Town Of St Albans Vt Tax Map, Owen Funeral Home Obituaries Cartersville, Ga, Articles E

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. California. 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. 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. United States v. Wiebe, 733 F.2d 549, 554 (8th Cir.1984); Bozilov v. Seifert, 983 F.2d 140 (9th Cir.1992). Family and friends will gather for his funeral services at 10:00 am on Saturday, September 7, 2019 at Lake Ridge 937 (D.Vt.1991); Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). Respondent also argues that Alejandro was abducted in the Spring of 1997 by representatives of Mexico which corroborates Mexico's alleged use of inappropriate force and means to secure evidence in this case. In support of its extradition request on the charge of criminal conspiracy, Mexico has provided, among other things, the following sworn, certified and authenticated witness statements which detail Valdez' membership and participation in the Arellano Felix drug trafficking organization: (1) Gerardo Cruz Pacheco aka "Capitan". Entre los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana tambin estaba Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario prominente en la ciudad . (5) The facts and the personal information of the person sought which will permit his identification and, where possible, information concerning his location; (6) A certified copy of the warrant of arrest issued by the judge or judicial officer [in Mexico]; and. Id. 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. While obviously nervous as he recounts the AFO's activities, there are no signs of physical abuse or manifestations consistent with psychological pressure or duress. The others drove in a white Volkswagen. No applicable authority was presented on this point and prevailing authority as set forth herein supports this ruling. 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. The Ninth Circuit has held that self incriminating statements of accomplices are sufficient to establish probable cause in an extradition hearing. 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. 3188 for a similar proposition. Valdez and Martinez drove off in the white Volkswagen and Cruz and Contreras followed them in a navy blue Cutlass.[24]. R.Crim.P. United States District Court, S.D. Respondent asserts that the Treaty in this instance is invalid due to changed circumstances. 96-1828 M, in The Matter of the Extradition of Alejandro Hodoyan Palacios, Docket No. (quoting Sindona v. Grant, 619 F.2d 167, 174 (2d Cir.1980)). This evidence is clearly contradictory and inadmissible under Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 315-317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 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 . 44). [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. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. Cal. 934 (D.Mass.1996). There is no corroborating evidence regarding the source, however. Emilio Valdez Mainero declara que en mayo de 1992, l, Arturo "Kitty" Pez Martnez, Fabin Martnez Gonzlez "El Tiburn", David Barrn Corona y Jorge Alonso, fueron a buscar para matarlo, a Ricardo Olmos; que despus que lo localizaron como usuario de un taxi, se emparejaron al vehculo y Valdez y Barrn descendieron del . This element was not challenged by the Respondent. View phone numbers, addresses, public records, background check reports and possible arrest records for Emilio Valdez. I Background 5.1 is denied. In re Petition of France for Extradition of Sauvage,819 F. Supp. At approximately 9:00 p.m., the two cars arrived at the Holiday Inn, Toluca, Valdez and Martinez got out of the car. Tambin as reclutaron a Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario de Tijuana, quien comenz a pasar droga sin levantar sospechas pues era . The essential question is whether the indicia of reliability is on the recantation or the initial statement. Mexico more correctly characterizes the Ruiz statement as a summary of statements by Seargent Ruiz. 00:15. 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 . 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. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. Based on case authorities Respondent's Motion in this regard is denied. De acuerdo con un artculo del periodista Jess Blancornelas, publicado en 2002 . [16] Habeas corpus was subsequently granted, Kin-Hong v. United States,957 F. Supp. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. 5.1 is without authority and is unavailable in any event under prevailing authority. at 952. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. No further "recantation" exists, although he does "appeal that accusation" (the charges brought against him are on the basis of the statements). The murder and conspiracy offenses, above described, survive the Respondent's challenge. The . In response to this evidence, Valdez offers statements of Gabriel Valdez, Marci Ramirez Marin de Gonzalez and Eva Marin viuda de Pena. Miranda added that the motivation for assassination was that Gallardo had threatened Gabriel Valdez Mainero (Emilio Valdez Mainero's brother) with a firearm.