The defendant had been arrested as a fugitive offender having been sentenced for rape in the US. The defendant argued that it would be ‘unjust or oppressive to return him’. The defendant argued that the case was an injustice but that if returned he would not have available to him a right of appeal against the convictio.
Held: If there were no right of appeal, a discretion may be exercised in his favour even in the absence of doubts about the safety of the conviction. In practice the defendant would have a right of appeal, and ‘any submission that the Secretary of State failed or failed adequately to address the question of rights of appeal in this case, is doomed to failure. There is nothing placed before me which serves arguably to demonstrate that there was anything placed before the Secretary of State which ought to have caused him to have any sensible doubt about the integrity of the appeal process in the United States or as to availability of any right or avenues of appeal. ‘ Order accordingly.
Judges:
Harry Ognall J
Citations:
[1998] EWHC Admin 163
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Regina v In the Matter of an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Subjiciendum Governor of HM Prison Brixton, ex parte Barone Admn 7-Nov-1997
The defendant had been convicted in his absence by a court in Turin and in respect of whom there was uncontradicted evidence before their lordships that if he were returned to that jurisdiction he would, under the relevant Italian procedures, be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition
Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138284
