No. 1578 Philadelphia, 1982, Appeal from Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, of Philadelphia County at Nos. MC 81-11-0203 and HC 82-02-0051.
Holly Maguigan, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Edward J. Cameron, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Cavanaugh, Rowley and Watkins, JJ.
[ 303 Pa. Super. Page 411]
This case involves an expedited appeal from an order of extradition entered by the court below. This court stayed extradition pending disposition of the appeal on the merits.
In 1980 an indictment was returned in Cape May County, New Jersey, charging the appellant with conspiracy in connection with illegal drug activities. In November, 1981, the appellant was arrested by Philadelphia police on a fugitive warrant issued in Cape May County, New Jersey. On February 1, 1982, appellant was arrested on a formal extradition warrant issued by the governor of Pennsylvania to which was attached a governor's warrant and the extradition papers issued by the governor of New Jersey.
On June 1, 1982 a hearing was held in the court below on the appellant's petition for habeas corpus and on the petition for extradition. Following the hearing the court below entered an order of extradition, which we subsequently stayed. Oral argument was held in this court on June 9, 1982.
Extradition will be ordered if (1) the subject of the extradition is charged with a crime in the demanding state; (2) the subject of the extradition is a fugitive from the demanding state; (3) the subject of the extradition was in the demanding state at the time of the commission of the crime and (4) the requisition papers are in order. Commonwealth v. Rowe, 264 Pa. Super. 67, 398 A.2d 1060 (1979), Commonwealth ex rel. Pizzo v. Aytch, 273 Pa. Super. 55, 416 A.2d 1086 (1979).*fn1
At the extradition hearing there was sufficient evidence to establish that the appellant was the individual named in the information in New Jersey. The governor's warrant contained a photograph of the individual indicted in
[ 303 Pa. Super. Page 412]
Cape May County and the court below examined the photograph and found it to be a picture of the appellant. Further, when the Philadelphia police asked appellant if he knew that New Jersey wanted him appellant responded "Now I do, yeah".
Appellant contends that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that he was in New Jersey at the time of the commission of the crime. We disagree. "The allegations of the requisition and the accompanying affidavit must be accepted as prima facie true." In re Ripepi, 427 Pa. 507, 511, 235 A.2d 141, 142 (1967). See also ...