[26]. [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. These issues were analyzed under that premise. In re Petition of France for Extradition of Sauvage,819 F. Supp. But the deal fell apart when the other inmate couldn't pay the promised . The request for a provisional arrest is based, in significant part, upon the existence of a warrant for the fugitive's arrest issued in the district of the authority making the request and charging the fugitive with a commission of crime for which his extradition is sought to be obtained. The 33-year-old Mexican . He goes on to state that he signed it because he was subjected to psychological pressure and that it was a "lie". The respondent offers a handwritten declaration of Alejandro, dated March 3, 1997, to document his being detained, interrogated and tortured. 50). 1103. Mxico, DF - Era el nico de los altos mandos de los Arellano Flix a quien . It is further argued that there is a strong motivation on behalf of the Hodoyan family to help Respondent and this would give rise to questions with regard to the trustworthiness of the document. Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. ``But it only makes the laxity which we see daily _ that should be viewed with greater and greater suspicion.. 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]. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. It was not until October 2, 1996 that Soto described the alleged torture to the judge in Mexico. United States v. Manzi, 888 F.2d 204, 206 (1st Cir. The document is not authenticated. 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. Cruising the freeway between San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico, like any suburban commuter, Emilio Valdez Mainero seemed an unlikely assassin. As to item 7, the sufficiency of the evidence, Respondent contends that the probable cause element has not been met and, therefore, there is no justification for his apprehension and commitment for extradition to Mexico. In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. [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). It is alleged that Respondent was involved in criminal activities within the Arellano-Felix drug trafficking organization (hereinafter AFO). Buscar. Respondent was identified in statements of alleged co-conspirators Fausto Soto Miller, aka "Joel Fierro," "El Chef" or "El Cocinero" (hereinafter "Soto");[22] Cruz; Gilberto Vasquez Culebro, aka "El Gorras" or "El Cachuchas" (hereinafter "Vasquez"); as well as witnesses, Alejandro Enrique Hodoyan Palacios, (hereinafter "Alejandro"); and, Gustavo Miranda Santacruz, (hereinafter "Miranda") with involvement in a host of criminal activities on behalf of the Arellano Felix organization and in particular with the shooting of Gallardo and Sanchez. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . Emami v. United States District Court for N. District of California, 834 F.2d 1444, 1453 (9th Cir.1987). 830 (1911). 1136 (1916); McNamara v. Henkel,226 U.S. 520, 33 S. Ct. 146, 57 L. Ed. The Court is sensitive to the practical and legal limitations on Respondent's ability to challenge the evidence in the extradition proceeding. Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Soto for purposes of his testimony. ), 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. 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. Miranda also identifies Respondent as the person depicted in various photographs reference as numbers 53, 54, 55, 73 and 74. The United States, in fact, complied with Article 11, Paragraph 3, by its initial filing of diplomatic note 001831, on November 25, 1996 with the U.S. Embassy in Mexico. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. [41] The statement of Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras" is offered in the Extradition of Alejandro Hodoyan Palacios, 96mg1828 AJB. Cruz also said he transported weapons used in Ibarras slaying. "The Secretary of State has sole discretion to refuse extradition on humanitarian grounds because of the procedures or treatment that await the surrendered fugitive." 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. 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. The personal notes and translation were offered to corroborate the declaration and the explanatory evidence with regard to Alejandro's testimony. He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. *1218 Respondent has been accused by Mexico of murder in violation of Mexican law. 