Document Mentions (4 shared documents)

EFTA00103380

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

03) 7 United States v. Sabhani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 6 United States v. Salvagno, 314 F. Supp. 2d 115 (N.D.N.Y. 2004) 15 United States v. Stanton, No. 91 Cr. 889 (CHS), 1992 WL 27130 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1992) 18 United States v. Stroh, No. 396 Cr. 139, 2000 WL 1832956 (D. Conn. Nov. 3, 20

. Supp. 2d 115 (N.D.N.Y. 2004) 15 United States v. Stanton, No. 91 Cr. 889 (CHS), 1992 WL 27130 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1992) 18 United States v. Stroh, No. 396 Cr. 139, 2000 WL 1832956 (D. Conn. Nov. 3, 2000) 15 United States v. Young, Nos. 12 Cr. 502, 12 Cr. 645, 2013 WL 12131300 (D. Utah Aug. 27

EFTA00078759

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

e defendant's offer to do so and the possibility that it might have some effect in the extradition proceeding."). 3 For example in United States v. Stanton, No. 91 CR 889 (CHS) 1992 WL 27139 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2002), the court observed: The government has been advised by the Crown Prosecution Service in

a which may take several years to resolve, and both parties agree that a waiver of extradition may not be enforceable in Canada."); United States v. Stroh, No. 396 CR 139-AHN, 2000 WL 1832956, at *5 (D. Conn. Nov. 3, 2000) ("[I]t appears that there is a substantial legal question as to whether any cou

EFTA00089154

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

missible in extradition proceedings in the United Kingdom, such a waiver is by no means binding, authoritative, or enforceable. See United States v. Stanton, No. 91 Cr. 889 (CHS), 1992 WL 27130, at *2 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1992) (denying modification of defendant's bail where defendant indicated willi

10-00547, 2010 WL 5387757, at *9 n.11 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2010); United States v. Bohn, 330 F. Supp. 2d 960, 961 (W.D. Tenn. 2004); United States v. Stroh, No. 396 Cr. 139, 2000 WL 1832956, at *5 (D. Conn. Nov. 3, 2000); United States v. Botero, 604 F. Supp. 1028, 1035 (S.D. Fla. 1985).3 For very good