简要地说

{"title":"简要地说","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2023.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"McCallum v. Italy involved the extradition of a U.S. national accused of murdering her husband and the burning of his corpse in Michigan. According to a press release from the Court, At the time she filed her case, she was being detained in Rome, but at the time of the judgment, she was in detention in the U.S. In denying her request to stay her extradition, the Italian authorities referred to the U.S. appeals process, the possibility of a pardon or a commutation of her sentence by the Michigan governor as reasons counseling in favor of extradition. They also felt that there were no reasons to believe that she would be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment there. Several months later, the U.S. authorities sent a diplomatic note to Italy indicating that McCallum would be tried for the lesser offense of second degree murder, which would carry with it the possibility of parole. A new extradition order was issued by Italy, but the Court ordered that it be stayed pending these proceedings. In ultimately holding that the extradition would not violate Article 3, the Court pointed out the importance of Michigan's diplomatic note, indicating that a lesser charge would be imposed. Citing prior case law, the Court noted that “Diplomatic Notes carry a presumption of good faith and that, in extradition cases, it was appropriate that that presumption be applied to a requesting State which has a long history of respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and which has longstanding extradition arrangements with Contracting States” (¶ 51, citing Harkins & Edwards v. UK , nos. 9146/07 and 32650/07 ).","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Briefly Noted\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ilm.2023.13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"McCallum v. Italy involved the extradition of a U.S. national accused of murdering her husband and the burning of his corpse in Michigan. According to a press release from the Court, At the time she filed her case, she was being detained in Rome, but at the time of the judgment, she was in detention in the U.S. In denying her request to stay her extradition, the Italian authorities referred to the U.S. appeals process, the possibility of a pardon or a commutation of her sentence by the Michigan governor as reasons counseling in favor of extradition. They also felt that there were no reasons to believe that she would be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment there. Several months later, the U.S. authorities sent a diplomatic note to Italy indicating that McCallum would be tried for the lesser offense of second degree murder, which would carry with it the possibility of parole. A new extradition order was issued by Italy, but the Court ordered that it be stayed pending these proceedings. In ultimately holding that the extradition would not violate Article 3, the Court pointed out the importance of Michigan's diplomatic note, indicating that a lesser charge would be imposed. Citing prior case law, the Court noted that “Diplomatic Notes carry a presumption of good faith and that, in extradition cases, it was appropriate that that presumption be applied to a requesting State which has a long history of respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and which has longstanding extradition arrangements with Contracting States” (¶ 51, citing Harkins & Edwards v. UK , nos. 9146/07 and 32650/07 ).\",\"PeriodicalId\":212220,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Legal Materials\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Legal Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2023.13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Legal Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2023.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

麦家廉诉意大利案涉及引渡一名被控谋杀其丈夫并在密歇根州焚烧其尸体的美国公民。根据法院发布的新闻稿,在她提交案件时,她被拘留在罗马,但在判决时,她被拘留在美国。在拒绝她暂停引渡的请求时,意大利当局将美国上诉程序,密歇根州州长赦免或减刑的可能性作为支持引渡的理由。他们还认为,没有理由相信她在那里会受到不人道或有辱人格的待遇。几个月后,美国当局向意大利发出外交照会,表示麦家廉将因较轻的二级谋杀罪受审,并有可能获得假释。意大利发布了一项新的引渡令,但法院下令在这些程序进行之前暂缓执行。法院在最终裁定引渡不会违反第3条时,指出了密歇根州的外交照会的重要性,指出将施加较轻的指控。法院引用先前的判例法指出,“外交照会带有善意的推定,在引渡案件中,这种推定适用于具有长期尊重民主、人权和法治的历史,并与缔约国有长期引渡安排的请求国是适当的”(¶51,引用哈金斯和安普;Edwards诉英国,第9146/07和32650/07号)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Briefly Noted
McCallum v. Italy involved the extradition of a U.S. national accused of murdering her husband and the burning of his corpse in Michigan. According to a press release from the Court, At the time she filed her case, she was being detained in Rome, but at the time of the judgment, she was in detention in the U.S. In denying her request to stay her extradition, the Italian authorities referred to the U.S. appeals process, the possibility of a pardon or a commutation of her sentence by the Michigan governor as reasons counseling in favor of extradition. They also felt that there were no reasons to believe that she would be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment there. Several months later, the U.S. authorities sent a diplomatic note to Italy indicating that McCallum would be tried for the lesser offense of second degree murder, which would carry with it the possibility of parole. A new extradition order was issued by Italy, but the Court ordered that it be stayed pending these proceedings. In ultimately holding that the extradition would not violate Article 3, the Court pointed out the importance of Michigan's diplomatic note, indicating that a lesser charge would be imposed. Citing prior case law, the Court noted that “Diplomatic Notes carry a presumption of good faith and that, in extradition cases, it was appropriate that that presumption be applied to a requesting State which has a long history of respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and which has longstanding extradition arrangements with Contracting States” (¶ 51, citing Harkins & Edwards v. UK , nos. 9146/07 and 32650/07 ).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信