Blandford v. State

Citations

• 10 Tex. Ct. App. 627

Syllabus

<p>1. International Extradition.—Treaties between the United States and foreign nations are obligatory upon and cognizable by the tribunals of the several States as well as those of the Federal government. In the administration of the criminal law of this State, therefore, it is incumbent on the State courts to give effect to the provisions of the extradition treaty between the United States and Mexico when they are invoked by the accused and are applicable to his case.</p> <p>2. Same — Extradition Treaty with Mexico.—Embezzlement of “public moneys ” is one of the crimes for which reciprocal extradition is stipulated by the extradition treaty of Mexico with the United States; but funds of a private incorporation are not “public moneys,” and the treaty repudiates any right to extradite an embezzler of private property or money.</p> <p>3. Same—Case Stated.— Appellant was extradited to Texas from Mexico on a requisition charging him with theft (one of the offenses enumerated in the extradition treaty between the United States and Mexico), but prior to his extradition he was indicted in T. county, Texas, for embezzlement of private funds, which is an offense not enumerated in the treaty. Pleading to the jurisdiction of the court, he alleged that the offense for which he was placed on trial was not the offense for which he had been extradited nor one provided for in the said extradition treaty. Meld, that the court below erred in sustaining a motion to strike out the plea, notwithstanding it is a plea unknown to our Code of Criminal Procedure. See the opinion in extenso for an exposition of the doctrine of international extradition and of the extradition treaty between the United States and Mexico.</p>