Certainly, the decision to act upon this type of evidence rests upon some indicia of authenticity and reliability. The interests of Mexico were represented by the United States through the United States Department of Justice, by United States Attorney Alan D. Bersin and Assistant United States Attorney Gonzalo P. Curiel. Mexico), they could have easily added that provision. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 517, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. 0. In this regard, statements characterized as "recantations" were offered by Cruz, Soto and Hodoyan. Columna. There is no credible evidence supporting the authenticity of this summary of testimony in the closed investigation in Mexico. The others drove in a white Volkswagen. Mexican law defines murder (or homicide) as taking the life of another (Article 302). 1980), the court refused to decide whether the accused might be tortured or killed if surrendered to the requesting nation because this argument raised an "issue that properly falls within the exclusive purview of the executive branch" Id. The proper authority for the political decision here is, of course, the Secretary of State. Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). We will gather for a memorial service and viewing at 6:00 p.m. Friday, September 6, 2019 followed by a visitation at Lake Ridge Chapel and Memorial Designers. Fausto Soto Miller presented Mexico does acknowledge that there is an investigation ongoing concerning the actions of General Rebollo and his associates, and that the investigations include the "possible" unlawful detention of suspects. In the final analysis, this Court is required to look at the indicia of reliability with regard to the persuasiveness of this evidence. It is also alleged that Respondent was in charge of cocaine and marijuana shipments for the AFO and as a leading member of the organization, was responsible for assigning code names to the other members. In the statement to the judge, with the assistance of counsel, Cruz was asked by the Court if he desired to make a statement concerning the facts that are attributed to him in the subject statement. As noted previously, Respondent also offers the expert opinion of Rodolfo Gastelum Perez which has been excluded under the analysis previously set forth.[31]. The testimony of Miranda, taken by Assistant United States Attorney Curiel, corroborates the substance of the evidence collected at the *1228 scene and statements by non-involved witnesses. Specifically, the tape of the interview with Miranda, all notes and interview sheets, and documentation concerning Assistant United States Attorney Curiel's agency on behalf of Mexico. 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. 3188 for a similar proposition. 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). [41] All of these individuals are described as "prisoners" in the statement. Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 315-317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. Alfredo Miguel Hodoyn Palacios, (a) "Lobo" u "88" , fue detenido el 30 de septiembre de 1996, en San Diego California. The extradition request and supporting documents are admitted into evidence during the hearing and the post hearing submissions are properly authenticated or otherwise admissible within the discretion of the Court. The Court concludes that each of the crimes for which extradition is requested by Mexico are among those specified in the Treaty but that only Criminal Association and First Degree Murder are analogous to United States law. 00:15. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. The notes are identified by Augustin Hodoyan, Alejandro's brother. 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 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. Lee tambin "Narcos Mxico 3": Bad Bunny ser un narcojunior del Cartel de Tijuana. *1226 In the final analysis, the Ruiz declaration is inadmissible given the lack of authenticity, certification or reliability and does little to support the recantations of Soto and Cruz. Hodoyan was taken into custody for carrying an AK-47 and some marijuana. Under 18 U.S.C. *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. These questions cannot be answered within the narrow confines of an extradition proceeding and would be most properly addressed by the Secretary of State and/or the Court in Mexico on a trial on the merits. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. 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. In the Matter of Extradition of Emilio Valdez Mainero,950 F. Supp. En septiembre de 2002, el Juzgado Cuarto de Procesos Penales Federales en el Estado de Mxico (antes Juzgado Primero de Distrito . MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION RE: DETAINEE'S RESPONSE TO EXTRADITION REQUEST AND REQUEST FOR RELEASE, p. 55, lines 17, et seq., Docket No. at 77, 78. Valdez and Martinez drove off in the white Volkswagen and Cruz and Contreras followed them in a navy blue Cutlass.[24]. Cruz identifies photographs numbered 53, 54 and 55, respectively as depictions of Respondent Valdez. [4] As presented, the documentary evidence in this regard appears to supplement, not supersede, the previous filings of certified documents in support of the request for extradition. The suggestion of torture is certainly present in the record. [8] See RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF EXTRADITION filed September 29, 1997 (Docket No. Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Cruz. In addition to being signed by extraditee's father, other family members similarly signed attesting to the authenticity and veracity of the document. Mexico did not produce a signed statement of Sergeant Ruiz or evidence of dates of arrest of the referenced witnesses. For the reasons set forth in footnote 32 an extended analysis of the recantation is not set forth, nor is the recantation viewed any differently than those of Cruz and Soto. Valdez "hires young assassins who belong to Tijuana's upper class," according to the statement by Francisco Molina Ruiz, commissioner of Mexico's National Institute for the Combat of . [37] Respondent criticizes Mexico for not filing this set of documents. Miranda was granted "use immunity" for giving the statement. During the drive, Contreras told Cruz that, "his friends in the white Volkswagen wanted to say hello to a fellow citizen who was in Toluca to train for boxing." This document is submitted to be from the files in the prosecution of General Gutierrez Rebollo, by the Republic of Mexico, in Mexico. No case authority is offered on this issue. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . As indicated previously, the extradition hearing is not a trial, nor a criminal proceeding providing respondent with rights available in a criminal trial at common law. There is no evidence, however, in this regard. [6] See ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO REOPEN EVIDENCE AND DIRECTING THE UNITED STATES TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed September 11, 1997 (Docket No. Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. Miranda infuriated his boss by refusing to do the hit because he had plans to go shopping with his family. Respondent also cites Title 18 U.S.C. The Second Circuit affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition. Respondent's objections to this evidence and his explanatory evidence have already been addressed, and rejected. Los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana. In fact, Respondent urges the Court to dismiss this proceeding stating that the Mexican Attorney General's office held back these statements because of their negative impact on the probable cause analysis. Respondent had indicated that a recantation by Vasquez would be filed, but no such document has been offered in evidence in this case. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Publicado: 5/6/2021 7:10:25 PM. 1103. Appellant asked the Court of Appeals to stop his extradition because he had been convicted in absentia in Italy and, therefore, would be imprisoned without trial, be unable to confront his accusers and would not be able to conduct a defense. Citations Copy Citation. 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). *1209 *1210 *1211 *1212 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michel Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Ricardo Valdez. Valdez moved the Court for release under the special circumstances doctrine. The government's request for the stay was denied sustaining Respondent's objection and request to proceed. [45] The thought of testimony coerced by torture is certainly abhorrent and inconsistent with tenets of our society. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. They are: (1) The Statement of October 12, 1996 at 1:00 a.m. in Mexico City; and. This is in contrast to the September 27, 1996 arrest date noted in the statement to the federal prosecutor. See footnote 25. Another court has correctly characterized the above sentence from the Second Circuit as "dicta." The "recantations" from Cruz and Soto are in the form of testimony before a judge of the First District of Federal Criminal Proceedings in the State of Mexico. Respondent asserts that Soto lost an eye as a result of the torture used by Mexico to extract his statement[39]. The March 3, 1997 date is taken from the first line of the document. The case against the implicated juniors spilled into U.S. courts after the Sept. 30 arrest of Emilio Valdez Mainero, 32, the baby-faced son of a deceased army colonel from Tijuana who, his widow . 18 U.S.C. (quoting Sindona v. Grant, 619 F.2d 167, 174 (2d Cir.1980)). denied, 398 U.S. 903, 90 S. Ct. 1688, 26 L. Ed. En una de esas fiestas fue que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, quien era hijo de un coronel que fue miembro de los guardias presidenciales, cuando an existan. Beyond that, he reports preparing a letter of resignation from the Department of National Defense under torture. 568 (S.D.N.Y.1979). Por Investigaciones ZETA. *1218 Respondent has been accused by Mexico of murder in violation of Mexican law. In this regard, Respondent cites Article 11, Paragraph 3 of the Treaty. The various activities included a number of incidents of transportation of illegal drugs and homicide. There was no mention of the lost eye in the medical exam performed by the Republic of Mexico or during the court proceedings where the alleged recantation took place. The extradition proceeding is not a criminal trial nor is Respondent entitled to the rights available in a criminal trial at common law. Mr. Vasquez states that the individuals acted suspiciously and carried long and short range firearms. [12] Statement of Gerardo Cruz Pacheco to an agent of the Federal Prosecutor on October 12, 1996. The evidence tying Valdez to the murder of Gallardo and Sanchez itself, given the numbers of other individuals involved, supports the criminal association charge. [31] See discussion at page 1213, line ___, et seq. Estudiaban en colegios particulares, eran de familias acomodadas y los deslumbr el estilo de vida del "Mon", uno de los lderes del crtel de Tijuana. If the Court determines that all the requisite elements have been met, the findings are incorporated into a certificate of extraditability. Id. Seeing no one in pursuit, Cruz followed the white Volkswagen in the navy blue Cutlass. Therefore, the Court will certify the above and all documents admitted into evidence to the Secretary of State. [23] Cruz made several statements relative to this matter. Emilio Ricardo Valds Mainero, (a) "Len" o "Ricardo Gonzlez Len", detenido el 30 de septiembre de 1996, en San Diego, California, por posesin ilegal de armas y de estupefacientes. On September 30, 1996, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of California, acting on behalf of the Republic of Mexico, presented to the Honorable Anthony Battaglia, United States Magistrate Judge, a complaint and a formal extradition request for Emilio Valdez Mainero (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Extraditee"). [42] See RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF EXTRADITION (Docket No. 