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 Secretary of State makes the ultimate decision on whether to surrender the Respondent. Appellant then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the district court. [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. En una de esas fiestas fue que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, quien era hijo de un coronel que fue . The witnesses all identify Respondent as the perpetrator in these regards. Otro de los reclutados fue Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, quien era hijo de un empresario prominente en Tijuana. Specifically, their testimony is summarized as follows: A. Gerardo Cruz Pacheco, aka "Capitan," On October 12, 1996 at 1:00 p.m.,[23] Gerardo Cruz Pacheco, aka "Capitan," (hereinafter "Cruz"), made a signed statement before Alma Leticia Lares Tenorio, an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor. The Ruiz statement also describes the "detention" of Alejandro and Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras". Respondent was afforded due process with a full opportunity to review and respond to the supplemental materials. Extradition of Kraiselburd, 786 F.2d 1395, 1399 (9th Cir.1986). ("Miranda") In his November 19, 1996 declaration, Miranda states that he knows the Arellano Felix brothers. 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. As noted previously, Respondent also offers the expert opinion of Rodolfo Gastelum Perez which has been excluded under the analysis previously set forth.[31]. In the Matter of the EXTRADITION OF Emilio Valdez MAINERO. In Shapiro v. Ferrandina,355 F. Supp. 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. 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. at 77, 78. The document was written by Alejandro Hodoyan Ramirez, father of both Alejandro and Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios who is also an extraditee sought by Mexico. The government's request for the stay was denied sustaining Respondent's objection and request to proceed. Respondent also asserts that not only have the governing administrations changed in Mexico and the United States since the 1978 signing of the Treaty, but the purpose and intent of the parties is materially different from what it was at the time the Treaty was signed. *1215 The sufficiency of the evidence (i.e., probable cause) will be discussed hereinafter. [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. is indoor ice skating safe during covid; most common super bowl final scores; lynette woodard spouse; reelfoot lake fishing guides; emilio valdez mainero. 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. 448 (1901). Quines eran los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana? Finally, the United States submits evidence in the form of statements attributed to Respondent related to the disappearance and murder of Alejandro by the AFO and the organizations efforts to effect a recantation of Alejandro's November 30, 1996 deposition. You're all set! In fact, it is the United States, on behalf of the Republic of Mexico, that is the moving party in this proceeding, pursuant to the subject Treaty. 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. 30), he requests discovery regarding the statement by Miranda. D. Gilberto Vasquez Culebro, aka "Cachuchas" On September 30, 1996, Gilberto Vasquez Culebro (hereinafter "Vasquez") gave a statement to Jose Luis Juarez Garcia, an agent of the Mexican federal public prosecutor in Mexico City, Mexico. 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 . Los narcojuniors . These declarations bear even greater indicia of competency than the police reports accepted as competent evidence in Zanazanian. For this reason, Respondent's challenge in this regard is denied. The videotaped deposition of Alejandro is the only credible evidence to demonstrate the circumstances under which Mexico's evidence was collected. Specifically, the Court ordered the United States to file copies of videotapes of Alejandro Hodoyan's deposition; evidence including Respondent's statements regarding the circumstances surrounding the 1997 abduction of Alejandro Hodoyan and the genesis of the March 3, 1997 declaration by Alejandro Hodoyan;[5] and, all statements, recordings, transcriptions and memoranda of interviews by the assistant U.S. Attorney and federal agents of Alejandro Hodoyan. His body was found in Osmun Lake in Pontiac on June 7, 2018 but no arrests were made until April 8 of this year. Through observation and discussion, he became privy to the knowledge set forth. LOS NARCOJUNIORS. The purported March 3, 1997 declaration of Alejandro is false and its manner of production and presentation erode any potential reliability. 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. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. 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. Under United States law, a conspiracy is an agreement among two or more persons to commit a crime. Treaties, by design, live well beyond the administration involved in their enactment. The evidence tying Valdez to the murder of Gallardo and Sanchez itself, given the numbers of other individuals involved, supports the criminal association charge. Since the evidence was undisputed it is not detailed extensively herein. 1 Since there is no right of appeal from extradition orders, Valdez and Hodoyan filed petitions for writs of habeas corpus in . In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Several days went by before Cruz met with Valdez, Martinez, Contreras and Cabrera. Valdez and Martinez then fled the Holiday Inn in the white Volkswagen. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. En 1995, su reinado lleg a su fin. [21] The real issue in this proceeding is whether or not there is probable cause to establish that Respondent was one of the perpetrators. 