Samuel Shapiro v. Thomas E. Ferrandina, United States Marshal for the Southern District of New York

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the extradition court had 8 properly excluded evidence that would not “explain away” or “obliterate” the government's 9 evidence “but would pose only a conflict of credibility”
• “The judge’s refusal to examine the credibility of the testimony and statements included in the translated material was clearly proper, since the declarants were not before him.”
• “The phrase ‘the laws of the place where the person sought shall be found’ refers to the law of the state where the arrest occurs rather than the laws of the United States’ ”
• “As a matter of international law, the principle of specialty has been viewed as a privilege of the asylum state, designed to protect its dignity and interests, rather than a right accruing to the accused.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).