State v. Truman In and For Pima County
| Decision Date | 22 March 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,CA-CIV,2 |
| Citation | 115 Ariz. 145,564 P.2d 96 |
| Parties | The STATE of Arizona, Petitioner, v. Honorable Alice TRUMAN, Judge of the Superior Court, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF PIMA, Respondent, and Damon Craig BAUM, Real Party in Interest. 2500. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
A petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in superior court by the real party in interest alleges, inter alia, the following facts. On March 29, 1976, a governor's warrant on extradition commanding the arrest of Damon Craig Baum was issued. The governor's warrant alleged that Baum was in the custody of the sheriff of Pima County. It did not provide a time within which the warrant was to be served, and Baum was not arrested upon the warrant until February, 1977. The governor's warrant was claimed to be defective in that Baum was accused of a probation violation rather than comission of a crime in another state, and the warrant did not 'provide a time span as required in A.R.S. § 13--1317' within which it was to be served.
A copy of the governor's warrant on extradition and a copy of a document executed by the governor of the State of Colorado authorizing designated agents to receive Baum and convey him to Colorado were admitted into evidence at the hearing on the habeas corpus petition.
The respondent court ordered that Baum 'be released on bond pursuant to (A.R.S.) Section 13--1316 in the sum of $900.00 conditioned upon his appearance' five days later. The court expressly found that the governor's warrant issued on March 29, 1976, was defective 'in that it did not specify the time within which the warrant was to be served and further that (Baum) was not in the custody of the Sheriff at the time said warrant was issued.' Since we are of the opinion (1) that the respondent court lacked jurisdiction to release Baum on bail, and (2) that the governor's warrant was not defective, we assume jurisdiction to grant relief.
This court had held that after a warrant for arrest is issued by the governor of this state, there is no right to bail. State v. Jacobson, 22 Ariz.App. 260, 526 P.2d 784 (1974). In so holding we construed A.R.S. §§ 13--1315 to 13--1317. A.R.S. § 13--1317 provides:
'If the accused is not arrested under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. J.M.W.
...rel. Schiff v. Brennan, 99 N.M. 641, 662 P.2d 642 (1983); Bayless v. Wandel, 119 Misc.2d 82, 462 N.Y.S.2d 396 (1983); State v. Truman, 115 Ariz. 145, 564 P.2d 96 (1977). We note also that at least one state, Nevada, has altered the language of the UCEA's bail provision to expressly provide ......
-
Ford, In re
...ex rel Schiff v. Brennan, 99 N.M. 641, 662 P.2d 642 (1983); Bayless v. Wandel, 119 Misc.2d 82, 462 N.Y.S.2d 396 (1983); State v. Truman, 115 Ariz. 145, 564 P.2d 96 (1977). We note also that at least one state, Nevada, has altered the language of the UCEA's bail provision to expressly provid......
-
Emig v. Hayward
...Judicial District Court, 86 Nev. at 534, 471 P.2d at 225; Deas v. Weinshienk, 188 Colo. at 19, 533 P.2d at 497; State v. Truman, 115 Ariz. 145, 146, 564 P.2d 96, 97 (App.1977); State ex rel. Schiff v. Brennan, 99 N.M. at 642-642, 662 P.2d at 643; In re Lucas, 136 N.J.Super. at 31-32, 343 A.......
-
Mathieu v. Dupnik
...that the offense stated in the document which showed a probation violation charged an extraditable offense. In State v. Truman, 115 Ariz. 145, 564 P.2d 96 (App. 1977), we relied on the Division One case for the proposition that a probation violation is an extraditable offense under the Extr......