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. De acuerdo con un artculo del periodista Jess Blancornelas, publicado en 2002 . 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. 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. Again, no more precise recantation of the specific events exists. Soto acknowledges having signed the statement as well as affixing his fingerprints. Pursuant to an extradition treaty between Mexico and the United States, Treaty 31 UST 5059, TIAS 9656 ("Treaty"), and under federal laws supplementing and implementing such treaties, 18 U.S.C. 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. 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. [27] Soto actually made a series of statements relative to this matter. 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. Valdez and Martinez then fled the Holiday Inn in the white Volkswagen. The limitations of the judicial review at this stage of the proceedings, however, should not be an excuse to admit evidence presented without apparent foundation or any independent indicia of trustworthiness. 23. [9] See ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed October 23, 1997 (Docket No. The others drove in a white Volkswagen. Actually, this declaration is not signed by Alejandro, nor was it written by Alejandro. 124 F.3d 1186, 1997 WL 624797 (9th Cir.). The purported recantation of Alejandro has been discarded with the indicia of reliability supporting the initial deposition. Miranda also identifies Respondent as the person depicted in various photographs reference as numbers 53, 54, 55, 73 and 74. 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. This element was not challenged by the Respondent. "The Secretary of State has sole discretion to refuse extradition on humanitarian grounds because of the procedures or treatment that await the surrendered fugitive." Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. He later was charged with several murders, including Ibarras. [13] The diplomatic note related to the initial firearms charge[14] and the criminal association charge. Finally, the scope of admissible evidence in an extradition hearing is guided by the distinction between contradictory and explanatory evidence. 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. 25. California. 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. Appellant appealed the habeas corpus denial to the Second Circuit. 2d 476 (1968), is also unpersuasive in this regard. 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. He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. Lastly, there is no authority that requires a magistrate judge to compel disclosure of explanatory information. The statement by Cruz to the federal prosecutor did indicate that Cruz had suffered recent physical injury. 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. 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]. 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. 1136 (1916). Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . Under 18 U.S.C. The various activities included a number of incidents of transportation of illegal drugs and homicide. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. The March 3, 1997 date is taken from the first line of the document. January 1997: Hodin Gutierrez Rico, a . 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]. 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. 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. [30] Respondent's Exhibits H, I and J, respectively, docket No. The two cars stopped in the village of San Mateo Atenco. Ultimately, the United States sought to stay the proceedings for an additional ninety (90) day period. Miranda added that the motivation for assassination was that Gallardo had threatened Gabriel Valdez Mainero (Emilio Valdez Mainero's brother) with a firearm.[26]. 12). An injury to the anterior upper third of his right leg is claimed to have resulted from a fight with an unknown person. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. He ended up in the hospital with gunshot wounds he said were inflicted by a member of the Arellano organization. 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. Cruz describes his mistreatment and torture at the hands of the Mexican authorities. When he appeared in court, the judge also noted, on the record, residual signs of physical injury. In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Background. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. 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 case against the implicated juniors spilled into U.S. courts after the Sept. 30 arrest of Emilio Valdez Mainero, 32, the baby-faced son of a deceased army colonel from Tijuana who, his widow . The videotapes clearly demonstrate Alejandro's demeanor. 13, 22 (D.Mass.1989). 1978). In contesting the accuracy of the statement of the federal prosecutor, he "rejects" the alias described to him, the reported rank in the infantry, and claims that he does not belong to the Presidential General staff but to the Presidential Guards Corps. Ahora me siento segura ya que me entero inmediatamente de todo lo que sucede, inclusive antes que mi abogado y que el abogado de . Barrett v. United States, 590 F.2d 624 (6th Cir. Terlinden v. Ames,184 U.S. 270, 22 S. Ct. 484, 46 L. Ed. 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. Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Therefore, the Court will certify the above and all documents admitted into evidence to the Secretary of State. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980). one strange rock gasp quizlet New Lab; glider timetable dundonald park and ride; 12 gauge 100 round drum; Por Investigaciones ZETA. 2d 74 (1960), as the case that establishes the possibility of a "humanitarian exception" based on the "federal court's sense of decency." Appellant then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the district court. Alejandro's statements are based upon his personal knowledge due to his admitted involvement in the AFO and their activities. Print material from AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL has also been filed. 