Ordinola v. Hackman
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
478 F.3d 588 (2007)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
The Shining Path, a left-wing revolutionary group, began fighting with the Peruvian government for control of the country. The Peruvian government created the Colina Group, a paramilitary organization, to fight the Shining Path. Once the violence lessened, the newly elected Peruvian government issued an extradition request for Wilmer Ordinola (defendant), a Colina Group chief who had sought political asylum in the United States, on several charges, including the kidnapping and murder of unarmed, civilian noncombatants during Ordinola’s time with the Colina Group. Ordinola allegedly opened fire on a crowd of men, women, and children, kidnapped civilians and forced them to dig their own graves before killing them, and engaged in cover-ups of the murders, blaming them on the Shining Path. Peru and the United States had a bilateral extradition treaty, but Ordinola argued that he could not be extradited under the political-offense exception. The magistrate judge found Ordinola to be extraditable, and Ordinola filed a habeas petition with the district court. The district court granted a writ of habeas corpus, finding that Ordinola’s crimes fell under the exception. The United States government (government) (plaintiff) appealed the decision to the Fourth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
