Bryer, 20154
| Citation | 372 P.2d 83,150 Colo. 293 |
| Decision Date | 11 June 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 20154,20154 |
| Parties | John KRUTKA, as Sheriff of Pueblo County, Colorado, and Matt Kikel, as District Attorney in Pueblo County, Colorado, Plaintiffs in Error, v. George BRYER, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Colorado |
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., J. F. Brauer, Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiffs in error.
No appearance for defendant in error.
This writ of error is directed to an order and judgment of the district court of Pueblo County dismissing extradition proceedings whereby it was sought to have defendant in error George Bryer returned for criminal prosecution to the State of Oklahoma. Bryer was arrested on a warrant of the Governor of this state, issued pursuant to a formal request for extradition from the Governor of the State of Oklahoma.
From the record it appears that 'The Matter of the Extradition of George Bryer to Oklahoma' was somehow aborted into the district court of Prowers County where Bryer was released on an appearance bond. There is no record of the proceedings in Prowers County except a letter addressed to the clerk of the district court of Pueblo County from the district judge of Prowers County, advising that the defendant was released by the Prowers county court because he was living in Pueblo. The extradition documents from the office of the Governor of Colorado were forwarded to the Pueblo district court.
On June 15, 1961, the district court of Pueblo County entered the following order:
'For these reasons the Court grants the said George Bryer a continuance of 60 days within which to do so; and the said George Bryer is released on his own recognizance, and is Ordered to appear in this Court on August 16, 1961, at 10:00 a. m., at which time the matter will be heard upon the merits.' (Emphasis supplied.)
It is presumed that the court in according Bryer 'the privilege of either contesting the validity of his arrest, or of the extradition proceedings' was acting pursuant to C.R.S. '53, 60-1-10, which provides:
(Emphasis supplied.)
Within the sixty days allowed by the court, however, Bryer did not apply for writ of habeas corpus. No notice was given to the prosecuting officer of the county or to the agent of the demanding state of any impending proceedings. Although there was nothing before the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Smith
... ... 398, 443 P.2d 988 (1968); Capra v. Miller, 161 Colo. 448, 451, 422 P.2d 636 (1967); Krutka v. Bryer, 150 Colo. 293, 372 P.2d 83 (1962); In re Kjeldsen, 39 Misc.2d 128, 240 N.Y.S.2d 71 ... ...
-
Reynolds v. Conway
... ... 766, 64 S.Ct. 522, 88 L.Ed. 1062, Ross v. Crofutt, 84 Conn. 370, 373, 80 A. 90, Krutka v. Bryer, 150 Colo. 293, 372 P.2d 83, and see 35 C.J.S. Extradition § 16(d); and in addition the ... ...
-
Capra v. Miller
... ... C.R.S.1963, 60--1--10; Krutka v. Bryer, 150 Colo. [161 Colo. 452] 293, 372 P.2d 83 (1962). In a habeas corpus proceeding the ... ...
-
Harding v. People, 22225
... ... See Capra v. Miller, supra; Fox v. People, supra; Krutka v. Bryer, 150 Colo. 293, 372 P.2d 83 (1962); Wigchert v. Lockhart, 114 Colo. 485, 166 P.2d 988 ... ...
-
Interstate Rendition Under the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act
...v. Miller, 160 Colo. 448, 422 P.2d 636 (1967). 104. Osborne v. Van Cleave, 166 Colo. 398, 443 P.2d 988 (1968). 105. Krutka v. Bryer, 150 Colo. 293, 372 P.2d 83 (1962). 106. Luker v. Koch, supra, note 87; Eathorne v. Nelson, supra, note 62; People v. Pitcher, ___ Colo. ___ 557 P.2d 395 (1976......