emilio valdez mainero

[8] See RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF EXTRADITION filed September 29, 1997 (Docket No. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. 20, 2013) From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research. (2) Gustavo Miranda Santacruz. at 1450-1451. When they reached Toluca, Valdez and Martinez stopped to make several telephone calls, at approximately 9:00 p.m. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. Bruton v. United States,391 U.S. 123, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 20 L. Ed. 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. 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. The Court denied the motion.[3]. Since the evidence was undisputed it is not detailed extensively herein. 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. A great number of questions exist, and many questions remain unanswered in this case. Among the young people recruited by Mexican drug trafficking were Emilio Valdez Mainero, son of a presidential guard, Alfredo . (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. He also stated that it was Valdez who assigned him the code name "F7". Magistrate No. Date published: Mar 20, 2013. (4) Preparatory Statement of October 2, 1996, at 6:00 p.m. before the District Judge of the Federal Criminal Proceedings in the State of Mexico, at the Federal Center for Social Rehabilitation Number 1, in Judicial Proceedings Courtroom Number One. Cruz testified based upon his personal acquaintance with the individuals named in the statement, and his participation in various events and circumstances, as well as conversations, with the individuals involved. 18 U.S.C. Soto is also asked of his desire to make a statement concerning the facts attributed to him in his statement. 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 . This element was not challenged by the Respondent. But the deal fell apart when the other inmate couldn't pay the promised . 28). Treaties, by design, live well beyond the administration involved in their enactment. 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. denied, 454 U.S. 894, 102 S. Ct. 390, 70 L. Ed. Emilio Valdez Mainero met Ramn Arellano at a posada before Christmas 1986 in the Lomas de Aguacaliente neighborhood. 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. 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. Respondent's discovery request in this regard is denied. Fue en una fiesta que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un coronel que fue miebro de los guardias presidenciales. 672, 685 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff'd, 619 F.2d 167 (2d Cir.1980), citing Collins, supra, 259 U.S. at 316. 777(N.D.Cal.1985). The request for discovery regarding Miranda was also submitted in RESPONDENTS SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY filed June 26, 1997 in Case 96-1828 (Docket No. 18 U.S.C. These latter efforts resulted in the formulation of the March 3, 1997 "declaration.". 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. Hodoyan was taken into custody for carrying an AK-47 and some marijuana. The personal notes and translation were offered to corroborate the declaration and the explanatory evidence with regard to Alejandro's testimony. This document is submitted to be from the files in the prosecution of General Gutierrez Rebollo, by the Republic of Mexico, in Mexico. Entre los jvenes reclutados por el narcotrfico mexicano se encentraban 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. [45] The physical injuries to Cruz are certainly suspicious in this regard. [3] See Memorandum Decision Denying Bail Pending Extradition Proceedings filed 10/21/96 (Docket No. Equihua had been close to a witness in the drug-related cases of Alfredo Hodoyan and Emilio Valdez Mainero, which were due to be heard in San Diego courts. In response to this evidence, Valdez offers statements of Gabriel Valdez, Marci Ramirez Marin de Gonzalez and Eva Marin viuda de Pena. This evidence is clearly contradictory and inadmissible under Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 315-317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. Respondent also offers, as evidence to defeat probable cause, recantations by Cruz and Soto relative to the earlier statements[36]. [30] These statements challenge the "motive" for the Gallardo murder as stated by Cruz and Miranda. *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. Soto extensively describes other, numerous criminal activities of the AFO. Mexico's evidence does support a finding of probable cause with regard to the criminal association charge. "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. Id. Quines eran los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana? The record is overwhelming with eyewitness testimony,[20] autopsies and physical evidence from the scene to establish these facts. Those issues will ultimately be resolved by the trial court, along with the sufficiency of the evidence regarding guilt. 12). 330 (1913); Zanazanian v. U.S., 729 F.2d 624 (9th Cir.1984). Valdez, Martinez and Contreras, were carrying small weapons in a white Volkswagen. 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.]" *1215 The sufficiency of the evidence (i.e., probable cause) will be discussed hereinafter. Valdez also faces charges of arranging the sale of a kilogram of heroin to a fellow inmate through friends outside prison. [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. The statement by Cruz to the federal prosecutor did indicate that Cruz had suffered recent physical injury. 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. There is no authority that exists that requires a magistrate judge to authorize compelled disclosures of explanatory information. Mr. Soto also provides a physical description of Respondent. 568 (S.D.N.Y.1979). 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"). 