United States Extradition Law — Case Law, Legal Framework and Procedure

Extradition cases involving United States — Requested and Requesting State

🇺🇸

United States

United States Extradition Law & Case Law — 70 cases

9
As requested
state
61
As requesting
state
Case Law
Foreign pre-extradition detention not credited absent proof that custody resulted from U.S. extradition request
✕
Summary
Following his surrender to the United States through Colombia, the petitioner sought credit against his U.S. drug-trafficking sentence for approximately six years spent in detention in Venezuela, claiming that he had been held there at the behest of the United States pending extradition pursuant to an INTERPOL Red Notice issued in 2014. The District Court for the District of Puerto Rico examined the Venezuelan and Colombian documentary record and found that the Venezuelan detention had not been shown to result from the U.S. Red Notice: Venezuelan authorities did not confirm that the petitioner was the person sought through INTERPOL until May 9, 2019, and only thereafter notified the United States of the deadline for submitting a formal extradition request. The Court therefore rejected the claim for credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), emphasizing that lengthy foreign detention does not qualify as extradition-related custody merely because the requested person characterizes it as such; the connection with the U.S. request must be established by the record. The Court also noted that authority to calculate credit for prior custody rests with the Bureau of Prisons rather than the sentencing court.
11/08/2026 · United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico · Civ. No. 25-1530 (JAG); 2026 WL 2322656
🇨🇴Colombia → 🇺🇸United States
Rejected (procedural grounds)Extradition
Extradition to the United States granted: constitutional reform allowing extradition of Costa Rican nationals applied to pending requests
✕
Summary
The case concerned appeals by the Public Prosecutor and the Attorney General’s Office against a first-instance decision refusing the extradition of a Costa Rican national requested by the United States for prosecution for cocaine trafficking and conspiracy offences. The first-instance court had held that the 2025 reform of Article 32 of the Costa Rican Constitution, which permits the extradition of nationals in cases of international drug trafficking and terrorism, could not apply to facts occurring before the reform entered into force. The Court of Appeal reversed that conclusion. Relying on binding Constitutional Chamber case law, it held that extradition is a procedural mechanism of international cooperation and that the constitutional reform was immediately applicable to pending extradition proceedings. The Court further reasoned that the Costa Rica–United States extradition treaty had already allowed, since 1991, the extradition of nationals where domestic constitutional law did not prohibit it; the 2025 reform therefore removed the internal constitutional obstacle rather than creating a new substantive offence or punishment. Since the first-instance court had already found that the treaty requirements were met, including double criminality, legality and non-prescription, the Court of Appeal granted extradition in deferred form, subject to the prior resolution of pending Costa Rican criminal proceedings and to formal assurances from the United States on speciality, non-imposition of death penalty or life imprisonment, and a maximum prison term not exceeding fifty years.
02/06/2026 · Tribunal de Apelación de Sentencia Penal, Segundo Circuito Judicial de San José · 2026-0960
🇨🇷Costa Rica → 🇺🇸United States
Granted with conditionsExtradition
Extradition decision (including procedural rulings) must be rendered by the Court of Appeal and not by a single delegated judge
✕
Summary
The decision on an extradition request—even where it takes the form of a ruling of no need to proceed due to the person’s absence from the national territory—falls within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal sitting in its collegiate composition, and not of a delegated judge. Accordingly, where, as in the present case, the delegated judge has exercised a power that the legal system reserves to the Court of Appeal, the impugned decision must be deemed affected by absolute nullity for lack of judicial capacity, as it entails a violation of the constitutional principle of the natural judge pre-established by law.
12/02/2026 · Italian Supreme Court · 12518/2026
🇮🇹Italy → 🇺🇸United States
Rejected (procedural grounds)Extradition
Final discontinuance in another EU Member State bars extradition to a third country for the same acts under ne bis in idem
✕
Summary
