84 N.E.2d 918
No. 31661Supreme Court of Ohio.
Decided February 16, 1949.
Supreme Court — Dismissal, sua sponte — No debatable constitutional question involved — Uniform Act for Out-of-State Parolee Supervision — Section 108-1, General Code — Permitting retaking of parolee convicts of sister state residing in Ohio — By sister state upon establishment of authority and identify only — Decision of sister state to retake not reviewable in Ohio — Act effective upon execution by states involved — Constitutionality — Right to indictment and trial — Section 10, Article I, Constitution — Article VI, Amendments, U.S. Constitution — Due process — Article V, Amendments, U.S. Constitution — Necessity of demand by executive authority of sister state — Section 2, Article IV, U.S. Constitution.
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery county.
Mr. Herbert M. Eikenbary, for appellant.
Mr. Mathias H. Heck, prosecuting attorney, Mr. William H. Wolff and Mr. Lloyd O’Hara, for appellees.
It is ordered and adjudged, sua sponte, that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.
Appeal dismissed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, TURNER and TAFT, JJ., concur.
Page 179