People ex rel. McCline v. Meyering

• Decision Date: 21 April 1934
• Docket Number: No. 22242.,22242.
• Citation: 190 N.E. 261,356 Ill. 210
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. McCLINE v. MEYERING, Sheriff.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

356 Ill. 210

190 N.E. 261

PEOPLE ex rel. McCLINE

v.MEYERING, Sheriff.

No. 22242.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 21, 1934.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John Prystalski, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding by the People, on the relation of Leander McCline against William D. Meyering, Sheriff. Judgment quashing writ, and relator brings error.

Affirmed.Oliver A. Clark and Irvin C. Mollison, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, J. Albert Woll, and Henry E. Seyfarth, all of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.

FARTHING, Justice.

This cause comes here by writ of error to review the judgment of the criminal court of Cook county quashing a writ of habeas corpus. The proceedings are under section 2 of chapter 60, known as the Fugitives From Justice Act (Smith-Hurd Rev. St. 1933, p. 1541). August 5, 1933, plaintiff in error filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus for his release. He had been arrested upon a fugitive warrant. Thereafter the Governor of Illinois issued a rendition warrant directed to any sheriff, coroner, or constable in any county in the state, commanding the arrest of Leander McClarnin, alias Leander McCline, and his production forthwith in open court; that he be given not less than twenty-four hours to obtain counsel and avail himself of the laws of this state for the security of personal liberty, and his delivery, unless discharged by the court, to the agent of the Governor of Tennessee, to be taken back to the state from which he fled. The warrant recited that the Governor of the state of Tennessee demanded of the Governor of Illinois the arrest and delivery of McClarnin, alias McCline, as a fugitive from justice, and had produced a copy of a warrant, certified as authentic and duly authenticated by the Governor of Tennessee, charging McClarnin, alias McCline, with having committed, on September 11, 1931, in the county of Maury, in the state of Tennessee, the crime of murder in the first degree, as set forth and alleged in the warrant, which the Governor of Tennessee certified to be a crime under the laws of that state. The rendition warrant recited further that the Governor of Illinois is satisfied that McClarnin, alias McCline, is a fugitive from justice and has fled from the state of Tennessee and taken refuge in this state. On August 16, 1933, an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed, and the papers filed with the Governor of Illinois were made a part of the petition. The respondent made return that the relator was detained by virtue of the Governor's warrant. The relator's amended petition was allowed to stand as a traverse to the return, and the issue was thus made.

The plaintiff in error contends that since the Governor of Tennessee did not certify as authentic an indictment or affidavit, as provided by section 5278 of the United States Revised Statutes (18 USCA § 662), the criminal court erred in remanding the relator to the custody of the sheriff. In answer to this contention, section 1 of an act in relation to judicial notice, approved June 21, 1929, authorizes courts to take judicial notice of the laws of sister states (Laws of 1929, p. 466 [Smith-Hurd Rev. St. 1933, c. 51, §§ 48a, 48b]). The laws of Tennessee, by section 11518 of Michie's Tennessee Code of 1932, provide: ‘Upon information made to any magistrate of the commission of a public offense, he shall examine, on oath, the informant, reduce the examination to writing, and cause the examination to be signed by the person making it.’ By section 11519: ‘The written examination shall set forth the facts stated by the informant tending to establish the commission of the offense and the guilt of the defendant.’ By section 11520: ‘If the magistrate is satisfied therefrom that the offense complained of has been committed, and there is reasonable ground to believe the defendant is guilty thereof, he shall issue a warrant of arrest.’ These statutory requirements were met. The same sheet of paper on which is found the affidavit of the complaining witness also contains a copy of the warrant for the arrest of the plaintiff in error. There can be no doubt that the affidavit was set out in order to show the Governor of the state of Tennessee that a warrant had been legally sworn out. Neither can there be any doubt that when the Governor of Tennessee certified to the authenticity of the warrant, he thereby certified, in effect if not specifically, that the affidavit was authentic. Section 5278 of the United States Rev. St. (18 USCA § 662) requires that the Governor of the demanding state shall authenticate an indictment found or an affidavit made before a magistrate. The Governor complied with that provision by what was done in this case.

The certificate of the county clerk of Maury county, Tenn., that the magistrate who issued the warrant and before whom the affidavit was sworn to was at the time a duly elected and qualified and acting justice of the peace in and for the county and state mentioned, and that his official acts as such are entitled to full faith and credit, appears also on the sheet with the affidavit and warrant. This certificate, and the recitals in the body of the warrant itself as to his having been a justice of the peace, answer the objection of plaintiff in error to ...