54(b) (5). Emilio Valdez Mainero met Ramn Arellano at a posada before Christmas 1986 in the Lomas de Aguacaliente neighborhood. 18 U.S.C. The United States filed certified documents in support of the extradition request at various times, the first of which was on December 4, 1996. 448 (1901). Curreri v. Vice, 77 F.2d 130, 132 (9th Cir.1935); Eain v. Wilkes, 641 F.2d 504, 510 (7th Cir.1981), cert. In the Matter of the EXTRADITION OF Emilio Valdez MAINERO. [46] Respondent's repeated request to confront and cross-examine Mexico's witnesses under Fed.R.Crim.P. 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. Some federal and local officials said the mens statements are not credible because they are clear attempts to land a sweetheart deal. 39); and, SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER DIRECTING THE UNITED STATES TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed September 12, 1997 (Docket No. These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. [26] In Respondent's REPLY TO GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY (Docket No. The Federal Rules of Evidence and of Criminal Procedure do not apply to an extradition hearing. Emilio Valdez passed away Saturday, August 31, 2019. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. In Matter of Extradition of Lui Kin-Hong,939 F. Supp. Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). Publicado: 5/6/2021 7:10:25 PM. Ramn, "el Mon", organizaba las fiestas para localizar a sus objetivos y en una de ellas conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, hijo de un coronel miembro de la Guardia Presidencial en la poca. Explanatory evidence is allowed only if the evidence would, clearly, negate a showing of probable cause. 526/2019. The murder and conspiracy offenses, above described, survive the Respondent's challenge. denied, 398 U.S. 903, 90 S. Ct. 1688, 26 L. Ed. 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. [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. Hodoyan haba estudiado en una . These issues were analyzed under that premise. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. [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. En 1995, su reinado lleg a su fin. 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. Gonzalo Curiel was made by Emilio Valdez Mainero in a bugged conversation with a convicted cocaine trafficker and government informant . The entire record supports the finding that probable cause exists with regard to homicide charges. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. Mr. Valdez was referred to as "El Cabezon", "C.P. 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. Argument, inference and innuendo is all that has really been presented here. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Mar. [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. There is no authority that exists that requires a magistrate judge to authorize compelled disclosures of explanatory information. Alfredo Miguel Hodoyn Palacios, (a) "Lobo" u "88" , fue detenido el 30 de septiembre de 1996, en San Diego California. 1462, 1464 (S.D.Tex.1992). The purported March 3, 1997 declaration of Alejandro is false and its manner of production and presentation erode any potential reliability. [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. de Sicor 1 Acdo. 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. Get free access to the complete judgment in MATTER OF EXTRADITION OF MAINERO, (S.D.Cal. Miranda also stated that in 1992, Valdez was in charge of cocaine trafficking, and that later, Valdez trafficked in 200 to 400 kilogram shipments of marijuana for the AFO. (2) Gustavo Miranda Santacruz. Ultimately, the Court concludes that there is no reliable evidence of torture or duress of the witnesses. The credible evidence, satisfies Mexico's burden in this respect[44]. They are: (1) Ministerial Statement of September 27, 1996, at 1140 a.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor, in Guadalajara, Mexico; (2) Additional Ministerial Statement of September 27, 1996, at 6:30 p.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor, in Guadalajara, Mexico; (3) Additional Statement of September 30, 1996, at 9:00 p.m. to Maria Isabel Gonzalez Chavez, an agent of the federal prosecutor in Mexico City, Mexico; and. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. ``But it only makes the laxity which we see daily _ that should be viewed with greater and greater suspicion.. 330 (1913); Zanazanian v. U.S., 729 F.2d 624 (9th Cir.1984). The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. 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." 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. Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 316, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. Gill v. Imundi,747 F. Supp. 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." 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. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. [27] Soto actually made a series of statements relative to this matter. 2d 496 (1990). Aparte de Kitty 'Pez', los que formaron el grupo de los "Narcojuniors" fueron Emilio Valdz Mainero, hijo de un guardia presidencial; Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un importante empresario . They also indicated that their boss, Ramon Arellano Felix, would be pleased with the last job they had carried out. No precise authority is offered in regard to this premise. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . The record is overwhelming with eyewitness testimony,[20] autopsies and physical evidence from the scene to establish these facts. 896 (S.D.Cal.1993). Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Cruz Vasquez identifies himself as a member of the AFO and states that in March, 1996, he had several visitors to his home, including Respondent Valdez, Martinez, and co-extraditee Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios. October 21, 1996. 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. 611 (S.D.N.Y.1985). 3184. 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. 44). At approximately 9:00 p.m., the two cars arrived at the Holiday Inn, Toluca, Valdez and Martinez got out of the car. [41] The statement of Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras" is offered in the Extradition of Alejandro Hodoyan Palacios, 96mg1828 AJB. 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. I Background 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. 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"). 253 (1910); Rice v. Ames,180 U.S. 371, 21 S. Ct. 406, 45 L. Ed. Demandado: Emilio Ricardo Valdez Mainero. 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. Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. Ultimately, the United States sought to stay the proceedings for an additional ninety (90) day period. The law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. 2d 61 (1970). 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. On July 29, 1997, Respondent filed a Motion to Reopen Evidence in this matter. He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. Appellant then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the district court. The indicia of reliability is clearly on the November 30, 1996 deposition offered in Mexico's case in chief. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. [9] See ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed October 23, 1997 (Docket No. 96-1828 M, in The Matter of the Extradition of Alejandro Hodoyan Palacios, Docket No. 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. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. MEMORANDUM DECISION DENYING BAIL PENDING EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS. No case authority is offered in this regard. The document was written by Alejandro Hodoyan Ramirez, father of both Alejandro and Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios who is also an extraditee sought by Mexico. No case authority is offered on this issue. 