White v. HALL, SHERIFF

⁴⁴⁷ Thompson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Robert Lee White, the appellant, sought habeas corpus relief under Md. Code, Art. 41, § 25, from a warrant of rendition issued by the Governor of Maryland on demand of the Governor of Nevada. The writ was denied by Judge Daniel T. Prettyman sitting in the Circuit Court for Worcester County. On appeal, as below, he contends the rendition warrant was improperly issued because: (1) there was no copy of the indictment or warrant attached to the demand for extradition; and (2) the affidavits attached to the demand were made on information and belief and not on personal knowledge.

I Compliance with Statute In making both contentions, White fails to distinguish between two factual situations contemplated by the statutory provisions of Md. Code, Art. 41, § 18, 1 i.e. between the case where the accused has already been convicted of a crime and not yet completed his sentence and the case where he has not yet been convicted. Those portions of the statute dealing with an accused who has not yet been convicted do require that a copy of the indictment, etc. be furnished and be supported by affidavit, but the second part of the statute apposite here, requires only “a copy ⁴⁴⁸ of a judgment of conviction or of a sentence imposed in execution thereof, together with a statement by the executive authority 2 of the demanding state that the person claimed has escaped from confinement or has broken the terms of his bail, probation or parole.” In the instant case, a copy of the judgment of conviction as a habitual criminal, dated March 18, 1966, was attached to the demand. The document disclosed the imposition of a sentence for a maximum term of_ fifteen years and was accompanied by a statement of the Governor of Nevada that the accused had violated the terms of his parole. Since the relevant portion of the Maryland statute requires neither a copy of the indictment nor affidavit, both of the appellant’s contentions must fail.

Section 18, supra, is a part of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act which has been adopted in Maryland and in the great majority of other states. Am.Jur.2d Desk Book (1971 Cum. Sup.), Doc. No. 129.

Our holding is supported by the decisions of other courts construing the Act. 3 II Waiver The record shows that White signed the following agreement when he was paroled: “I do hereby waive extradition to the State of Nevada from any State in the Union, and from any territory or country outside the continental United States, and also agree that I will not ⁴⁴⁹ contest any effort to return me to the United States or to the State of Nevada. I have read, or have had read to me, the foregoing conditions of my parole, and I fully understand them and I agree