40). 611 (S.D.N.Y.1985). Mr. Vasquez states that the individuals acted suspiciously and carried long and short range firearms. 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. Prior to the June 30, 1997 evidentiary hearing on the extradition requests, there were numerous other filings by the United States and by counsel for the detainee as well as several status hearings. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. Mexican law defines murder (or homicide) as taking the life of another (Article 302). C. Fausto Soto Miller, aka "Chef" In his September 27, 1996[27] declaration before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor, Fausto Soto Miller, "Chef," (hereinafter *1221 "Soto") stated that he was aware of the personal problems between Valdez and Gallardo, arising out of a threat with a firearm against Gabriel Valdez made by Gallardo. Respondent's role is alleged to have included, among other things, the planning and carrying out of assassinations of people perceived to be enemies of the AFO, including rival drug traffickers and law enforcement officials. At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. A Supplemental Complaint was filed and Respondent was arraigned thereon on October 16, 1996. 1136 (1916); McNamara v. Henkel,226 U.S. 520, 33 S. Ct. 146, 57 L. Ed. En una de esas fiestas fue que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, quien era hijo de un coronel que fue . Specifically, Respondent sought "all witness statements submitted in General Gutierrez Rebollo's case to determine whether or not there is additional relevant testimony." Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 789, 790 (9th Cir.1986). California. 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. 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. Los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. In fact, in the statement to the district judge on October 2, 1996, Mr. Soto indicates that he has no physical defects. [41] All of these individuals are described as "prisoners" in the statement. 1136 (1916). The Ruiz statement also describes the "detention" of Alejandro and Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras". The contours do not lend themselves, nor invite the type of inquiry required to evaluate the humanitarian concerns of the magnitude suggested by Respondent. Recanting statements are relevant as they affect probable cause, but a showing that the prior statement is coerced and that indicia of reliability is on a subsequent recantation is the appropriate point of analysis on this issue. Garcia-Guillern v. United States, 450 F.2d 1189, 1192 (5th Cir. The 33-year-old Mexican . Alfredo Miguel Hodoyn Palacios, (a) "Lobo" u "88" , fue detenido el 30 de septiembre de 1996, en San Diego California. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. Soto contends that he was arrested on September 12, 1996 and held in custody for some weeks. The two cars stopped in the village of San Mateo Atenco. In Matter of Extradition of Pazienza,619 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). 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. Finally, he contests the date of arrest. 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 . 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. Seguir Leyendo "Siempre estaba preocupada por el avance de mi divorcio, me la pasaba marcando y visitando a mi abogado. 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. 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. 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. 896 (S.D.Cal.1993). United States ex rel Sakaguchi v. Kaulukukui, 520 F.2d 726, 730-731 (9th Cir.1975). A few seconds passed and then he saw the white Volkswagen speed out of the parking lot. Mexico also argued that the document was not certified as required by the treaty and would be presumptively inadmissable. 54(b) (5). The others in the navy blue Cutlass also left the Holiday Inn and caught up with the white Volkswagen at the village of San Mateo Atenco. 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). There is no prohibition against hearsay in the extradition context because the Federal Rules of Evidence, which proscribe hearsay, do not apply to extradition. Attorney Gastelum's opinions are contradictory, at best, and excludable on that basis. 1983). 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. In this regard, Respondent cites Article 11, Paragraph 3 of the Treaty. Soto acknowledges having signed the statement as well as affixing his fingerprints. 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. 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. 1462, 1464 (S.D.Tex. 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. 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). Everardo Pez, also known as "El Kitty", was not a person of money, but under the tutelage of Ramn Arellano Flix, he dedicated himself, together with the narco juniors, to cross drugs into the United States without raising suspicions due to his economic status. [30] Respondent's Exhibits H, I and J, respectively, docket No. 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 . [13] The documents themselves do not have to filed in court by the 60 day period, only received by the United States. Valdez and Martinez then fled the Holiday Inn in the white Volkswagen. B. Gustavo Miranda Santacruz On November 19, 1996, Gustavo Miranda Santacruz (hereinafter "Miranda") made a declaration before Assistant United States Attorney, Gonzalo P. Curiel, acting as Mexico's agent pursuant to a request under the mutual Legal Assistance Treaty that exists between Mexico and the United States. In this regard, statements characterized as "recantations" were offered by Cruz, Soto and Hodoyan. 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 filing of certified documents permitted Mexico to go forward with the extradition proceeding under the Treaty. 