Additional documentation[4] (specifically related to the first degree murder and carrying a firearm exclusive to the Army, Navy and Air Force) were submitted by diplomatic note No. These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. 30), he requests discovery regarding the statement by Miranda. [25] Miranda testified based upon his acquaintance with the individuals described in his statement, his personal presence at various of the events and circumstances described and conversations with the involved individuals. November 4, 1997. Fue en una de las celebraciones que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, el hijo de un coronel que en su momento fue miembro de los guardias presidenciales. [28] See, IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTRADITION OF ALFREDO HODOYAN PALACIOS, U.S.D.C. [15] The later supplementation of the record and the supplementation of Mexico's request for extradition, with additional charges, are not inconsistent with the Treaty or its provisions. Mr. Vasquez states that the individuals acted suspiciously and carried long and short range firearms. En septiembre de 2002, el Juzgado Cuarto de Procesos Penales Federales en el Estado de Mxico (antes Juzgado Primero de Distrito . The record is overwhelming with eyewitness testimony,[20] autopsies and physical evidence from the scene to establish these facts. Magistrate No. See Reply to Extraditees Response to Extradition Request and Request for Release, Page 8, lines 1-5, inclusive (Docket No. Certainly, the decision to act upon this type of evidence rests upon some indicia of authenticity and reliability. The government's request for the stay was denied sustaining Respondent's objection and request to proceed. It is also notable, that the sum total of the evidence showed Alejandro's Declaration regarding torture and abuse to be contrived in its derivation. The Court's direction to the United States to request from Mexico a copy of the signed statement by Ruiz or other information confirming its authenticity and the actual arrest dates of the individuals involved has been met with a response that this information is not available. [32] Respondent also argues that the statements of Francisco Cabrera Castro and Edgar Alejandro Gonzalez Gonzalez offered by Mexico were also "extracted" by torture. Through observation and discussion, he became privy to the knowledge set forth. The murder and conspiracy offenses, above described, survive the Respondent's challenge. En 1995, su reinado lleg a su fin. Opinion for Matter of Extradition of Mainero, 950 F. Supp. Background. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. 1462, 1469 (S.D.Tex.1992). ("Cruz") In his October 12, 1996 statement, Cruz declared before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor that Valdez, Martinez and, Fabian Partiday, aka "Domingo," described to him crimes that they had committed, the firearms they used to commit the crimes, and the numerous cities in Mexico, in which they had committed crimes in furtherance of the goals of the AFO. Martinez told Cruz that he would receive some money if Cruz would hold the 38 Super and the 9mm guns that they had used to kill Gallardo and Sanchez. Miranda added that the motivation for assassination was that Gallardo had threatened Gabriel Valdez Mainero (Emilio Valdez Mainero's brother) with a firearm.[26]. The Ruiz statement presents conflict with regard to dates of the arrest of some of Mexico's witnesses and is asserted to corroborate the use of torture in this case as well as create conflicts in Mexico's evidence in challenging the reliability of the evidence Mexico relies upon in this proceeding. In making this ruling, the Court of Appeals stated: After making its holding, the Gallina court did state that a case might occur in which the extraditee "would be subject to procedures or punishments so antipathetic to a federal court's sense of decency as to require reexamination of the [the general principle upholding extradition.]" 442 (S.D.Cal.1990). They are: (1) Ministerial Statement of September 27, 1996, at 1140 a.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor, in Guadalajara, Mexico; (2) Additional Ministerial Statement of September 27, 1996, at 6:30 p.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor, in Guadalajara, Mexico; (3) Additional Statement of September 30, 1996, at 9:00 p.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor in Mexico City, Mexico; and. At the time of the June 30, 1997 hearing, a typed translation of Alejandro's personal notes was offered. 96-1798-M. United States District Court, S.D. 3190. Soto extensively describes other, numerous criminal activities of the AFO. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. I Background This resulted in the arrest of Valdez on September 30, 1996. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. The credible evidence, satisfies Mexico's burden in this respect[44]. [48] Authority for this proposition is gathered from dicta in some case law in that there is no direct authority for this proposition. The United States has also offered statements from interviews between Alejandro and federal agents in February of 1997 which are asserted to corroborate Alejandro's knowledge of the AFO and his willingness to cooperate. ), affirmed as modified, 478 F.2d 894 (2d Cir.1973) the court stated in part: The magistrate judge conducting the extradition proceeding has wide latitude in admitting evidence. Respondent's request for discovery is denied. Ahora me siento segura ya que me entero inmediatamente de todo lo que sucede, inclusive antes que mi abogado y que el abogado de . In this regard, Respondent cites Article 11, Paragraph 3 of the Treaty. According to testimony given to Mexican authorities, the Arellanos _ led by brothers Benjamin, Ramon, Javier and Francisco _ have been able to coordinate major assassinations with the aid of the