956 (1922). The Supplemental Complaint charged Respondent with criminal association under Article 164, paragraph 1 and Article 13, section 2 of the Penal Code for the Federal District. Galanis v. Pallanck, 568 F.2d 234 (2d Cir.1977); Sayne v. Shipley, 418 F.2d 679 (5th Cir.1969) cert. After the statements of September 27, 1996, a medical doctor examined Soto and found no traces of any recent physical wounds. Extradition of Kraiselburd, 786 F.2d 1395, 1399 (9th Cir.1986). Finally, Valdez offers that Cruz, Soto, Alejandro and Vasquez[32] were subjected to torture, *1222 and were under duress at the time of the "alleged" statements. The Extradition Hearing was continued on several occasions after the January 14, 1997 filing, with the consent of the parties, to allow for further preparation and response to the evidence. Miranda also declared that Valdez had told him he and Fabian Reyes Partida, aka "Domingo", (hereinafter Reyes) had assassinated Jesus Romero Magana because he was investigating Valdez' criminal activity. Zanazanian v. United States, 729 F.2d 624, 626-27 (9th Cir.1984). You're all set! Cruz declared that the group told him of multiple murders that they, including Valdez, had committed because the "boss was angry", referring to Ramon Arellano Felix. There is no authority that exists that requires a magistrate judge to authorize compelled disclosures of explanatory information. Each "recantation" is essentially a denial of the former statement(s) in their entirety and an allegation of torture and abuse at the hands of the Mexican authorities. No charges have been filed against Anaya, and he denies the allegations. The Ruiz statement also describes the "detention" of Alejandro and Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras". 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. at 77, 78. These latter efforts resulted in the formulation of the March 3, 1997 "declaration.". Explanatory evidence is allowed only if the evidence would, clearly, negate a showing of probable cause. [22] The individuals related to this case are often referred to in the evidence by nicknames. 44). 3190 having been properly and legally certified and authenticated by Bruce A. Beardsley, principal counsular officer of the U.S. in Mexico. In response to this evidence, Valdez offers statements of Gabriel Valdez, Marci Ramirez Marin de Gonzalez and Eva Marin viuda de Pena. De recuperar la libertad, en Mxico le esperan una sentencia de 22 aos de crcel por narcotrfico . He later was charged with several murders, including Ibarras. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. Chapo Guzman gave marijuana to Gallardo so that he could move it into the United States, but afterwards, Chapo Guzman sent the Federal Police after him. 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 . It is argued that Vasquez suffered similar mistreatment at the hands of the Mexican authorities and had recanted the statement attributed to him in Mexico's case in chief. Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies.". [44] There are some inconsistencies in the testimony when various statements are compared, but these are not significant differences affecting this analysis. Under Article 10(7) of the Treaty, the probable cause determination is to be made in accordance with the laws of requested party (here, the United States). In Matter of Extradition of Lui Kin-Hong,939 F. Supp. This evidence is clearly contradictory and inadmissible under Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 315-317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. 777(N.D.Cal.1985). EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . I Background. Valdez and Martinez then fled the Holiday Inn in the white Volkswagen. There is no indication of any coercion or duress, and in fact, Miranda is given "use immunity" with regard to the statement. 44). Augustin also indicates that Alejandro told him that the Mexican officers intended to torture and kill Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios should he be extradited to Mexico. *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. The complaint . 896 (S.D.Cal.1993). 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 United States has filed videotapes of Alejandro's November 30, 1996 deposition. The Courts have chosen to defer questions regarding the procedures or treatment that might await an individual on extradition to the executive branch because of its exclusive power to conduct foreign affairs. There is no corroborating evidence regarding the source, however. 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. Actually, this declaration is not signed by Alejandro, nor was it written by Alejandro. 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 right of confrontation,[46] specifically, has been held inapplicable, as have the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. *1209 *1210 *1211 *1212 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michel Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Ricardo Valdez. 