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. The law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. The interviews of Alejandro in the United States confirm the uncoerced willingness of Alejandro to provide testimony concerning the criminal activities of the AFO and Respondent's role therein. The Federal Rules of Evidence and of Criminal Procedure do not apply to an extradition hearing. The Department of Justice shall prepare a certification consistent with this memorandum as required by 18 U.S.C. According to the allegations, earlier on April 9, 1996, Valdez, Martinez, and Isaac Contreras Ayala, aka "Calaco", (hereinafter "Contreras") were awaiting the arrival of Gerardo Cruz Pacheco, aka "Capitan", (hereinafter "Cruz") at the Glorieta del Angel. Curreri v. Vice, 77 F.2d 130, 132 (9th Cir.1935); Eain v. Wilkes, 641 F.2d 504, 510 (7th Cir.1981), cert. Respondent also offers, as evidence to defeat probable cause, recantations by Cruz and Soto relative to the earlier statements[36]. Treaties, by design, live well beyond the administration involved in their enactment. On June 26, 1997, respondent filed a SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY[34], with an attached declaration of Augustin Hodoyan (Alejandro's brother) with Alejandro's personal notes which were used to create the March 3, 1997 declaration. The witnesses go on to attribute a number of other incidents based upon their personal knowledge occurring since 1994 which are competent for a finding of probable cause on this charge as well. Soto contends that he was arrested on September 12, 1996 and held in custody for some weeks. 3184. The Department of States's opinion is entitled to deference. Id. United States v. Taitz, 130 F.R.D. All the victims were prosecutors or police commanders from Baja California who had investigated the Arellanos. 672, 685 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff'd, 619 F.2d 167 (2d Cir.1980), citing Collins, supra, 259 U.S. at 316. In the Matter of the EXTRADITION OF Emilio Valdez MAINERO. Those issues will ultimately be resolved by the trial court, along with the sufficiency of the evidence regarding guilt. [48] Evidence submitted in this regard includes the "recantations" regarding the use of torture to extract statements from the witnesses as well as the alleged abduction of Alejandro. But federal prosecutors said that the information is valuable for this case and others, and that the mens credibility is proved by the way their stories fit together. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. 44). You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Tambin as reclutaron a Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario de Tijuana, quien comenz a pasar droga sin levantar sospechas pues era . 1997). El recordado criminal perteneca a los Narcojuniors, una clula del crtel de Tijuana que sale a relucir en la nueva temporada de la serie de Netflix. Lastly, there is no authority that requires a magistrate judge to compel disclosure of explanatory information. The Ninth Circuit has labeled the above statement from Gallina as speculation. Neely v. Henkel, supra. Mexico contests the reliability of these recantations asserting that they are self serving, lacking in reliability and inadmissable as contradictory evidence. 1280 (D.Mass.1997) but reversed on appeal. De acuerdo con un artculo del periodista Jess Blancornelas, publicado en 2002 . Background. Discovery is not available in extradition proceedings. El Lobo was captured in the United States together with Emilio Valdez Mainero "El Radioloco", they were extradited to Mexico in January of 1998 and also sent to Altiplano at Almoloya de Juarez. 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.Ms tarde contactaron . Furthermore, the sworn witness statements in the instant case are the type of evidence contemplated by the Treaty to avoid the need for the requesting country to send its witnesses to the requested country to testify at the extradition hearing. The certified documents included diplomatic note 001831 dated November 25, 1996 from the Embassy of Mexico formally requesting the extradition of Respondent on the firearms and conspiracy charges. 3184, Argento v. Horn, 241 F.2d 258 (6th Cir.1957). EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. Alejandro's statement, at page 13, implicates Respondent[47] in the murder. 448 (1901). Whitepages people search is the most trusted directory. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635, 636 (2d Cir.1980). The power to make treaties is constitutionally invested in the executive branch of the United States government. *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. The statements of three admitted members of the organization are contained in extradition papers for Emilio Valdez Mainero, an alleged Arellano henchman arrested in the United States. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. 44). Background. 1983). However, before we can indict evidence as tainted by the coercive effect of torture, satisfactory evidence must be presented. E. Alejandro Enrique Hodoyan Palacios On November 30, 1996, Alejandro Enrique Hodoyan Palacios (hereinafter "Alejandro") gave a deposition at the office of the Attorney General of the United States of Mexico.
Hummer H3 Passenger Floorboard Wet, Is Tj Millhouse A Real Singer, Articles E