| United States v. Alvarez-Machain | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 1, 1992 Decided June 15, 1992 | |
| Full case name | United States of America v. Humberto Alvarez-Machain |
| Citations | 504 U.S. 655 (more) 112 S. Ct. 2188; 119 L. Ed. 2d 441 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 946 F.2d 1466 (9th Cir. 1991); cert. granted, 502 U.S. 1024 (1992). |
| Subsequent | On remand, 971 F.2d 310 (9th Cir. 1992). |
| Holding | |
| The fact of respondent's forcible abduction from another country does not prohibit his trial in a United States court for violations of American criminal laws. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by White, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Blackmun, O'Connor |
United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the respondent's forcible abduction from a foreign country, despite the existence of an extradition treaty with said country, does not prohibit him from being tried before a U.S. court for violations of American criminal laws. The ruling reconfirmed the Ker-Frisbie Doctrine, established in Ker v. Illinois (1886) and Frisbie v. Collins (1952), which generally permits the prosecution of criminal defendants regardless of whether their presence was obtained in accordance with an applicable extradition treaty.