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. California. 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). The notes are identified by Augustin Hodoyan, Alejandro's brother. 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." Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies.". 50). The Treaty between the United States and Mexico calls for probable cause to be measured by the standards established in the requesting country. Threats at the time were taken seriously, especially given the high profile murders of Tijuana's police chief in February 2000, followed shortly by the murder of Jose Patio . Respondent's reliance upon Article 11, Paragraph 3, is misplaced. "The Secretary of State has sole discretion to refuse extradition on humanitarian grounds because of the procedures or treatment that await the surrendered fugitive." Under *1216 United States law, the standard of probable cause is whether there is any evidence warranting the finding that there was reasonable ground to believe the accused guilty. The two perpetrators escaped in a white Volkswagen. The statements attributed to Respondent Valdez from the wiretape surveillance,[35] result in a finding that Alejandro's March 3, 1997 declaration and personal notes were contrived and are unreliable. 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. When arrested, Gallardo said that the marijuana belonged to Benjamin Arellano Felix, which caused the issuance of an arrest warrant for Benjamin Arellano Felix. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Whitepages people search is the most trusted directory. Miranda added that the motivation for assassination was that Gallardo had threatened Gabriel Valdez Mainero (Emilio Valdez Mainero's brother) with a firearm.[26]. denied, 364 U.S. 851, 81 S. Ct. 97, 5 L. Ed. Beyond that, he reports preparing a letter of resignation from the Department of National Defense under torture. 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. Specifically, Respondent asserts that evidence included in the second extradition packet should not be received or considered by the Court. 3184. Ultimately, the Court concludes that there is no reliable evidence of torture or duress of the witnesses. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") 1 is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . See footnote 10. [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. Appellant then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the district court. denied, 494 U.S. 1017, 110 S. Ct. 1321, 108 L. Ed. denied, 398 U.S. 903, 90 S. Ct. 1688, 26 L. Ed. (5) There is probable cause that a crime or crimes were committed and that the Respondent participated in or committed them. *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. 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. *291 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michael Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Valdez Mainero. As set forth in Footnote 26, the rights normally available in a criminal trial are not available in this proceeding. While Ruiz provides no direct account of any torture, this information supports a finding that Alejandro was "in custody"[43] along with others and supports an argument that extended detention was involved in the handling of the witnesses by Mexico. He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. Id. Background. the arrest dates of Soto and Cruz), is unpersuasive as offered to totally obliterate probable cause under a Contreras analysis. Emilio Valdez passed away Saturday, August 31, 2019. In addition to being signed by extraditee's father, other family members similarly signed attesting to the authenticity and veracity of the document. 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. I Background. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. That conclusion is based on the following analysis. The documents were filed by Mexican authorities seeking extradition of two men -- Emilio Valdez Mainero, 32, and Alfredo Hodayan Palacios, 25 -- alleged to be hit men for the Arellano Felix brothers. 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. Background. 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. This finding could be based upon the testimony of Miranda and Alejandro, alone. No case authority is offered on this issue. 577 (1901). Opinion for Matter of Extradition of Mainero, 950 F. Supp. The United States filed certified documents in support of the extradition request at various times, the first of which was on December 4, 1996. Mxico, DF - Era el nico de los altos mandos de los Arellano Flix a quien . As to Soto, his three statements to the Mexican authorities, two on September 27, 1996 and one on September 30, 1996, respectively, do not reference any injury. 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. There is no evidence, however, in this regard. Again, no more precise recantation of the specific events exists. It is alleged that Respondent was involved in criminal activities within the Arellano-Felix drug trafficking organization (hereinafter AFO). 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. Under United States law, a conspiracy is an agreement among two or more persons to commit a crime. These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. [1] Valdez was identified or described at various times and by different persons or in documentary evidence with nicknames or aliases. Mexico more correctly characterizes the Ruiz statement as a summary of statements by Seargent Ruiz. Matter of Extradition of Koskotas, 127 F.R.D. 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. 1992); Fed.R.Evid. Zanazanian v. United States, 729 F.2d 624, 626-27 (9th Cir.1984). 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.

Carolyne Roehm Brain Surgery, Seventh Day Baptist Beliefs State Of The Dead, Jfax Communications Colorado, Articles E