The United States sought the extradition of a Danish national for fraud, money laundering and related offences concerning the alleged misuse of research funds. The Court held that extradition was inadmissible for counts 2–4 and 6–13 because the same acts had already been the subject of a final and binding discontinuance of criminal proceedings in Denmark; the transnational ne bis in idem principle under Article 50 of the Charter and Article 54 CISA also applies to final non-judicial prosecutorial decisions. Extradition remained admissible for counts 1, 5 and 14–22 because double criminality was satisfied, prosecution was not time-barred under US law, and the United States had provided reliable assurances that the principle of speciality would be respected. The Court also rejected objections based on alleged political motivation, fair-trial risks, sentence severity, detention conditions and the absence of a return-transfer assurance. Continued extradition detention was ordered on the basis of flight risk.
13/01/2026 · Higher Regional Court of Munich · 1 OAus 167/25, BeckRS 2026, 12515
🇩🇪Germany → 🇺🇸United States
Granted with conditionsExtradition
Absence of the requested person (even if due to a “deliberate escape”) and “no grounds to proceed” judgment
✕
Summary
The absence of the person sought for extradition, even if due to a “deliberate escape,” results in a ruling that the case should not proceed; the presence of the person sought for extradition in the requested State is an essential prerequisite for the application of the extradition process: if that person is no longer within the territory of the Italian Republic, this essential prerequisite is no longer met
06/07/2023 · Italian Supreme Court · 33518/2023
🇮🇹Italy → 🇺🇸United States
Rejected (procedural grounds)Extradition
Further challenge to extradition to the United States dismissed as res judicata and abuse of process
✕
Summary
The case concerned further proceedings brought by a person whose extradition to the United States had already been the subject of several unsuccessful challenges before the Federal Court of Australia. The applicant sought to resist surrender by challenging previous decisions made under the Australian Extradition Act, relying among other things on alleged fraud, abuse of process, human rights concerns, COVID-19 risks, Indigenous heritage, constitutional arguments, habeas corpus, bail, and claims for damages. The Court held that many of the issues had already been determined in earlier proceedings and were barred by res judicata, Anshun estoppel, or constituted an abuse of process. It also found that the proposed new claims had no reasonable prospects of success and that the applicant’s repeated attempts to reopen the proceedings were inconsistent with the public interest in finality of litigation. The originating application and related interlocutory applications were therefore dismissed, leaving the extradition process undisturbed.
03/03/2021 · Federal Court of Australia · [2021] FCA 161; QUD 254 of 2020
🇦🇺Australia → 🇺🇸United States
Rejected (procedural grounds)Extradition
Country Contributor
Bruce Zagaris
Berliner, Corcoran & Rowe LLP - Washington, DC
Bruce Zagaris is a partner in the Washington, D.C. firm of Berliner, Corcoran & Rowe LLP.
His practice focuses on international white collar crime, including tax controversy, money movement, international evidence gathering, extradition and INTERPOL, prisoner transfer matters, and the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Bruce has successfully challenged INTERPOL Red and Yellow notices. He has also authored a chapter about INTERPOL in his book International White Collar Crime (Cambridge University Press, 2015).
Since 1985, he has served as editor-in-chief of the International Enforcement Law Reporter, a weekly and monthly journal on international enforcement law.
Bruce has been teaching law throughout his entire career. He has served as an adjunct professor, and since 2016, he has been teaching at Texas A&M Masters Program, the school’s Wealth Management and Risk Management course.
Bruce regularly appears as an expert witness in extradition, evidence gathering, international tax, financial regulatory, and money laundering cases. He has authored and edited six books and many law review and other articles. He has worked as a consultant for international organizations on a variety of international enforcement matters.
Country Contributor
Joshua Kolsrud
Kolsrud Law Offices - Phoenix
Josh Kolsrud is a former federal prosecutor turned aggressive criminal defense attorney with deep experience in complex international and federal criminal cases.
A native of Phoenix, Arizona, Josh graduated summa cum laude from Arizona State University’s Barrett Honors College in 2004 and received his Juris Doctor from the University of Miami School of Law in 2007.
He began his career at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and later served as Senior Trial Attorney for the Coconino County Attorney’s Office. Josh was then recruited to the United States Attorney’s Office, where he spent more than five and a half years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney prosecuting cases involving human trafficking, drug trafficking, illegal reentry, gun crimes, white-collar fraud, and other federal offenses with cross-border elements. He successfully authored and won two appeals before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Josh was personally recruited by the Attorney General of the Republic of Palau to lead an anti-human sex trafficking operation in the South Pacific. His efforts helped rescue hundreds of victims from sexual slavery and included prosecuting one of the only jury trials in Palau’s history.
