Compton v. Alabama

Background

Compton, charged in Georgia as a common cheat and swindler, fled to Alabama after an affidavit swearing to the crime was made before a Georgia notary public. The Georgia governor sent a formal requisition to Alabama asking that Compton be returned to face trial. The Alabama governor issued a warrant and Compton was arrested. Compton sought release in an Alabama city court arguing his arrest was unlawful because the affidavit was not made before a “magistrate” as the federal extradition statute requires. The Alabama courts rejected his challenge and ordered extradition.

Reasoning

The Court’s main question was whether an affidavit made before a Georgia notary public satisfied the federal statute’s requirement that an affidavit be made before a “magistrate.” The Court explained the statute requires either a copy of an indictment or an affidavit made before a magistrate in the demanding State. It looked to Georgia law and found that Georgia notaries public are commissioned, serve as ex officio justices of the peace, and keep dockets, so they count as magistrates under the statute. Because the affidavit met the statutory test, the Alabama governor’s warrant and the extradition proceedings were lawful.

Real world impact

The ruling means states may rely on affidavits sworn before state-recognized notaries when seeking extradition, so governors in the asylum State may lawfully issue arrest warrants when those documents are presented. The decision limits habeas corpus relief on purely technical defects when the executive authorities considered the papers sufficient. This ruling decides only the procedure for returning Compton to Georgia; it does not determine whether he is guilty of the charged crime.