1103. [24] A Volkswagen was seen leaving the scene by eyewitness Juan Manual de la Cruz. The scope of this proceeding is narrow and is limited to the existence of probable cause and the evidence, received by virtue of the Treaty provisions and applicable law. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. 1996) on CaseMine. (4) Alejandro Enrique Hodoyan Palacios In his November 30, 1996 deposition, Alejandro not only discussed the murder of Gallardo and Sanchez, but he also discussed other criminal activity involving the AFO and including the activities of Respondent Valdez. 3188 for a similar proposition. California. They also indicated that their boss, Ramon Arellano Felix, would be pleased with the last job they had carried out. Valdez moved the Court for release under the special circumstances doctrine. The certified documents submitted by Mexico, including the statements of Cruz, Miranda, Soto, Vasquez and Alejandro are admitted into evidence in accordance with Article 10(6) of the subject Treaty and 18 U.S.C. That conclusion is based on the following analysis. The Federal Rules of Evidence and of Criminal Procedure do not apply to an extradition hearing. aka "Cachuchas" In his September 30, 1996, declaration before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor, Gilberto Vasquez Culebro, aka "Cachuchas", (hereinafter Vasquez), declared that Valdez was a member of the AFO and that, in March, 1995, Valdez was in the company of the other AFO members, including, Eduardo Leon, aka "Abulon", Contreras, and Reyes. [13] The documents themselves do not have to filed in court by the 60 day period, only received by the United States. The document is not authenticated. United States v. Taitz, 130 F.R.D. narcoseries Netflix. 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. [40] U.S.-MEXICO DRUG WAR: Two Systems Collide, New York Times, July 22, 1997. The Ninth Circuit recognizes that barring hearsay from extradition hearings would thwart one of the objectives of bilateral extradition treaties by requiring the requesting nation to send its citizens to the extraditing country to confront the accused. Oen Yin-Choy v. Robinson, 858 F.2d 1400, 1407 (9th Cir.1988). There is no prohibition against hearsay in the extradition context because the Federal Rules of Evidence, which proscribe hearsay, do not apply to extradition. Gill v. Imundi,747 F. Supp. Los narcojuniors . Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Cruz. 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. Por Investigaciones ZETA. 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. For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Decision Denying Bail (see footnote 1), the Court finds that the offense of carrying a firearm exclusive to the Army, Navy and Air Force lacks dual criminality and petitioner fails in its burden regarding extradition on that matter.[18]. 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, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. 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 law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. MEMORANDUM DECISION DENYING BAIL PENDING EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS. 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. [39] MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION RE: DETAINEE'S RESPONSE TO EXTRADITION REQUEST AND REQUEST FOR RELEASE, Page 6, lines 5-7 (Docket No. 18 U.S.C. [33] As such, it is argued that the statements were not credible, nor should they support extradition in this case. January 1997: Hodin Gutierrez Rico, a . 18 U.S.C. The admissibility of Miranda's statement, as taken by Assistant United States Attorney Curiel, was previously discussed. Mr. Valdez was referred to as "El Cabezon", "C.P. 25. En 1995, su reinado lleg a su fin. The Department of States's opinion is entitled to deference. The Ninth Circuit has held that self incriminating statements of accomplices are sufficient to establish probable cause in an extradition hearing. These offenses are extraditable offenses under the extradition treaty between Mexico and the United States. 534 (1902). 