Glucksman v. Henkel

Citations

• 221 U.S. 508
• 31 S. Ct. 704
• 55 L. Ed. 830
• 1911 U.S. LEXIS 1751

Syllabus

<p>While a person is not to be sent from this country on mere demand or surmise, this Government should respond to a request for extradition if there is reasonable ground to suppose the accused to be guilty of an extraditable crime, even if presented in untechnical form; good faith demands this much in carrying out an extradition . treaty.</p> <p>Courts are bound by the existence of an extradition treaty to assume that the trial in the demanding State will be fair.</p> <p>Where a magistrate of a demanding State certifies of his own knowledge to the identity of photographs, the courts of this country will presume in extradition proceedings that he had reason for so doing.</p> <p>In this case held that although the presentation was untechnical it was sufficient to justify surrender.</p> <p>Where the complaint calls the instruments alleged to have been forged bills of exchange and the evidence showed they were promissory notes the variance will not defeat surrender where the instruments áre identified and there is a plain charge of forgery.</p> <p>If an extraditable crime under the law oí the State where the accused is found is sufficiently charged, the effect of variance between complaint and proof is a matter to be decided '«on general principles irrespective of the law of that State. Wright v. Henkel, 190 U. S. 40; Petit v. Walshe, 194 U. S. 205, distinguished.</p> <p>Even though the complaint be sworn to on information and belief, if it is supported by testimony of witnesses stated to have deposed, the court will presume that they were sworn and the complaint is sufficient. Rice v. Ames, 180 U. S. 371.</p>