attorney general of Baja California, Jose Luis Anaya Bautista. Concerning the murder and firearms charge, it is alleged that on April 9, 1996, at approximately 9:30 p.m., in the restaurant at the Holiday Inn in Toluca, Mexico, Jesus Gallardo Vigil, aka "El Bebe", (hereinafter "Gallardo"), and Jesus Sanchez Angulo (hereinafter "Sanchez") were shot and killed by Respondent and Fabian Martinez Gonzalez, aka "Tiburon", (hereinafter "Martinez"). Ms tarde contactaron a Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, quien era hijo de un empresario acaudalado de la ciudad. Soto also explains the details of the alleged abuse visited upon him. [19] Respondent's requests for cross examination of Petitioner's witnesses pursuant to Fed. *1229 The testimony of the various witnesses, including Miranda and Alejandro provide competent evidence for an assessment of probable cause to believe that the crime of criminal association (conspiracy) has been committed and that Respondent is involved therein. 3190 having been properly and legally certified and authenticated by Bruce A. Beardsley, principal counsular officer of the U.S. in Mexico. Los jvenes que cayeron en las garras de los hermanos Arellano Flix fueron: Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un guardia presidencial, Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario, Eduardo Len, los hermanos Endir y Henain Meza Castaos, Gustavo Miranda Santa Cruz y Fabin Martnez. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. The date of production for the photographic evidence was set for November 5, 1997[9] and later extended with properly authenticated and certified originals being filed on December 1, 1997. *1218 Respondent has been accused by Mexico of murder in violation of Mexican law. Respondent asserts that the Treaty in this instance is invalid due to changed circumstances. Respondent's role is alleged to have included, among other things, the planning and carrying out of assassinations of people perceived to be enemies of the AFO, including rival drug traffickers and law enforcement officials. 568 (S.D.N.Y.1979). In the absence of legal authority to support the court's ability to find the treaty invalid for changed circumstances or that the purpose and intent of the parties in this instance is materially different, Respondent's position in this regard is rejected. 1101(d) (3); and Fed. The Republic of Mexico seeks to extradite Valdez to answer the following charges: (1) Carrying a firearm exclusive to the Army, Navy and Air Force on or about April 9, 1996 in violation of Article 83, Section II, in accordance with Article 11, Section (b), of the Federal Law of Mexico on Weapons and Explosives;[10]. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. *1225 Seargent Ruiz' statement appears to confirm Soto's statement that he was arrested prior to the September 27, 1996 date set forth in the statements made to the Mexican authorities. They are under a compelled setting initiated by Mexican judicial authorities (as opposed to a self directed recantation by the declarants) and are no greater than a plea of not guilty when analyzed to similar proceedings under United States law. October 21, 1996. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. Thus, it has been held appropriate to permit evidence that tends to obliterate probable cause but not evidence which merely contradicts the same. Recanting statements are relevant as they affect probable cause, but a showing that the prior statement is coerced and that indicia of reliability is on a subsequent recantation is the appropriate point of analysis on this issue. Based on the above evidence, this Court finds that there is probable cause to believe that Valdez committed the crime of criminal conspiracy as alleged in the extradition request. 00:15. The documents were filed by Mexican authorities seeking extradition of two men -- Emilio Valdez Mainero, 32, and Alfredo Hodayan Palacios, 25 -- alleged to be hit men for the Arellano Felix brothers. During the meeting, the group discussed their plans to kill enemies of their interests, including Amado Carillo, a rival drug trafficker. The Treaty between the United States and Mexico calls for probable cause to be measured by the standards established in the requesting country. 13, 22 (D.Mass.1989). Background. This issue was not challenged by the Respondent. Emilio Valdez Mainero and Alfredo Hodoyan were linked to the Arellano Felix drug organization, which controls the lucrative drug corridor from Baja California into the United States. Get free access to the complete judgment in MATTER OF EXTRADITION OF MAINERO, (S.D.Cal. No case authority is offered on this issue. B. Gustavo Miranda Santacruz On November 19, 1996, Gustavo Miranda Santacruz (hereinafter "Miranda") made a declaration before Assistant United States Attorney, Gonzalo P. Curiel, acting as Mexico's agent pursuant to a request under the mutual Legal Assistance Treaty that exists between Mexico and the United States. Ejecutivo Mercantil Autr. A certified copy of the extradition Treaty between the United States of America and Mexico of May 4, 1978 *1217 (TIAS 9656) was submitted by the United States in support of its position that the Treaty is presently in full force and effect. Alejandro, who is the brother of extraditee Alfredo Miguel hodoyan Palacios aka "Lobo",[28] stated that his brother told him that Valdez and Martinez had participated in the murder of Gallardo at the Holiday Inn Hotel in Toluca. The suggestion of torture is certainly present in the record. They are: (1) The Statement of October 12, 1996 at 1:00 a.m. in Mexico City; and. (5) There is probable cause that a crime or crimes were committed and that the Respondent participated in or committed them. Soto's testimony is based upon his acquaintance with the individuals referenced in the statement, and his role as a cook residing at various times with these individuals. In fact, in the statement to the district judge on October 2, 1996, Mr. Soto indicates that he has no physical defects. *1220 At approximately 9:30 p.m., Cruz, who was about twenty meters away from the entrance of the Holiday Inn heard several firearms shots. The Ruiz statement also describes the "detention" of Alejandro and Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras". The statement is a summary of what Alejandro described to his family and includes information related to meeting General Gutierrez Rebollo as well as contact with DEA and FBI agents who pressured him to sign a confession in exchange for removal from Mexico and protection thereafter. Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. The others in the navy blue Cutlass also left the Holiday Inn and caught up with the white Volkswagen at the village of San Mateo Atenco. Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. Another court has correctly characterized the above sentence from the Second Circuit as "dicta." Under that rule, "an extraditing court will generally not inquire into the procedures or treatment which await a surrendered fugitive in the requesting country." Demandado: Emilio Ricardo Valdez Mainero. Respondent asserts that Soto lost an eye as a result of the torture used by Mexico to extract his statement[39]. The Ninth Circuit has held that self incriminating statements of accomplices are sufficient to establish probable cause in an extradition hearing. Neely v. Henkel, supra. United States District Court, S.D. This assertion relates specifically to the supplemental filing of evidence regarding the first degree murder charge on January 14, 1997 and the weapons charge related to the events and circumstances of April 9, 1996. [6] The Court also directed the United States to request from Mexico, a signed statement of Seargent Ruiz and evidence of all dates of arrest after September 1, 1996 of witnesses Soto, Alejandro Hodoyan, Francisco Cabrera Castro and Gerardo Cruz Pacheco.[7]. The Federal Rules of Evidence and of Criminal Procedure do not apply to an extradition hearing. The . ``When they want to do a job _ when they want to bring down the hammer _ they can do it with brilliance and genius, Lupsha said. En esta temporada podemos ver lo que pasa despus de la cada de Miguel ngel Flix Gallardo, interpretado por Diego Luna. Ante una posible enfermedad terminal, Benjamn Arellano Flix pretende obtener una liberacin humanitaria, y no pagar la pena de 25 aos de prisin en Estados Unidos. In fact, the prevailing authorities are clear that: The decision to honor a request for extradition is "political", not "judicial". This is defined as an individual who is a member of a group or gang of three or more persons whose purpose is to carry out criminal activity (Article 164). 563, 572 *1219 (S.D.N.Y. The law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. The purported March 3, 1997 declaration of Alejandro is false and its manner of production and presentation erode any potential reliability. ``But it only makes the laxity which we see daily _ that should be viewed with greater and greater suspicion.. While the Court has wide latitude in admitting evidence, and hearsay evidence is admissible, the Ruiz statement is without any legally reliable corroborating or authenticating evidence in this case. 2d 496 (1990). Zanazanian v. United States, 729 F.2d 624, 626-27 (9th Cir.1984). There is no question, and no conflict in the evidence, that Gallardo and Sanchez were shot and killed by two individuals on April 9, 1996, at approximately 9:30 p.m., at the entrance of the restaurant at the Holiday Inn in Toluca, Mexico. mayo 9, 2022. In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. The court has jurisdiction over the Respondents if they are before the court. Bruton v. United States,391 U.S. 123, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 20 L. Ed. Respondent has no right to rebut prosecutorial evidence (here, the basis and procedural compliance with the laws of Mexico as well as the determination of probable cause to issue the warrant in Mexico). In Gallina, commissioner found the appellant subject to the extradition in Italy. Under 18 U.S.C. The Court is not limited in its receipt of this evidence by virtue of the lack of certification. In addition to being signed by extraditee's father, other family members similarly signed attesting to the authenticity and veracity of the document. El cantante interpreta a Arturo "Kitty" Paez, un sanguinario pero muy snob criminal . 1136 (1916); McNamara v. Henkel,226 U.S. 520, 33 S. Ct. 146, 57 L. Ed. In the final analysis, this Court is required to look at the indicia of reliability with regard to the persuasiveness of this evidence. In Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 815 (9th Cir.1986), the Ninth Circuit reaffirmed that hearsay evidence that would be inadmissible for other purposes is admissible in extradition hearings. 1996) on CaseMine. Criminal activity is defined as those who agree to or plan the crime, commit the crime themselves and/or commit the crime jointly with others (Article 13, Sections 1 through 3, inclusive). [42] The response from Mexico indicates that closed proceedings related to General Rebollo are ongoing in Mexico and that Ruiz is a witness therein. This is in contrast to the September 27, 1996 arrest date noted in the statement to the federal prosecutor. Garcia-Guillern v. United States, 450 F.2d 1189, 1192 (5th Cir. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 789, 790 (9th Cir.1986). In Matter of Extradition of Pazienza,619 F. Supp. The physical description of Emilio Valdez Mainero, "El C.P." or "Cabeza de Perro," is the following: 30 years old, 1.77 or 1.76 meters, heavy build, white skin, short straight hair which .
Wedding Reception Near St Benedict Church Silang,
Matthew Stephens Permaculture,
When A Taurus Woman Is Hurt,
Articles E