3184, Ward v. Rutherford, 921 F.2d 286, 289 (D.C.Cir.1990) and Rule 74 of the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court of the Southern District of California. Article 11, Paragraph 3, provides that the provisional arrest "shall be terminated" if the United States does not receive the formal request for extradition and the necessary documents specified in Article 10 within 60 days after the detainee's apprehension. Otros de los jvenes reclutados tambin fueron personificados en Narcos Mxico 3, por ejemplo Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un guardia presidencial, quien conoci a Ramn Arellano en una . The credible evidence, satisfies Mexico's burden in this respect[44]. The Miranda statement provides competent evidence to support a finding of probable cause that Valdez was involved in the Gallardo and Sanchez murders of April 9, 1996. If the Court determines that all the requisite elements have been met, the findings are incorporated into a certificate of extraditability. The long list of challenges to the probable cause finding in Mexico and the other alleged infirmities are not fully set forth herein as the Court finds the opinions of Attorney Gastelum are irrelevant to these proceedings. United States ex rel Sakaguchi v. Kaulukukui, 520 F.2d 726, 730-731 (9th Cir.1975). Fabin Martnez remplaz en el cargo a Emilio Valdez Mainero, El CP, y adems compadre de Ramn Arellano Flix, luego que aqul fue arrestado en 1996 en San Diego, California, y condenado a 30 aos de prisin por delitos relacionados con trfico de cocana y herona hacia Estados Unidos. Si te preguntas quines son en la vida real los llamados narcojuniors de Narcos Mxico, serie de Netflix, se trata de al menos tres de los jvenes de familias acomodadas en Tijuana, Baja California, que se involucraron en temas de drogas y en especial con el Crtel de los Arellano Flix.Entre ellos, El Kitty Arturo Everardo Pez y los hermanos Hodoyan. 3184, et seq. "The rationale is that such matters are to be determined solely by the executive branch." Based on case authorities Respondent's Motion in this regard is denied. Alfredo Miguel Hodoyn Palacios, (a) "Lobo" u "88" , fue detenido el 30 de septiembre de 1996, en San Diego California. 830 (1911). This finding could be based upon the testimony of Miranda and Alejandro, alone. Mexico), they could have easily added that provision. Mr. Vasquez testified based upon his acquaintance and interaction with Respondent and his involvement in the events he describes. Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. In Zanazanian, the Ninth Circuit held that police reports which summarize the statements of witnesses are competent evidence, *1227 even though the same documents would be inadmissible hearsay in other contexts. He states that the reason that Gallardo was murdered was because he had allowed "Chapo Guzman" into the territory of Tijuana to deal drugs and push out Benjamin Arellano Felix. Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Soto for purposes of his testimony. [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]. In Shapiro v. Ferrandina,355 F. Supp. Mexico also cites the medical examination of Soto following the September 27, 1996 statements concluding that there were no traces of any recent physical wounds. The Court is sensitive to the practical and legal limitations on Respondent's ability to challenge the evidence in the extradition proceeding. Respondent urges that this Court decline extradition based upon a "humanitarian exception" in that he is likely to be tortured based upon his alleged relationship to the Arellano-Felix brothers. Valdez was ordered detained following arraignment. Quines eran los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana? 1997). Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). Ultimately, the United States sought to stay the proceedings for an additional ninety (90) day period. In Matter of Extradition of Pazienza,619 F. Supp. 20, 2013) From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research. Mexican prosecutors persuade California courts to send Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios and Emilio Valdez Mainero, alleged paid killers for a vicious drug ring based in Tijuana, back to Mexico to face . 1978). Finally, Respondent filed FINDINGS OF MEXICAN LAW EXPERT RODOLFO GASTELUM PEREZ RE: ABSENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE; SYNOPSIS; AND CURRICULUM VITAE which asserted procedural, substantive and constitutional infirmities under Mexican law in the extradition request and in the arrest warrant. Id. ``Take out your AK-47, and you are going to (expletive) him right now.. 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. The court denied the writ. The videotaped deposition of Alejandro is the only credible evidence to demonstrate the circumstances under which Mexico's evidence was collected. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635, 636 (2d Cir.1980). On the other hand, the formal statements of Soto and Cruz have significant detail concerning the personal background of the witnesses and the specifics of the offenses and related matters. ("Miranda") In his November 19, 1996 declaration, Miranda states that he knows the Arellano Felix brothers. 1280 (D.Mass.1997) but reversed on appeal. The suggestion of torture is certainly present in the record. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. [20] i.e. Challenges to the testimony of Cruz, Soto, Vasquez, Miranda and Alejandro based upon the argument that they are conclusory, unreliable hearsay, and unreliable as presented by alleged codefendants or co-conspirators are rejected. This latter evidence also results in a finding that any hostile action taken toward Alejandro and resulting in his disappearance and murder was more likely than not prompted at the direction of the AFO and not Mexico. 