Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Rene Martin Verdugo-Urquidez

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 22, 1991No. 88-5462Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJames R. Browning, Circuit Judge

I

The court holds that all extradition treaties to which the United States is a party, including the Mexican-American Extradition Treaty, bar the United States from arresting any suspect within the territory of any other signatory nation. See supra at 1362.

I would rest our holding solely on the ground that Article 9 of the Mexican-American Extradition Treaty bars the United States from arresting a Mexican national like Verdugo within the territory of Mexico. This does not imply that I would disagree with the court’s ruling if I were to reach it, but only that I believe our ruling should be no…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Frisbie v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. United States v. Verdugo-UrquidezSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Ker v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  4. Ford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. John Badea v. Harvey CoxCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API