Lott v. Heyd
| Decision Date | 04 April 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 20066.,20066. |
| Citation | 315 F.2d 350 |
| Parties | Joseph LOTT, Appellant, v. Louis A. HEYD, Sr., Criminal Sheriff, Parish of Orleans, Louisiana, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Harry F. Connick, Edward G. Koch, Jr., New Orleans, La., for appellant.
Philip Foto, New Orleans, La., Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., M. E. Culligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jim Garrison, Dist. Atty. for Parish of Orleans, for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS*, CAMERON and WISDOM, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from habeas corpus proceedings. Appellant was arrested by Louisiana authorities on the basis of an affidavit1 dated June 18, 1962. Extradition papers from Mississippi arrived on July 20 and 24, 1962. Rendition proceedings were held in the State Criminal District Court July 21 and August 6, 1962 at which time appellant pled the thirty day prescriptive period set out in LSA- R.S. 15:168, but the court held that the § 168 prescriptive period "was of no moment" inasmuch as the prisoner was then being held under the Louisiana Governor's warrant of arrest, LSA-R.S. 15:160. The court below denied a writ of habeas corpus.
LSA-R.S. 15:168 is a state statute implementing 18 U.S.C.A. § 31822 in that the federal statute provides that, after request by the executive authority of the fugitive state, the executive authority of the asylum state shall have the fugitive arrested and held thirty days. The Louisiana statute is a holding statute, allowing an arrest on affidavit pending an extradition request.
State v. Commisso, 214 La. 1055, 39 So.2d 729 (1949) held that "The state cannot hold the accused by successive affidavits for any time beyond the thirty day period to await extradition. * * * but There is nothing to prevent the authorities from proceeding under a warrant of the governor of this state issued upon a proper demand."
We agree. Assuming that the appellant was held for three days without legal authority, no federally-protected rights were violated and to hold that Louisiana's alleged misbehavior deprived Mississippi of its Constitutional3 right to the fugitive would amount to allowing the State of Louisiana to amend the Constitution.
* Of the Tenth Circuit sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parks v. Bourbeau
...States ex rel. McInery v. Shelley, 524 F.Supp. 499, 501 n. 5 (N.D.Ill.1981). The same court also said: "Similarly, in Lott v. Heyd, 315 F.2d 350 (5th Cir.1963), a fugitive sought habeas corpus relief claiming that Louisiana, the asylum state, had held him beyond the statutory period permitt......
-
Olson v. Thurston
...has been issued and executed, questions relating to the illegality of petitioner's prior detention are rendered moot. Lott v. Heyd, 315 F.2d 350 (5th Cir. 1963); Reese v. Warden & Keeper of County Jail, Colo., 561 P.2d 339 (1977); People ex rel. Gummow v. Larson, 35 Ill.2d 280, 220 N.E.2d 1......
-
Glavin v. Warden, State Prison
...lengthy periods of confinement of fugitives pending consummation of extradition proceedings by the demanding State. (Cf. Lott v. Heyd (5th Cir.), 315 F.2d 350; Bolton v. Timmerman, 233 S.C. 429, 105 S.E.2d 518). There is, however, no indication of any legislative intent to restrict the peri......
-
United States ex rel. McInery v. Shelley
...ordered that the fugitive's extradition be effected immediately — and not that the extradition be stopped. Similarly, in Lott v. Heyd, 315 F.2d 350 (5th Cir. 1963), a fugitive sought habeas corpus relief claiming that Louisiana, the asylum state, had held him beyond the statutory period per......