3184, Argento v. Horn, 241 F.2d 258 (6th Cir.1957). Article 11, itself, cites that urgency to arrest and detain an individual supports this initial procedure. Hearsay evidence is admissible on behalf of the Respondent to establish the "obliteration" of probable cause. 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. 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. 33. In Bruton, the Supreme Court held that the admission of a co-defendant confession at a joint trial violates the defendants right to confrontation if the confession also incriminates the defendant. Mar. Emilio Valdez Mainero met Ramn Arellano at a posada before Christmas 1986 in the Lomas de Aguacaliente neighborhood. Whitepages people search is the most trusted directory. [45] The physical injuries to Cruz are certainly suspicious in this regard. Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. 3184, et seq., the United States issued a provisional arrest warrant for the Respondent, signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on September 30, 1996. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . 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. Quines eran los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana? 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. 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. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. The principle argument regarding changed circumstances is the existence of the practice of torture by Mexican authorities. 934 (D.Mass.1996). [38] Specifically, Cruz was charged with homicide and Soto was charged with possession of various *1224 weapons, and a narcotics related offense (possession of marijuana). The limitations of the judicial review at this stage of the proceedings, however, should not be an excuse to admit evidence presented without apparent foundation or any independent indicia of trustworthiness. [26] In Respondent's REPLY TO GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY (Docket No. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. 54(b) (5). A full review of the evidence, however, is the provence of the trial court in the requesting nation. 2d 455 (1972). 448 (1901). The signs of injury included 16 irregularly circular scars, 17 circular scars and 3 small scars on the chest as well as a hematoma to the upper base of the nose and a circular bruise on the right chin. No. November 4, 1997. Tambin se encontraban en este grupo Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un guardia presidencial, Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, Eduardo Len, los hermanos Endir y Henain Meza Castaos, Gustavo Miranda Santa Cruz y Fabin Martnez. "El Lobo" tambin fue capturado en los Estados Unidos junto con el tijuanense Emilio Valdez Mainero "El Radioloco", ambos extraditados a Mxico en enero de 1998 y tambin remitidos a Almoloya de Jurez. His body was found in Osmun Lake in Pontiac on June 7, 2018 but no arrests were made until April 8 of this year. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. *1215 The sufficiency of the evidence (i.e., probable cause) will be discussed hereinafter. As a society we cannot suspend that concept by virtue of the interest of a foreign nation in the extradition of an United States citizen, the heinous nature of the offense notwithstanding. Emilio Valdez Mainero seemed an appropriately upper-tier husband, but he too allegedly found employment in the Arellano Felix organization, recruiting 'young assassins who belong to Tijuana's . 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. The recantations are little more than self-serving declarations at the time of "arraignment" on the charges based upon the statements given to the federal prosecutor. Terlinden v. Ames,184 U.S. 270, 22 S. Ct. 484, 46 L. Ed. 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.]" Recanting statements are relevant in these proceedings as they affect probable cause. Valdez _ the godfather of one of the Arellanos children _ was arrested in September in Coronado, Calif. An extradition hearing began Thursday for Valdez and another man. Ejecutivo Mercantil Autr. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. 30). La pequea y poco conocida . Elias v. Ramirez,215 U.S. 398, 30 S. Ct. 131, 54 L. Ed. Matter of Extradition of Koskotas, 127 F.R.D. R.Crim.P. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. The document was written by Alejandro Hodoyan Ramirez, father of both Alejandro and Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios who is also an extraditee sought by Mexico. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. 