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. R.Crim.P. Background. Specifically, Respondent submits that the Treaty is invalid because the use of torture in Mexico in obtaining evidence, including the evidence in this matter, is contrary to the law of the United States. Among the young people recruited by Mexican drug trafficking were Emilio Valdez Mainero, son of a presidential guard, Alfredo . *1215 The sufficiency of the evidence (i.e., probable cause) will be discussed hereinafter. Soto acknowledges having signed the statement as well as affixing his fingerprints. Mexico contests the reliability of these recantations asserting that they are self serving, lacking in reliability and inadmissable as contradictory evidence. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. The court denied the writ. 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 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). *1220 At approximately 9:30 p.m., Cruz, who was about twenty meters away from the entrance of the Holiday Inn heard several firearms shots. 3190 having been properly and legally certified and authenticated by Bruce A. Beardsley, principal counsular officer of the U.S. in Mexico. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980). 23. (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. The Ninth Circuit has labeled the above statement from Gallina as speculation. This issue was not challenged by the Respondent. Mr. Valdez became a top operative in the organization, arranging drug . [13] The documents themselves do not have to filed in court by the 60 day period, only received by the United States. 124 F.3d 1186, 1997 WL 624797 (9th Cir.). There is no corroborating evidence regarding the source, however. Miranda infuriated his boss by refusing to do the hit because he had plans to go shopping with his family. at 952. In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. 1978). Martinez told Cruz that he would receive some money if Cruz would hold the 38 Super and the 9mm guns that they had used to kill Gallardo and Sanchez. Soto's testimony is based upon his acquaintance with the individuals referenced in the statement, and his role as a cook residing at various times with these individuals. 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. 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. See footnote 25. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 789, 790 (9th Cir.1986). In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. Mr. Valdez became a top operative in the organization, arranging drug shipments and assassinations, the Mexican and American police have charged in court. ("Cruz") In his October 12, 1996 statement, Cruz declared before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor that Valdez, Martinez and, Fabian Partiday, aka "Domingo," described to him crimes that they had committed, the firearms they used to commit the crimes, and the numerous cities in Mexico, in which they had committed crimes in furtherance of the goals of the AFO. Arnbjornsdottir-Mendler v. United States, 721 F.2d 679, 683 (9th Cir. These offenses are extraditable offenses under the extradition treaty between Mexico and the United States. 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. [48] Authority for this proposition is gathered from dicta in some case law in that there is no direct authority for this proposition. As noted previously, Respondent also offers the expert opinion of Rodolfo Gastelum Perez which has been excluded under the analysis previously set forth.[31]. En una de esas fiestas fue que conocieron a Emilio Valdez Mainero, quien era hijo de un coronel que fue . Ultimately, Article 9 of the Treaty invests the "executive authority" with the final discretion.[17]. 28). 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. Respondent also cites Title 18 U.S.C. *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. at 1450-1451. "Chef" ("Soto") In his September 27, 1996 declaration before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor, Soto recalled an incident in which Valdez, Ramon Arellano Felix and other members of his organization met at a house rented by Valdez in Mexico City. In the Ruiz statement, it appears that Soto was arrested at least no later than September 15, 1996. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. The statement by Cruz to the federal prosecutor did indicate that Cruz had suffered recent physical injury. These individuals left his home the following day for Mexico City in a light grey Spirit automobile. 2d 74 (1960), as the case that establishes the possibility of a "humanitarian exception" based on the "federal court's sense of decency." Matter of Extradition of Koskotas, 127 F.R.D. In fact, Respondent urges the Court to dismiss this proceeding stating that the Mexican Attorney General's office held back these statements because of their negative impact on the probable cause analysis. The document is not authenticated. (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. The precedent of the long line of cases discussed above, supports the proposition that the consideration of a "humanitarian exception" should be left to the Department of State where it rightly belongs. 3187 allow for the provisional arrest and detention of a fugitive in advance of the presentation of formal proofs. [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. 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. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. Miranda's statement was given to an officer of this Court. [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. Certainly, the decision to act upon this type of evidence rests upon some indicia of authenticity and reliability. 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. 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. 534 (1902). Valdez was ordered detained following arraignment. Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. The contours of the extradition proceeding were shaped by the Treaty and statute. 3190. For this reason, Respondent's challenge in this regard is denied. [30] These statements challenge the "motive" for the Gallardo murder as stated by Cruz and Miranda. You're all set! These statements are also corroborated in significant part by Alejandro's declaration. 20, 2013) From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research. The date of production for the photographic evidence was set for November 5, 1997[9] and later extended with properly authenticated and certified originals being filed on December 1, 1997. I Background. 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. "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. 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). Valdez also faces charges of arranging the sale of a kilogram of heroin to a fellow inmate through friends outside prison. [40] U.S.-MEXICO DRUG WAR: Two Systems Collide, New York Times, July 22, 1997. Appellant appealed the habeas corpus denial to the Second Circuit. 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. Valdez relies on Gallina v. Fraser, 278 F.2d 77, 78 (2d Cir.1960), cert. The analysis is also unnecessary in light of the Ninth Circuit order of October 2, 1997 ordering an en banc hearing in the case. (5) There is probable cause that a crime or crimes were committed and that the Respondent participated in or committed them. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. 18 U.S.C. When the two cars arrived at the Holiday Inn in Toluca, Valdez got out of the white Volkswagen and told Contreras, "Be, cautious, wait for me here and when you see us going out from the parking lot in the white Volkswagen, you should form a `wall' so that we cannot be followed.". The cohorts also said the Arellanos had on their payroll Mexican immigration agents who waved cocaine shipments across the border. January 1997: Hodin Gutierrez Rico, a . 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.