Hinz v. Perkins
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtKenison, J.
The office of habeas corpus in interstate rendition is generally confined to: “(1) the correctness of the requisition papers, (2) the relator’s identity, (3) whether the relator is a fugitive, (4) whether 'a crime is substantially charged.’ ” Note, Habeas Corpus in Interstate Rendition, 47 Col. L. Rev. 470, 471. This petition raises no question as to the validity of the requisition papers or the plaintiff’s identity. Since the “requisition is accompanied by a duly authenticated indictment which substantially charges the commission of an offense against the laws of ... ” the Commonwealth of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Higley v. MillspawNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- People Ex Rel. Gottschalk v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
- Commonwealth v. BoothMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- In re Habeas Corpus Brought by KingSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1942
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reeves v. CoxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
- Gullick v. SampsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978