1274 (1913); Glucksman v. Henkel,221 U.S. 508, 512, 31 S. Ct. 704, 55 L. Ed. It is asserted that the videotapes demonstrate Alejandro's demeanor and rebut the assertion that Alejandro testified as a result of any torture or duress. Respondent's discovery request in this regard is denied. 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. At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. Fue en una fiesta que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un coronel que fue miebro de los guardias presidenciales. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Informacin de El Universal. Mexico has filed the videotapes, the evidence concerning Respondent's statements regarding the 1997 abduction of Alejandro Hodoyan and the genesis of the March 3, 1997 Declaration by Alejandro Hodoyan, as well as the statements by Alejandro to U.S. agents. 124 F.3d 1186, 1997 WL 624797 (9th Cir.). Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. [8] Additional written argument was entertained from counsel and submissions in this regard were completed on October 14, 1997. *291 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michael Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Valdez Mainero. The indicia of reliability is in favor of the formal statements given to the Mexican authorities by Soto and Cruz and not their in court "recantations." October 21, 1996. Finally, he contests the date of arrest. The Court finds that the videotapes do show a cooperating witness. Citations Copy Citation. is indoor ice skating safe during covid; most common super bowl final scores; lynette woodard spouse; reelfoot lake fishing guides; emilio valdez mainero. Mexico contests the reliability of these recantations asserting that they are self serving, lacking in reliability and inadmissable as contradictory evidence. After receipt of the diplomatic note, Respondent was then held under the formal request for extradition and not the provisional arrest which had initiated the case. 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. 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"). En una de las fiestas conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, quien era hijo de un coronel que fue miembro de los guardias presidenciales, cuando existan. Bruton v. United States,391 U.S. 123, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 20 L. Ed. [31] See discussion at page 1213, line ___, et seq. Alejandro provides an unrestrained narrative discussion of various events and circumstances, prompted by periodic questions and all simultaneously recorded in an office on CPU's. 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 . Defendant Emilio Valdez-Mainero, represented by the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., seeks a 73 month reduction in his sentence on the basis of Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines which revised the Drug Quantity Table in U.S.S.G. "El Lobo" tambin fue capturado en los Estados Unidos junto con el tijuanense Emilio Valdez Mainero "El Radioloco", ambos extraditados a Mxico en enero de 1998 y tambin remitidos a Almoloya de Jurez. Magistrate No. Respondent's reliance upon Article 11, Paragraph 3, is misplaced. Netflix lanz la ltima temporada de Narcos: Mxico, donde adems de los personajes que ya conocemos, hay UNA sorpresa: Bad Bunny. [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. In fact, they are of relatively little evidentiary value herein and as such, an extended analysis is unnecessary. Seeing no one in pursuit, Cruz followed the white Volkswagen in the navy blue Cutlass. 896 (S.D.Cal.1993). 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"). In Escobedo v. United States, 623 F.2d 1098, 1107 (5th Cir. Those issues will ultimately be resolved by the trial court, along with the sufficiency of the evidence regarding guilt. Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. The statement by Cruz to the federal prosecutor did indicate that Cruz had suffered recent physical injury. The . 0. Ultimately, the Court concludes that there is no reliable evidence of torture or duress of the witnesses. Under that rule, "an extraditing court will generally not inquire into the procedures or treatment which await a surrendered fugitive in the requesting country." Fernandez v. Phillips,268 U.S. 311, 45 S. Ct. 541, 69 L. Ed. Mexico's evidence does support a finding of probable cause with regard to the criminal association charge. There is no legal support for a judicially created "humanitarian exception" in an extradition proceeding. 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. Several days went by before Cruz met with Valdez, Martinez, Contreras and Cabrera. [2] The warrant was issued on a Complaint charging Respondent with carrying a firearm exclusively reserved for the military in violation of Articles 160 and 162, paragraph 3, Criminal Code for the Federal District.
Lake Life Seltzer Nutrition Facts,
Fibonacci Series In Matlab Using Recursion,
How Old Is Elizabeth Afton Before She Died,
Dangerous Fish In Kentucky,
Articles E