With extensive experience in transnational crime, international investigations, and federal appellate practice, Josh brings unique insight into extradition and cross-border criminal matters.
Country Contributor
Jeffrey Lehtman
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Jeffrey Lehtman's practice focuses on assisting clients with internal and government investigations, global regulatory compliance, and complex cross-border litigation. Client feedback in Chambers Global describes Jeff as "extremely available no matter the issue at hand" and notes he is "business-minded and addresses what needs immediate action first." Clients say "…his advice is outstanding."
Jeff has particular experience counseling clients with regard to civil, criminal, and regulatory issues arising in their international operations, ranging from compliance strategies to mitigate potential risk to internal and government investigations. In addition to counseling clients on issues arising from day-to-day operations, he has represented multinational companies, financial institutions, fintech companies, professional sports teams, international development banks, and their officers and directors in connection with investigations before the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), and numerous other domestic and foreign regulatory and government bodies.
Jeff’s substantive experience includes the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), anti-money laundering (AML) regulations, and economic sanctions laws, as well as allegations relating to accounting and disclosure irregularities, insider trading and workplace misconduct. In addition, Jeff has experience advising clients in connection with international extradition matters and international assistance among regulatory authorities (MLATs).
Prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg, Jeff was a partner at boutique firms in Washington D.C. and an AmLaw 200 firm. In addition, Jeff was previously Senior Regional Counsel at Citibank, overseeing regulatory, litigation and corporate matters involving Latin America. He also served as a Trial Attorney in the Office of International Affairs within the DOJ's Criminal Division.
Country Contributor
Vahdet Talha Bıçak
Bıçak Law Firm - Chicago
Attorney Vahdet Talha Bıçak is a Turkish attorney focusing on international business law, cross-border disputes, international judicial cooperation, extradition-related matters, investment law, maritime law, and commercial litigation. He is part of the management team of Bıçak Law Firm, an Ankara-based full-service law firm representing domestic and international clients in complex cross-border legal matters.
He currently continues his academic and professional activities in Chicago, United States, where he has further expanded his comparative and international legal expertise. His international exposure and practical experience enable him to work effectively on matters involving multi-jurisdictional disputes, international cooperation mechanisms, and transnational legal risks.
Attorney Bıçak graduated from Bilkent University Faculty of Law in 2018 with advanced English legal training. He also pursued postgraduate studies in international trade and corporate law. During his legal education, he served as President of ELSA (European Law Students’ Association), one of Europe’s largest law student organizations, where he organized and coordinated numerous international legal projects and conferences.
His legal practice includes advising multinational corporations, foreign investors, embassies, and international commercial actors on Turkish and international legal matters. He has experience in international arbitration, cross-border investment disputes, international trade, maritime disputes, compliance, regulatory matters, and international commercial litigation. Attorney Bıçak has also been involved in matters relating to international criminal cooperation, comparative law, and extradition-related legal issues. His growing interest in extradition law, European Arrest Warrant practice, INTERPOL-related matters, and international judicial cooperation has led him to contribute to comparative legal research and case-law analysis in this field.
He is fluent in Turkish and English.
His practice areas include extradition and international judicial cooperation, cross-border litigation and dispute resolution, international commercial law, maritime and transportation law, international investment law, arbitration and mediation, corporate and regulatory compliance, white-collar and financial crime-related matters, and INTERPOL-related international criminal cooperation matters.
Attorney Vahdet Talha Bıçak is a member of the Ankara Bar Association and previously served as President of ELSA Ankara. He currently continues his professional activities through Bıçak Law Firm while further developing his international legal practice in the United States.
Need legal assistance?

Extradition proceedings involving United States

Contact a specialist lawyer with proven experience in extradition cases.

Contact →