Pierce Butler

“ Evidence is required to support the allegations of the complaint.
It may not with perfect accuracy be said, as in some removal decisions it has been said or implied, that the indictment is evidence of the facts that it alleges. But it fulfills the constitutional requirement (Amendment 5) , establishes probable cause (Amendment 4) , and is itself authority to bring the accused to trial. In the absence of evidence requiring a finding that there is no ground for the prosecution, the government is entitled to an order for removal. ”

“ The Commissioner found that there was probable cause to believe that petitioner had committed the offenses and held him to await the action of the District Judge.
Removal from one federal district to another under section 1014, R.S. (18 USCA § 591) [1] is unlike extradition or interstate rendition, in that the protection owed by a sovereign to those within its territory is not involved. Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U.S. 73, 82, 83, 24 S.Ct. 605, 48 L.Ed. 882. A person accused by indictment and found within the district where he is wanted is not entitled to a hearing in advance of trial. ”

“ There is no constitutional right to a hearing in advance of removal. Undoubtedly, Congress has power to direct that accused persons be taken, immediately and without hearing, before the court for trial. ”