Soto recounted another incident in March, 1995, during which he was told by members of the AFO that Valdez and others participated in the assassination of a man named "Endir" who was the cousin of Manolo Rico. 290 Brought to you by Free Law Project, . Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. [37] Respondent criticizes Mexico for not filing this set of documents. 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. 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. According to the United States' submissions and consistent therewith at the hearings, Mexico seeks extradition of the Respondent for the Mexican charges identified above. 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. ``But it only makes the laxity which we see daily _ that should be viewed with greater and greater suspicion.. There is no evidence to suggest that the United States no longer honors the treaty or that its purpose and intent are no longer served. Finally, he contests the date of arrest. 448 (1901). In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. The cohorts also said the Arellanos had on their payroll Mexican immigration agents who waved cocaine shipments across the border. Neely v. Henkel, supra. 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. Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. The authority of a magistrate judge to conduct the proceedings is provided by 18 U.S.C. [45] The thought of testimony coerced by torture is certainly abhorrent and inconsistent with tenets of our society. While the motion was denied, the Court did find good cause to order the production of further evidence described by the United States in its responsive papers as becoming available since the June 30, 1997 extradition hearing. By Molly Moore. See footnote 10. Based on case authorities Respondent's Motion in this regard is denied. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980). 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. In the supplemental request for extradition filed in January, 1997, the facts supporting the firearms offense were related to the first degree murder of Mr. Gallardo and Mr. Sanchez alleged to have occurred on or about April 9, 1996. No case authority is offered on this issue. [27] Soto actually made a series of statements relative to this matter. January 1997: Hodin Gutierrez Rico, a . 1462, 1469 (S.D.Tex.1992). They are: (1) The Statement of October 12, 1996 at 1:00 a.m. in Mexico City; and. The environment where the deposition was taken is not suggestive of any coercive circumstances. En septiembre de 2002, el Juzgado Cuarto de Procesos Penales Federales en el Estado de Mxico (antes Juzgado Primero de Distrito . de Sicor 1 Acdo. 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. 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. Arnbjornsdottir-Mendler v. United States, 721 F.2d 679, 683 (9th Cir. Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. Los narcojuniors estudiaban en colegios particulares y pertenecan a familias acomodadas. The personal notes and translation were offered to corroborate the declaration and the explanatory evidence with regard to Alejandro's testimony. In this regard, statements characterized as "recantations" were offered by Cruz, Soto and Hodoyan. Finally, the scope of admissible evidence in an extradition hearing is guided by the distinction between contradictory and explanatory evidence. 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]. La pequea y poco conocida . There is no corroborating evidence regarding the source, however. 33. Terlinden v. Ames,184 U.S. 270, 22 S. Ct. 484, 46 L. Ed. Est acusado de ser uno de los secuaces ms temidos de Arellano y se lo busca por asesinato en Mxico.Emilio Valdez Mainero era un compaero de juventud que Alex Hodoyn eligi, aos ms . The March 3, 1997 date is taken from the first line of the document. Soto contends that he was arrested on September 12, 1996 and held in custody for some weeks. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. An injury to the anterior upper third of his right leg is claimed to have resulted from a fight with an unknown person. United States ex rel Sakaguchi v. Kaulukukui, 520 F.2d 726, 730-731 (9th Cir.1975). [44] There are some inconsistencies in the testimony when various statements are compared, but these are not significant differences affecting this analysis. Hearsay evidence is admissible on behalf of the Respondent to establish the "obliteration" of probable cause. 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. Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. Soto is also asked of his desire to make a statement concerning the facts attributed to him in his statement. [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. 577 (1901). If the drafters of the Treaty had intended the judicial officer to consider the admissibility and weight of the evidence under the law of the requesting party (i.e. ("Miranda") In his November 19, 1996 declaration, Miranda states that he knows the Arellano Felix brothers. The indicia of reliability is clearly on the November 30, 1996 deposition offered in Mexico's case in chief. 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. Therefore, the Court will certify the above and all documents admitted into evidence to the Secretary of State. 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. 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. 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. Valdez moved the Court for release under the special circumstances doctrine. These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. ", "El 5 Segundos", Ricardo Gonzalez Leon, Ricardo Emilio Valdez Mainero and Emilio Ricardo Valdez. 3184, et seq., in order to extradite the Respondent, the United States, on behalf of the Republic of Mexico, must establish that: (1) The judicial officer is authorized to conduct extradition proceedings; (2) The court has jurisdiction over the respondent; (3) The applicable treaty is in full force and effect; (4) The crimes for which surrender is sought are included within the terms of the treaty; and. 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 did not produce a signed statement of Sergeant Ruiz or evidence of dates of arrest of the referenced witnesses. The record is overwhelming with eyewitness testimony,[20] autopsies and physical evidence from the scene to establish these facts. [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. The Court may act upon unsworn statements of absent *1223 witnesses, although they could not have been received by the judge under the law of the state in a preliminary examination. Respondent had indicated that a recantation by Vasquez would be filed, but no such document has been offered in evidence in this case. 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. *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. 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 . 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. Magistrate No. Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . Mr. Soto also provides a physical description of Respondent. This document is submitted to be from the files in the prosecution of General Gutierrez Rebollo, by the Republic of Mexico, in Mexico. 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] See RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF EXTRADITION (Docket No. Netflix lanz la ltima temporada de Narcos: Mxico, donde adems de los personajes que ya conocemos, hay UNA sorpresa: Bad Bunny. 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.