Benjamin D. Greene v. William Henkel

Background

A federal prosecutor in New York filed a sworn deposition saying that a grand jury in Georgia had returned a criminal indictment, and a certified copy of that indictment was attached. A United States commissioner in New York issued an arrest warrant, the defendants appeared, and the commissioner first refused defense evidence and committed them to await removal. The district judge in New York sent the case back to the commissioner for more evidence. After hearings the commissioner again found probable cause and recommitted the defendants, and the district judge then signed an order removing them to Georgia for trial.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether the judge who ordered the removal had authority and whether a habeas petition could be used to reexamine the evidence supporting probable cause. The Court said the judge had jurisdiction and that habeas review cannot be used to weigh the merits or reweigh the evidence that already supported the commissioner’s and judge’s finding of probable cause. The opinion explains that a certified indictment is prima facie valid for these proceedings, and a magistrate need not investigate how the grand jury was drawn; any such objections belong in the Georgia court. The Court also noted a different result would follow if an indictment charged no federal offense or if the evidence showed no offense triable in the other district, but that was not before the Court.

Real world impact

The decision leaves in place the ordinary path for moving defendants between federal districts: magistrates and judges may rely on certified indictments and probable‑cause findings to order removal, and defendants must raise grand jury or indictment defects in the trial court rather than by habeas review, where the merits and weight of the evidence are generally not relitigated.