The Fourth Amendment has no application in an international extradition proceeding. [Although here, the court grants a conditional extradition based on the assurances of the requesting country that a new trial will be given on extradition because the fugitive was tried in absentia even in apparent violation of the requesting country’s constitution.] In re Extradition of Harusha, 2008 WL 1701428 (E.D. Mich. April 9, 2008):<\/p>\n
The Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments have no application to extradition hearings. See Neely v. Henkel<\/em>, 180 U.S. 109, 122 (1901) (rights available to one charged with criminal offense in the United States not applicable to offenses committed outside the United States against the laws of another country); Glucksman v. Henkel<\/em>, 221 U.S. 508, 512 (1911) (\u201cIt is common in extradition cases to attempt to bring to bear all of the factitious niceties of a criminal trial at common law. But it is a waste of time.\u201d); In the Matter of the Extradition of Octavio Rodriguez Ortiz<\/em>, 444 F.Supp.2d 876, 885 (N.D. Ill. 2006) (\u201c[C]onstitutional protections applicable in criminal proceedings have been held inapplicable in the context of extradition.\u201d). The process due for a determination of guilt under the foreign law is correctly afforded by the foreign court making that determination. See Neely<\/em>, 180 U.S. at 123. In addition, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Evidence do not apply. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 54(b)(5) (\u201cThese rules are not applicable to extradition and rendition of fugitives\u201d); Fed. R. Evid. 1101(d)(3) (\u201cThe rules (other than with respect to privileges) do not apply … [to p]roceedings for extradition or rendition\u201d).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading