good thanx much
that is a confirmed singularity
& my question of course is about the actual shape & dimensions of the
condo territory
& the positions of the 2 condo tripoints
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> > also
> > if you know texarkana
> > can you confirm whether there is really a bistate correctional
> > condominium there too
> >
> > as i understand it
> > there may be a legal area in a jailhouse where both states have
> > jurisdiction without but rights of extradition
> >
> > is this for real
> >
> > if so it would be the only legal bistate condo in the usa
>
> There are two courthouses athwart the state boundary in Texarkana.
One is the
> famous US Post Office and Federal Courthouse. The state boundary
presents no
> jurisdictional problems for the feds. The second one is quite a
different
> story.
>
> Yes, it is something of a condominium, under the provisions of the
Bi-state
> Criminal Justice Center Compact ( http://tinyurl.com/tush ).
[Wow! I knew I'd
> eventually get a TinyURL code that spelled something.] Note that
each state
> "relinquishes exclusive jurisdiction" and that they "recognize the
existence of
> concurrent jurisdiction" within the building.
>
> The building originated circa 1980. It is jointly owned by the
County of Miller
> (Arkansas), the County of Bowie (Texas), the City of Texarkana
(Arkansas), and
> the City of Texarkana (Texas). The physical plant, the joint
dispatching
> center, and the joint records management center are operated by an
organ called
> the Law Enforcement Advisory Committee, which is composed of the
two county
> sheriffs and the two city chiefs of police. The LEAC has no
employees, but
> assigns joint law enforcement duties to employees of the respective
police and
> sheriff agencies. The LEAC contracts with the City of Texarkana
(Arkansas) to
> provide building custodial and maintenance staff, etc.
>
> All of the jurisdictional niceties are meticulously spelled out in
the Texas
> Local Government Code, 361.021-361.029 (
http://tinyurl.com/tuuk ). The law of
> Texas requires that its courts be held in Texas, but that is the
only function
> limited to one portion of the building. Arkansas courts may be
held anywhere in
> the building. General police, prosecutorial, and detentional
functions of each
> state can operate anywhere in the building, and offices of the
respective
> agencies are freely intermixed throughout, without regard to the
boundary.
> There are no markings of the boundary within the building, which
sits on the
> diagonal to the boundary.
>
> If you walk into the building, you and your property are under the
joint
> jurisdiction of both states, and you must obey the laws of both.
If this is
> impossible due to a conflict in laws, you may choose the state to
have
> jurisdiction over you. If you are a prisoner of one of the states
or are
> summoned by one of them, you are under that state's exclusive
jurisdiction and
> are exempt from arrest or service of process by the other while in
the building.
> Either state may interrogate suspects, receive confessions, and
make arrests
> anywhere in the building, and no extradition is required unless the
subject was
> already a prisoner in the custody of the other state (and therefore
under its
> exclusive jurisdiction).
>
> I was in the building once on the day of a Texas election, and I
observed a
> voting box in operation. It was actually in Texas, although most
voters were
> entering the building's spacious lobby through a nearby Arkansas
door. That
> entrance and all of the others bore legal notices of the election
as required by
> Texas law for buildings containing voting boxes.
>
> This is indeed intriguing stuff for the political geographer!
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA