Assistant Attorney General Jeffery Warfield Sr. said he already notified via e-mail the Los Angeles Police Department and city prosecutors about the latest ruling.
“We’ve always been confident, from the moment that we made our first appearance in this case, that the law dictated that Mr. Miura must be extradited to the Los Angeles county. We’ve never wavered from that. We’ve remained steadfast in our position and we still do,” he said in a hastily called press conference minutes after the justices earlier made an “under advisement” ruling.
But the defense team of the Japanese businessman who is wanted in California for allegedly plotting the death of his wife 27 years ago in the city of Los Angeles said they will file yet another emergency motion to stay the execution of the extradition at the CNMI Supreme Court today.
“We’re going to keep fighting,” said Bruce Berline, Miura’s lead counsel on Saipan. “We’ll continue to resist the extradition.”
If their motion is denied, Berline said they will bring Miura’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus to the U.S. District Court for the Northern Marianas and up to the U.S. Supreme Court “until he gets the justice he deserves.”
Warfield said they already expect the defense to seek other legal remedies but stressed that only another stay order can prevent Miura from leaving Saipan to Los Angeles.
“Only if there’s a stay granted by the federal district court,” said Warfield when asked if the defense’ action would have any impact to the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“If there’s a stay granted then that means he can’t go anywhere. But unless there’s a stay granted, LAPD is free to take him at any time,” he added.
Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan, Associate Justice Alexandro C. Castro and Justice Pro Tem Jesus C. Borja heard Miura’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Warfield said the defense’ motion is without merit and should be denied.
The defense asserted Miura isn’t substantially charged yet with the crime of murder and conspiracy to commit murder in California, thus, he should not be considered a fugitive and be extradited.
But Warfield said the fact that Miura’s defense attorney in California is questioning the validity of the warrant of arrest rather than asking for a dismissal connotes that he agrees that his client has been substantially charged.
“Nothing’s going to happen in the demanding state [California] until the defendant is there,” he said.
“He’s [Mark Geragos] not filing a motion to dismiss [the charges]. He filed a motion to quash the warrant of arrest that’s why I said he’s conceding at that point,” said Warfield.
The justices said the CNMI judiciary has no right to validate Miura’s guilt or innocence in the case as its role is limited to delivering Miura to California.
“The trial court’s decision denying appellant’s request for a writ of habeas corpus is hereby affirmed and this court’s Sept. 15, 2008 stay of extradition pending appeal is lifted,” Demapan, Castro and Borja said in their one-page order.
The high court is expected to issue later a full opinion for its ruling.
Attorney William Fitzgerald, who argued on behalf of the defense, said Miura’s case is considered a “case of first impression” which means there are no leading cases whereby the court can base its judgment.
Japan acquitted Miura of murder in 1998 in connection with the 1981 attack on his wife that led to her death.
California, however, requested Saipan immigration authorities to held him last Feb. 22 based on a 1981 warrant of arrest that was amended this year to include the charge of conspiracy to commit murder.
Miura’s attorneys argued he couldn’t be tried for murder in California because that would subject him to double jeopardy.
But LA prosecutors countered he could still stand trial for conspiracy to commit murder on the suspicious death of his wife.
The body of a missing Japanese woman found in a vacant lot in LA in 1979 was later identified as Miura’s girlfriend.
The Japanese media have been going back and forth to Saipan since the case unfolded early this year to give Japan updates on what it considers as its version of the O.J Simpson case.
