|
Practice Areas
|
Practice Areas
Extradition Cases
Joshua L. Dratel, P.C., has developed an internationally recognized expertise in extradition matters, both to and from the U.S. The firm's work includes direct representation as well as providing expert opinions and testimony to attorneys in other countries for clients whom the U.S. seeks to extradite.
The firm's unique and varied achievements in extradition matters include:
- In Re "Bender" - Secured bail and prevented extradition to Trinidad of dual citizen in political fraud case;
- United States v. "McBride" - Served as expert witness/consultant on U.S. national security/fraud prosecutions, sentencing, and prison confinement issues for British citizen who successfully fought extradition to the U.S. from the United Kingdom on charges of hacking into U.S. military computer systems, representing the first instance under the current extradition treaty between the U.S. and U.K. that the British Home Secretary refused a U.S. request for extradition;
- United States v. "Khan" - Served as expert witness/consultant on U.S. national security prosecutions, sentencing, and prison confinement issues for British citizen who successfully fought extradition to the U.S. from the United Kingdom on charges of material support for terrorism. Extradition was denied because of the prospective harsh conditions of confinement that the defendant would have endured in U.S. prison (if convicted of a terrorism-related offense);
- United States v. "Basra" - Successfully represented a U.S. citizen living in the Middle East, and assisted foreign counsel, in contesting extradition to the U.S. on charges of financing terrorism;
- United States v. "Sheldon" - Served as expert/consultant on U.S. sentencing and prison confinement issues for a Canadian citizen, charged with drug offenses, who successfully fought extradition to the U.S., only the third instance in which the Canadian courts have denied extradition to the U.S.;
- United States v. "Masri" - Served as expert/consultant on U.S. national security prosecutions, law, and practice, for Canadian resident who successfully fought removal from Canada, which had accused him of being a member of a foreign terrorist organization;
- United States v. "Esmail" - Formally qualified by a Canadian Court, and testified (for a defendant facing extradition to the U.S.), as an expert in New York State search and seizure law, U.S. Fourth Amendment constitutional law on search and seizure, and New York State criminal practice with respect to firearms offenses and plea bargaining;
- United States v. "Dinh" - Formally qualified by the Court, and testified at a hearing (for a defendant facing extradition to the U.S.), as an expert in the field of U.S. federal law, in particular in relation to Special Administrative Measures, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, evidentiary status of statements obtained by torture or coercion, and conditions of confinement generally in U.S. prison and pretrial detention facilities;
- United States v. "Saleh" - Formally qualified by a Canadian Court, and testified at a removal hearing for a defendant (facing ejection from Canada), as an expert regarding United States national security and terrorism-related cases in the United States, and in particular the Embassy Bombings case [United States v. Bin Laden, 98 Cr. 1023 (LBS/KTD/LSK)]; and
- United States v. "York" - Formally qualified by a British Court, and testified at a hearing (for a defendant facing extradition to the U.S.), as an expert in U.S. federal law, in particular in relation to federal sentencing law and practice.
|