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. The environment where the deposition was taken is not suggestive of any coercive circumstances. While 3188 requires the United States to deliver a person committed for extradition to a foreign government within two months, that provision has no application to the proceedings in this case, at this stage, as commitment does not occur prior to the certification of the Respondent's extraditability by the Court. 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. [47] Alejandro's testimony also implicates his brother concerning the involvement with the AFO, which relates to the pending extradition of Alfredo Hodoyan-Palacios, 96mg1828(AJB). Argument, inference and innuendo is all that has really been presented here. He also stated that it was Valdez who assigned him the code name "F7". [8] Additional written argument was entertained from counsel and submissions in this regard were completed on October 14, 1997. (2) Gustavo Miranda Santacruz. No case authority is offered in this regard. It was at one of the celebrations that they met Emilio Valdez Mainero, the son of a colonel who was once a member of the presidential guards.Later they contacted Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, who was the son of a wealthy businessman from the city.Alfredo had been born and studied in USA, so it was easier for the drug to pass through the border without generating suspicion. This is in contrast to the September 27, 1996 arrest date noted in the statement to the federal prosecutor. Mexican officials wanted Valdez, 32, for allegedly gunning down an aspiring boxer over a personal grudge in 1996 at a Holiday Inn in the state of Mexico. 3184, et seq. In September of 2002, a Judge of the Federal Penal Processes in Mexico State found El Lobo, La Piedra and El Capitan guilty, and sentenced them all to . [23] Cruz made several statements relative to this matter. 956 (1922). (2) Criminal Association between 1994 and September 14, 1996 in violation of Article 164, Paragraph 1 in accordance with Article 13, Section II, of the Penal Code for the Federal District;[11] and. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. 777 (N.D.Cal.1985). 18 U.S.C. 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. Most of the cocaine entering the United States comes from Mexico, and most of it passes through the Arellanos undisputed turf _ Baja California, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. "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. El cantante interpreta a Arturo "Kitty" Paez, un sanguinario pero muy snob criminal . Bruton v. United States,391 U.S. 123, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 20 L. Ed. 1462, 1469 (S.D.Tex.1992). Mar. Respondent's discovery request in this regard is denied. Arnbjornsdottir-Mendler v. United States, 721 F.2d 679, 683 (9th Cir. 2d 455 (1972). 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. 568 (S.D.N.Y.1979). 000012 dated January 3, *1213 1997. Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. Article 3 of the Treaty says, in part: In this case, that means as defined in federal law. 12). 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. During the meeting, the group discussed their plans to kill enemies of their interests, including Amado Carillo, a rival drug trafficker. Miranda infuriated his boss by refusing to do the hit because he had plans to go shopping with his family. The certificate is forwarded to the Department of State. 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. 970 (1925); the probable cause is sustained if competent evidence to establish reasonable grounds is presented, not necessarily evidence competent to convict. 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." [44] There are some inconsistencies in the testimony when various statements are compared, but these are not significant differences affecting this analysis. [46] Respondent's repeated request to confront and cross-examine Mexico's witnesses under Fed.R.Crim.P. 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. 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. United States v. Valdez-Mainero. 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. The cohorts also said the Arellanos had on their payroll Mexican immigration agents who waved cocaine shipments across the border. A Supplemental Complaint was filed and Respondent was arraigned thereon on October 16, 1996. 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. 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). The credible evidence, satisfies Mexico's burden in this respect[44]. In the Matter of Extradition of Emilio Valdez Mainero,950 F. Supp. Gill v. Imundi,747 F. Supp. United States ex rel Sakaguchi v. Kaulukukui, 520 F.2d 726, 730-731 (9th Cir.1975). 1997). [29] Clearly, Alejandro's testimony is based upon his personal knowledge derived from his acquaintance with Respondent and the other individuals named and his discussion and observations in their presence. An injury to the anterior upper third of his right leg is claimed to have resulted from a fight with an unknown person.