The only vehicle for testing the legality of a governor's warrant is through the filing of an application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Chapman, 601 S.W.2d 380 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980). Once the governor of an asylum state grants extradition, a court considering release on habeas corpus can only decide: (1) whether the extradition documents on their face are in order; (2) whether the petitioner has been charged with a crime in the demanding state; (3) whether the petitioner is the person named in the request for extradition; (4) whether the petitioner is a fugitive. Michigan v. Doran, 439 U.S. 282, 289, 99 S. Ct. 530, 535, 58 L. Ed. 2d 521 (1978); State ex rel. Holmes v. Klevenhagen, 819 S.W.2d 539, 543 (Tex.Cr.App. 1991). The courts of the asylum state (Texas) are "without authority to consider equitable issues." Id. A governor's grant of extradition is prima facie evidence that constitutional and statutory requirements have been met. Doran, 439 U.S. at 289, 99 S. Ct. at 535. If the governor's warrant is regular on its face, the burden shifts to the accused to show the warrant was not legally issued, not based on proper authority, or contains inaccurate recitals. Ex parte Cain, 592 S.W.2d 359, 362 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980). Our review of the denial of habeas corpus relief in an extradition proceeding is limited to the following issues: (1) whether the extradition documents on their face are in order; (2) whether the petitioner has been charged with a crime in the demanding state; (3) whether the petitioner is the person named in the request for extradition; (4) whether the petitioner is a fugitive. Doran, 439 U.S. at 289, 99 S. Ct. at 535; Ex parte Flores, 548 S.W.2d 31, 32 (Tex.Cr.App. 1977); Ex parte Lopez, 988 S.W.2d 788, 789 (Tex.App.--San Antonio 1999, no pet.).