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. Miranda's testimony is not only generally consistent with the statements of others, but is based upon his acquaintance and involvement with the individuals described therein. The extradition proceeding is not a criminal trial nor is Respondent entitled to the rights available in a criminal trial at common law. Since the evidence was undisputed it is not detailed extensively herein. There is no legal support for a judicially created "humanitarian exception" in an extradition proceeding. This assertion relates specifically to the supplemental filing of evidence regarding the first degree murder charge on January 14, 1997 and the weapons charge related to the events and circumstances of April 9, 1996. In the proceeding before this Court, the Republic of Mexico (hereafter Mexico), through the United States government, seeks the extradition of United States citizen, EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO, alleged to have committed crimes in Mexico. Si te preguntas quines son en la vida real los llamados narcojuniors de Narcos Mxico, serie de Netflix, se trata de al menos tres de los jvenes de familias acomodadas en Tijuana, Baja California, que se involucraron en temas de drogas y en especial con el Crtel de los Arellano Flix.Entre ellos, El Kitty Arturo Everardo Pez y los hermanos Hodoyan. At approximately 9:00 p.m., the two cars arrived at the Holiday Inn, Toluca, Valdez and Martinez got out of the car. [24] A Volkswagen was seen leaving the scene by eyewitness Juan Manual de la Cruz. There was no mention of the lost eye in the medical exam performed by the Republic of Mexico or during the court proceedings where the alleged recantation took place. There is no credible evidence supporting the authenticity of this summary of testimony in the closed investigation in Mexico. Homicide is an extraditable offense under Article 2(1) and Appendix Part 1 of the treaty. 2D1.1 and reduced by two levels the offense level applicable to many drug trafficking offenses. 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 . As a result, the Court finds Treaty compliance in this respect and denies Respondent's request for release on this basis. California. The Treaty between the United States and Mexico calls for probable cause to be measured by the standards established in the requesting country. United States v. Kin-Hong, 110 F.3d 103 (1st Cir. "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. 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. 2d 61 (1970). No mention of torture or physical abuse is made. 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. 1997). In re Petition of France for Extradition of Sauvage,819 F. Supp. 526/2019. In the absence of legal authority to support the court's ability to find the treaty invalid for changed circumstances or that the purpose and intent of the parties in this instance is materially different, Respondent's position in this regard is rejected. 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. Los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana. 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. The evidence tying Valdez to the murder of Gallardo and Sanchez itself, given the numbers of other individuals involved, supports the criminal association charge. The Court is sensitive to the practical and legal limitations on Respondent's ability to challenge the evidence in the extradition proceeding. *1218 Respondent has been accused by Mexico of murder in violation of Mexican law. Additionally, it is not the business of the United States Courts to assume responsibility for supervising the integrity of a judicial system of another sovereign nation; such an assumption would directly conflict with the principal of comity on which extradition is based. Article 3 of the Treaty says, in part: In this case, that means as defined in federal law. 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. [31] See discussion at page 1213, line ___, et seq. When they reached Toluca, Valdez and Martinez stopped to make several telephone calls, at approximately 9:00 p.m. 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. 448 (1901). [19] Respondent's requests for cross examination of Petitioner's witnesses pursuant to Fed. As set forth in Footnote 26, the rights normally available in a criminal trial are not available in this proceeding. The holding in Gallina, however, offers no support for Valdez' claim. A concern over the authenticity of the evidence offered by way of the Ruiz declaration is also present. [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. [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. 40). The Secretary of State makes the ultimate decision on whether to surrender the Respondent. There is no corroborating evidence regarding the source, however. 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. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. (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 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. According to testimony given to . 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. We will gather for a memorial service and viewing at 6:00 p.m. Friday, September 6, 2019 followed by a visitation at Lake Ridge Chapel and Memorial Designers. Respondent asserts that the Treaty in this instance is invalid due to changed circumstances. 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. There is no indication of any coercion or duress, and in fact, Miranda is given "use immunity" with regard to the statement. The power to make treaties is constitutionally invested in the executive branch of the United States government. The court has jurisdiction over the Respondents if they are before the court. 290 (S.D.Cal.1996). [25] Miranda testified based upon his acquaintance with the individuals described in his statement, his personal presence at various of the events and circumstances described and conversations with the involved individuals. 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. The admissibility of Miranda's statement, as taken by Assistant United States Attorney Curiel, was previously discussed. The "recantations" from Cruz and Soto are in the form of testimony before a judge of the First District of Federal Criminal Proceedings in the State of Mexico. Court documents say the threat against assistant U.S. Atty. Cruz admitted his own involvement in the criminal activities of Valdez and the AFO and admitted that he was paid to assist them in killing the enemies of Ramon Arellano-Felix. These issues were analyzed under that premise. Demandado: Emilio Ricardo Valdez Mainero. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Explanatory evidence is allowed only if the evidence would, clearly, negate a showing of probable cause. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . 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. This latter evidence also results in a finding that any hostile action taken toward Alejandro and resulting in his disappearance and murder was more likely than not prompted at the direction of the AFO and not Mexico. 