Opinion
June 28, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
It is well settled that extradition proceedings are summary in nature, and that presumptions of regularity and accuracy attach to a Governor's warrant and supporting documenta tion (see generally, People ex rel. Sheehan v. District Attorney of Bronx County, 184 A.D.2d 319; People ex rel. Kotch v District Attorney of Kings County, 170 A.D.2d 632; People ex rel. Kokell v. Dooley, 158 A.D.2d 568; People ex rel. Glidden v Nemier, 133 A.D.2d 487). Given these principles, we find that since the name of the individual sought by New Jersey authorities, to wit, Devon Wonder, is identical to the name of the petitioner as set forth in the records of the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, the respondent established that the petitioner is the same person sought by the demanding State (see, People ex rel. Drake v. Oslwyn, 51 A.D.2d 240) The petitioner at the hearing adduced no evidence to substantiate his contention that the name Devon Wonder was merely added to the records of the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services when he was arraigned on the New Jersey fugitive warrant. Furthermore, the identification affidavit appended to the warrant supports the hearing court's determination as to identity, especially when considered in the context of the prosecution's representations and the hearing testimony of the petitioner's expert witness. Accordingly, the proceeding was properly dismissed. Sullivan, J.P., Eiber, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.