People ex rel. Gummow v. Larson
| Decision Date | 23 September 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 39591,39591 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE ex rel. Rodney GUMMOW, Appellant, v. Charles E. LARSON, Sheriff, Appellee. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Julius Lucius Echeles, Chicago, for appellant.
Bruno W. Stanczak, State's Atty., Waukegan (Jack Hoogasian, Asst. State's Atty., of counsel), for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court of Lake County denying relator's petition for a writ of Habeas corpus and remanding him to the custody of the sheriff of that county for extradition to the State of Wisconsin.
Relator was originally arrested by the sheriff of Lake County on December 11, 1964, pursuant to a warrant apparently issued upon a complaint by Racine, Wisconsin authorities as provided by section 30 of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1963, chap. 60, par. 30). He was released on bail and the cause was continued until January 5, 1965. No further proceedings were had before the magistrate either on January 5 or at any other time thereafter. Relator remained at liberty until March 23, 1965, when, pursuant to an extradition warrant issued by the Governor of Illinois, he was arrested and taken into custody by the sheriff of Lake County. The instant Habeas corpus petition was thereafter filed and denied.
It is maintained by relator that since the provisions of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1963, chap. 60, pars. 32, 33, 34) were not complied with after his original arrest, jurisdiction over his person was lost, thus entitling him to be discharged. Where a person is arrested on a fugitive warrant charging that he has fled another State wherein he has allegedly committed a criminal offense, and a judge or magistrate upon examination finds that the accused is the one so charged, he may be committed to the county jail for a time not exceeding thirty days to await an extradition warrant to be issued by the Governor, or he may be admitted to bail; in the latter case the judge or magistrate should specify a time certain for the accused's reappearance to be arrested pursuant to the Governor's warrant. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1963, chap. 60, pars. 32, 33). Should the Governor's extradition warrant not be executed within the thirty days as specified in section 32, or within the time set for the accused's reappearance should he be admitted to bail (section 33), section 34 provides that he may be recommitted to the county jail or allowed further bail for a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Olson v. Thurston
...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 165 (1960); Miller v. Warden, Baltimore City Jail, 14 Md.App. 377, 287 A.2d 57 (1972); People v. Doran, supra; Lombardo v. T......
-
Glavin v. Warden, State Prison
... ... 2 We cannot agree ... [163 Conn. 398] In People ex rel. Gummow v. Larson, 35 Ill.2d 280, 282, 220 N.E.2d 165, 167, the ... ...
-
United States ex rel. McInery v. Shelley
...is to return a fugitive to the demanding state so that he can stand trial. 322 N.E.2d at 77. Relying upon People ex rel. Gummow v. Larson, 35 Ill.2d 280, 220 N.E.2d 165 (1966), the Vasquez court found that the time period during which the accused may be committed does not run against the go......
-
Shields v. State
...lost sight of this fact. Cf. Cohen v. Warden, etc., 252 F.Supp. 666 (D.Md.1966). A case exactly in point is People ex rel. Gummow v. Larson, 35 Ill.2d 280, 220 N.E.2d 165 (1966). Gummow had been arrested pursuant to a fugitive warrant. He was released on bail. More than 90 days later, he wa......