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. is indoor ice skating safe during covid; most common super bowl final scores; lynette woodard spouse; reelfoot lake fishing guides; emilio valdez mainero. 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 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. However, before we can indict evidence as tainted by the coercive effect of torture, satisfactory evidence must be presented. The proper authority for the political decision here is, of course, the Secretary of State. In the Matter of the EXTRADITION OF Emilio Valdez MAINERO. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. Otro de los reclutados fue Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, quien era hijo de un empresario prominente en Tijuana. 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. Mexico did not produce a signed statement of Sergeant Ruiz or evidence of dates of arrest of the referenced witnesses. In the Matter of Extradition of Emilio Valdez Mainero,950 F. Supp. For this reason, Respondent's challenge in this regard is denied. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. 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 . [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. 2d 208. 50). 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. Gonzalo Curiel was made by Emilio Valdez Mainero in a bugged conversation with a convicted cocaine trafficker and government informant . 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. Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies.". There is no prohibition against hearsay in the extradition context because the Federal Rules of Evidence, which proscribe hearsay, do not apply to extradition. Publicado: 5/6/2021 7:10:25 PM. (quoting Sindona v. Grant, 619 F.2d 167, 174 (2d Cir.1980)). No further "recantation" exists, although he does "appeal that accusation" (the charges brought against him are on the basis of the statements). The United States has filed videotapes of Alejandro's November 30, 1996 deposition. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent")[1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of Mexican laws. Respondent's discovery request in this regard is denied. Miranda infuriated his boss by refusing to do the hit because he had plans to go shopping with his family. 54(b) (5). 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 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. Entre los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana tambin estaba Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario prominente en la ciudad . At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980). Discovery is not available in extradition proceedings. Alejandro, who is the brother of extraditee Alfredo Miguel hodoyan Palacios aka "Lobo",[28] stated that his brother told him that Valdez and Martinez had participated in the murder of Gallardo at the Holiday Inn Hotel in Toluca. 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. As a society we cannot suspend that concept by virtue of the interest of a foreign nation in the extradition of an United States citizen, the heinous nature of the offense notwithstanding. Gill v. Imundi,747 F. Supp. A significant portion of the mens statements were taken in Mexico by officials putting together the case against Valdez and his companion at the time of his arrest, 25-year-old Alfredo Hodoyan de Palacios. Los narcojuniors . I Background Mexico also takes the position that the statement is inaccurate and not properly certified or executed. Soto extensively describes other, numerous criminal activities of the AFO. 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." 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. 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. See Reply to Extraditees Response to Extradition Request and Request for Release, Page 8, lines 1-5, inclusive (Docket No. [8] Additional written argument was entertained from counsel and submissions in this regard were completed on October 14, 1997. Cruz also said he transported weapons used in Ibarras slaying. Under United States law, (i.e., California Penal Code 187-199) murder is unlawful and similarly defined. denied, 405 U.S. 989, 92 S. Ct. 1251, 31 L. Ed. Valdez and Martinez drove off in the white Volkswagen and Cruz and Contreras followed them in a navy blue Cutlass.[24]. Fernandez v. Phillips,268 U.S. 311, 45 S. Ct. 541, 69 L. Ed. The credible evidence, satisfies Mexico's burden in this respect[44]. Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies."[12]. Ultimately, Article 9 of the Treaty invests the "executive authority" with the final discretion.[17]. He also stated that it was Valdez who assigned him the code name "F7". 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). 30), he requests discovery regarding the statement by Miranda. Only the criminal association (conspiracy) and murder charges satisfy the dual criminality requirement for extradition. The entire record supports the finding that probable cause exists with regard to homicide charges. This resulted in the arrest of Valdez on September 30, 1996. Respondent does not dispute that the Treaty requirements have been met with regard to these items with three exceptions. 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. *1209 *1210 *1211 *1212 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michel Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Ricardo Valdez. 00:15. 3190. 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. You're all set! de Sicor 1 Acdo. United States v. Taitz, 130 F.R.D. ``When they want to do a job _ when they want to bring down the hammer _ they can do it with brilliance and genius, Lupsha said. This issue was not challenged by the Respondent. In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. 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. Under Article 10 of the Treaty, the request for extradition is required to contain the description of the offense for which extradition is requested and shall be accompanied by: (1) A statement of the facts of the case; (2) The text of the legal provisions describing the essential elements of the offense; (3) The text of the legal provisions describing the punishment for the offense; (4) The text of the legal provisions relating to the time limit on the prosecution of the offense; and. Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. 39); and, SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER DIRECTING THE UNITED STATES TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed September 12, 1997 (Docket No. 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. Certainly, the decision to act upon this type of evidence rests upon some indicia of authenticity and reliability.