
    Ex Parte GOODMAN.
    (No. 3956.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Feb. 9, 1916.)
    1. Extradition <@=^35 — Interstate—Aeeida-VIT— Ol'EENSE— SUEEICIENCX.
    Under the act of Congress (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, § 10126) and the laws of Texas (Vernon’s Ann. Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 1088) requiring that a fugitive from justice from another state, sought to be held as such, be charged with an offense in the demanding state, an affidavit that affiant had good reason to believe and did believe that a party was a fugitive from justice from Louisiana, where he had on a given date committed a criminal offense under the laws of Louisiana, and that he fled into Texas, where he might be found, was insufficient to justify the alleged crimináis arrest as a fugitive from justice.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Extradition, Cent. Dig. § 39; Dec. Dig. <¿¿>35.]
    2. Extradition <@=»21 — Interstate—Federal Jurisdiction.
    The laws of Texas touching the return of criminals to other states are governed by the federal act touching the matter.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Extradition, Cent. Dig. § 26; Dec. Dig. <&^>21.]
    3. Extradition <@=^32 — Interstate — Complaint Charging Crime. ■ ■
    A complaint, filed in Louisiana, charging violation of its criminal law, based only upon belief or information, is insufficient as authority for a requisition demand on the Governor of Texas for the return of the offender.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Extradition, Cent. Dig. §§ 36-38; Dec. Dig. <S=>32.]
    Application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of Bob Goodman. Applicant discharged from custody.
    B. y; Cummings, of Hillsboro, for appellant. C. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, J.

This record is very brief, and can be briefly stated. It is an original application for a writ of habeas corpus to this court asking for a discharge under what is supposed to be an extradition proceeding. As a basis for this case Mr. Gross made an affidavit that he had good reason to believe and did believe that Bob Goodman is a fugitive from justice from the state of Louisiana; that he did on or about the 15th of May, 1915, in said state of Louisiana, willfully, maliciously, and feloniously have carnal knowledge with Leona Daily, she being an unmarried female between the age of 12 and 18 years, and that said act so committed by Bob Goodman was then and there and is now a violation of the penal laws of the state of Louisiana, and that said Goodman has fled from that state where he committed said offense to the state of Texas, and is now to be found in Hill county, Tex.

It will be noticed that this affidavit only states that the affiant had reason to believe that the applicant is a fugitive from justice from a sister state, and that he had carnal intercourse with a girl between 12 and 18 years of age, she being unmarried, and that said act was a violation of the laws of Louisiana, and that he had fled from that state into Texas, and is now in this state. This is not sufficient. There are no extradition papers in the record, and, so far as the case is concerned, it does not show that any were issued by the Governor of this state honoring a requisition from the Governor of Louisiana, nor is it stated that applicant stood charged in Louisiana by indictment or complaint with this offense. Under the act of Congress (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, § 10126) this is not sufficient, nor is it sufficient under the laws of Texas (Vernon’s Ann. Code Crim. Proc. 1916, art. 1088), which, of course, must be governed by the congressional act. Had a complaint been filed in Louisiana charging some violation of the law by reason of sexual intercourse, based only upon belief or information, it would not have been sufficient as authority for the requisition demand on the Governor of this state. This is settled by the authorities, which are not necessary to De cited. But this complaint does not allege or assert, directly or indirectly, that the applicant had been charged in any legal way in Louisiana with an offense; therefore it is not sufficient. Under the act of the Legislature it is necessary, where the party is a fugitive from justice and is sought to be held as such, that he be charged with an offense in the demanding state. Talcing this as a basis, an affidavit may be made holding the alleged fugitive awaiting the requisition demand, but there is nothing in this case indicating those things; therefore we are of opinion that the applicant is entitled to his discharge, which is accordingly ordered. 
      <@^Eor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     