Michigan v. Doran
E902469
Michigan v. Doran is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the limited role of asylum states in reviewing extradition requests from other states under the Extradition Clause and federal statute.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Michigan v. Doran canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T11054829 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Michigan v. Doran Context triple: [Puerto Rico v. Branstad, relatedCase, Michigan v. Doran]
-
A.
Michigan v. Tucker
Michigan v. Tucker is a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the exclusionary rule’s application to statements obtained without full Miranda warnings, holding that derivative evidence from such statements could still be admissible.
-
B.
Minnesota v. Dickerson
Minnesota v. Dickerson is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the scope of stop-and-frisk searches by recognizing the "plain feel" doctrine while limiting officers’ ability to manipulate objects during a pat-down.
-
C.
South Dakota v. Dole
South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
-
D.
Michigan v. Bryant
Michigan v. Bryant is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decision that further defined the scope of the Confrontation Clause by clarifying when statements made to police are considered “testimonial” and thus subject to Sixth Amendment protections.
-
E.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Michigan v. Doran Target entity description: Michigan v. Doran is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the limited role of asylum states in reviewing extradition requests from other states under the Extradition Clause and federal statute.
-
A.
Michigan v. Tucker
Michigan v. Tucker is a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the exclusionary rule’s application to statements obtained without full Miranda warnings, holding that derivative evidence from such statements could still be admissible.
-
B.
Minnesota v. Dickerson
Minnesota v. Dickerson is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the scope of stop-and-frisk searches by recognizing the "plain feel" doctrine while limiting officers’ ability to manipulate objects during a pat-down.
-
C.
South Dakota v. Dole
South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
-
D.
Michigan v. Bryant
Michigan v. Bryant is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decision that further defined the scope of the Confrontation Clause by clarifying when statements made to police are considered “testimonial” and thus subject to Sixth Amendment protections.
-
E.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (45)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal procedure case ⓘ extradition case ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
governors of asylum states
ⓘ
state courts reviewing extradition warrants ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ intergovernmental relations ⓘ |
| citation | 439 U.S. 282 ⓘ |
| clarifies | limited role of asylum states in extradition ⓘ |
| construes | federal extradition statute ⓘ |
| defines | scope of habeas corpus review in interstate extradition cases ⓘ |
| establishesTest | four-factor test for judicial review of extradition ⓘ |
| frequentlyCitedFor |
limits on asylum state inquiry into probable cause
ⓘ
standard of review in interstate extradition ⓘ |
| hasCountry |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasDecisionDate | 1978 ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | United States federal law NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasLanguageOn | comity among states in criminal law enforcement ⓘ |
| hasPetitioner | State of Michigan NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasPrecedentialStatus | binding precedent in U.S. federal and state courts on extradition issues ⓘ |
| hasRespondent | Doran NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holds |
asylum state courts may not re-litigate probable cause determinations of demanding states in extradition proceedings
ⓘ
asylum state may not consider defenses to the underlying charge in extradition proceedings ⓘ asylum state may not inquire into the guilt or innocence of the accused in extradition ⓘ extradition is a summary and mandatory executive proceeding ⓘ once the governor of the asylum state has granted extradition, judicial review is extremely limited ⓘ |
| interprets |
18 U.S.C. § 3182
ⓘ
Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ Extradition Clause of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
criminal procedure
ⓘ
extradition ⓘ federalism ⓘ interstate rendition ⓘ |
| limits | asylum state power to deny extradition ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 282 ⓘ |
| reinforces | obligatory nature of interstate extradition under the Extradition Clause ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Extradition Clause jurisprudence
ⓘ
Kentucky v. Dennison NERFINISHED ⓘ Puerto Rico v. Branstad NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| standsFor |
demanding state’s judicial determination of probable cause is binding on asylum state in extradition
ⓘ
extradition proceedings are not vehicles for full evidentiary hearings on the charge ⓘ |
| volumeOfUnitedStatesReports | 439 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1978 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Michigan v. Doran Description of subject: Michigan v. Doran is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the limited role of asylum states in reviewing extradition requests from other states under the Extradition Clause and federal statute.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.