Opinion
No. 27351
Decided December 27, 1976.
Defendant was arrested and charged with violation of section 16-19-103, C.R.S. 1973 (fugitive from another jurisdiction). From a dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, petitioner appealed.
Affirmed
1. HABEAS CORPUS — Proceeding — Not Part of Extradition — Independent. A habeas corpus proceeding is not filed as part of an extradition proceeding, but is filed as an independent civil action.
Appeal from the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Honorable James C. Flanigan, Judge.
J. D. MacFarlane, Attorney General, Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy, Edward G. Donovan, Solicitor General, Thomas J. Tomazin, Assistant, for plaintiff-appellee.
R. Douglas Buckles, Robert M. Petrusak, for defendant-appellant.
The defendant was arrested and charged with a violation of section 16-19-103, C.R.S. 1973 (fugitive from another jurisdiction). He filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the extradition proceeding, asserting that the documents supporting extradition were incomplete. The trial court properly dismissed the petition.
[1] In People v. Pitcher, 192 Colo. 195, 557 P.2d 395 we stated that a "habeas corpus proceeding is not filed as part of an extradition proceeding, but is filed as an independent civil action." We find application of that principle appropriate in this case.
Judgment affirmed.