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. 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. [42] The response from Mexico indicates that closed proceedings related to General Rebollo are ongoing in Mexico and that Ruiz is a witness therein. 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. As a result, the Court finds Treaty compliance in this respect and denies Respondent's request for release on this basis. ), 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. Mexico takes issue with the March 3, 1997 declaration, noting that it was not signed by the declarant, nor is part of an official proceeding or under penalty of perjury. De acuerdo con un artculo del periodista Jess Blancornelas, publicado en 2002 . In that statement, Cruz was noted to have suffered multiple burns which were attributed to an incident several days before when he was inspecting the exhaust pipe of a vehicle. 1136 (1916). Attorney Gastelum's opinions are contradictory, at best, and excludable on that basis. When they reached Toluca, Valdez and Martinez stopped to make several telephone calls, at approximately 9:00 p.m. Narcos Mxico 3: de Kitty Pez a los Arellano Flix - infobae A full review of the evidence, however, is the provence of the trial court in the requesting nation. These declarations bear even greater indicia of competency than the police reports accepted as competent evidence in Zanazanian. [29] Respondents request for discovery of all evidence of discussions with Alejandro Hodoyan is denied on the basis of the authority set forth in footnote 26, except to the extent that this information was produced in response to the Court's order of September 11, 1997 (see footnote 6). MATTER OF EXTRADITION OF MAINERO, (S.D.Cal. 1996) The law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. Hodoyan was taken into custody for carrying an AK-47 and some marijuana. 3190. 3190 having been properly and legally certified and authenticated by Bruce A. Beardsley, principal counsular officer of the U.S. in Mexico. These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. Miranda details numerous other criminal activities in which Valdez and others in the AFO were involved, including the assassination of Larios Guzman, the July 1994 assassination of multiple military officers, the kidnaping and murder of a person with the last name Margain, and the kidnaping of a man with the last name Baloyan. Soto extensively describes other, numerous criminal activities of the AFO. *291 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michael Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Valdez Mainero. Discovery is not available in extradition proceedings. at 1450-1451. Family and friends will gather for his funeral services at 10:00 am on Saturday, September 7, 2019 at Lake Ridge Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. Miranda also identifies Respondent as the person depicted in various photographs reference as numbers 53, 54, 55, 73 and 74. This is in contrast to the September 27, 1996 arrest date noted in the statement to the federal prosecutor. As a result, the accomplice argument does not negate reliability in this instance, nor does it defeat admissibility. The Department of States's opinion is entitled to deference. October 21, 1996. Respondent's reliance upon Article 11, Paragraph 3, is misplaced. Los narcos asesinan, se ren y despus se van a cenar 1274 (1913); Glucksman v. Henkel,221 U.S. 508, 512, 31 S. Ct. 704, 55 L. Ed. 2d 208. These individuals returned to Mr. Vasquez' home in April of 1996 and stated that they were running from the authorities because they had committed a homicide in Mexico City. Two Mexican men to be extradited for drug-related murders In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. 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. 1997). Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). 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. But the deal fell apart when the other inmate couldn't pay the promised . The United States filed certified documents in support of the extradition request at various times, the first of which was on December 4, 1996. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Publicado: 5/6/2021 7:10:25 PM. The Court finds that the videotapes do show a cooperating witness. Respondent also challenges compliance with the Treaty, and urges his release in these proceedings, relative to the "late filing" of certified documents in this case. 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. Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies.". United States District Court, S.D. [8] Additional written argument was entertained from counsel and submissions in this regard were completed on October 14, 1997. the arrest dates of Soto and Cruz), is unpersuasive as offered to totally obliterate probable cause under a Contreras analysis. 2d 476 (1968), is also unpersuasive in this regard. Explanatory evidence is allowed only if the evidence would, clearly, negate a showing of probable cause. 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. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. Valdez was a 2016 graduate of Warren Mott High School who had moved to Pontiac. It was not until October 2, 1996 that Soto described the alleged torture to the judge in Mexico. Fue en una fiesta que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un coronel que fue miebro de los guardias presidenciales. There, Valdez told the group, "`The Baby' paid me off. [37] These statements were taken in open Court, at the time that Cruz and Soto were arraigned on charges filed against them by the Republic of Mexico and based upon the statements given to the public prosecutor. 2d 496 (1990). [38] These are the same statements offered in this matter to support the request for extradition. Thus, it has been held appropriate to permit evidence that tends to obliterate probable cause but not evidence which merely contradicts the same. En septiembre de 2002, el Juzgado Cuarto de Procesos Penales Federales en el Estado de Mxico (antes Juzgado Primero de Distrito . 970 (1925); the probable cause is sustained if competent evidence to establish reasonable grounds is presented, not necessarily evidence competent to convict. Extradition of Mainero, Matter of, 950 F. Supp. 290 | Casetext Search BATTAGLIA, District Judge. 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. At the time, Emilio Valdez Mainero, a member of the Arellano Flix cartel, said in a bugged conversation with a inmate-turned-informant that he wanted to kill Curiel. Kitty Pez, el narco real que interpreta Bad Bunny en 'Narcos Mxico [45] The thought of testimony coerced by torture is certainly abhorrent and inconsistent with tenets of our society. This issue was not challenged by the Respondent. The March 3, 1997 date is taken from the first line of the document. [5] This Declaration is filed in Case No. The essential question is whether the indicia of reliability is on the recantation or the initial statement. 777(N.D.Cal.1985). 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. Cartel Suspect Admits Plotting Cocaine Deal - Los Angeles Times 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. 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. 33. See footnote 10. Seeing no one in pursuit, Cruz followed the white Volkswagen in the navy blue Cutlass. Narcos Mxico 3: Ellos son los verdaderos "narcojuniors" en los que The Ruiz statement also describes the "detention" of Alejandro and Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras". Where a prior statement is shown to be coerced and the indicia of reliability is on the recantation, then the subsequent statement negating the existence of probable cause is germane in an extradition proceeding. The document is not authenticated. [41] All of these individuals are described as "prisoners" in the statement. Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . These issues were analyzed under that premise. This document is submitted to be from the files in the prosecution of General Gutierrez Rebollo, by the Republic of Mexico, in Mexico. 20, 2013) From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research. Tijuana Scions of Privilege Alleged to Be Drug Hit Men There is no prohibition against hearsay in the extradition context because the Federal Rules of Evidence, which proscribe hearsay, do not apply to extradition. Elias v. Ramirez,215 U.S. 398, 30 S. Ct. 131, 54 L. Ed. Quines son los narcojuniors reales de Narcos Mxico 3 - EL DEBATE Quin era 'El Kitty', narcojunior interpretado por Bad Bunny? 28). 3184, et seq. No further "recantation" exists, although he does "appeal that accusation" (the charges brought against him are on the basis of the statements). 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." "El Mon" y "El Kitty" se la pasaban en fiestas, en las que Arellano invitaba a los asistentes, en una conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un coronel miembro de los guardias presidenciales de aqul entonces. Narcos 3: who are the "narco juniors" of the new season in real life 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 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. Extradition case gives look at vicious cocaine group 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. Extradition of Kraiselburd, 786 F.2d 1395, 1399 (9th Cir.1986). The indicia of reliability is clearly on the November 30, 1996 deposition offered in Mexico's case in chief. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") 1 is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . 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. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. During the meeting, the group discussed their plans to kill enemies of their interests, including Amado Carillo, a rival drug trafficker. 1989), cert. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. Matter of Extradition of Mainero, No. 96MG1798 (AJB). *1214 (3) First Degree Murder of Jesus Gallardo Vigil and Jesus Sanchez Angulo in violation of Article 302; Article 303, Sections I and III, Article 315 and Article 320 of the Penal Code for the Federal District. 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. Quines son en la vida real los narcojuniors de la serie Narcos 3? An analysis of whether this Court should enact a humanitarian exception into foreign extradition begins with a recognition of the rule of non-inquiry. 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.