Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. The certificate is forwarded to the Department of State. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . Neely v. Henkel, supra. 25. 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 . In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Some federal and local officials said the mens statements are not credible because they are clear attempts to land a sweetheart deal. The interests of Mexico were represented by the United States through the United States Department of Justice, by United States Attorney Alan D. Bersin and Assistant United States Attorney Gonzalo P. Curiel. 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. In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. The essential question is whether the indicia of reliability is on the recantation or the initial statement. Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir.1976). 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. Hodoyan haba estudiado en una . Miranda added that the motivation for assassination was that Gallardo had threatened Gabriel Valdez Mainero (Emilio Valdez Mainero's brother) with a firearm.[26]. 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 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. 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. Valdez told Contreras, "Wait for me here and when you see us leave the parking lot in the white Volkswagen, make a wall so that we won't be followed". Peryea v. United States,782 F. Supp. 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 . 1983). 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 . MEMORANDUM DECISION DENYING BAIL PENDING EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS. 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. Ejecutivo Mercantil Autr. Actually, this declaration is not signed by Alejandro, nor was it written by Alejandro. 834 F.2d 1444, 1453. Evidence that conflicts with that submitted on behalf of the demanding party is not permitted, nor is impeachment of the credibility of the demanding country's witnesses. Curreri v. Vice, 77 F.2d 130, 132 (9th Cir.1935); Eain v. Wilkes, 641 F.2d 504, 510 (7th Cir.1981), cert. Background. These statements are also corroborated in significant part by Alejandro's declaration. "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. 124 F.3d 1186, 1997 WL 624797 (9th Cir.). 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. at 952. 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. Gerardo Cruz Pacheco, a former presidential security guard, told Mexican officials he helped the gunmen escape after the Holiday Inn murder by forming a wall of cars as they drove off. 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"). 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.]" Miranda declared that Valdez and Martinez committed the murder of Gallardo. In addition to being signed by extraditee's father, other family members similarly signed attesting to the authenticity and veracity of the document. No case authority is offered in this regard. Alejandro provides an unrestrained narrative discussion of various events and circumstances, prompted by periodic questions and all simultaneously recorded in an office on CPU's. [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. 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. The videotapes clearly demonstrate Alejandro's demeanor. On July 29, 1997, Respondent filed a Motion to Reopen Evidence in this matter. 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. Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 315-317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. 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. aka "Cachuchas" In his September 30, 1996, declaration before an agent of the Mexican Federal Public Prosecutor, Gilberto Vasquez Culebro, aka "Cachuchas", (hereinafter Vasquez), declared that Valdez was a member of the AFO and that, in March, 1995, Valdez was in the company of the other AFO members, including, Eduardo Leon, aka "Abulon", Contreras, and Reyes. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. [45] The physical injuries to Cruz are certainly suspicious in this regard. Date published: Mar 20, 2013. 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. [13] The documents themselves do not have to filed in court by the 60 day period, only received by the United States. 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. 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. Respondent does not dispute that the Treaty requirements have been met with regard to these items with three exceptions. The videotaped deposition of Alejandro is the only credible evidence to demonstrate the circumstances under which Mexico's evidence was collected. 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. Homicide is an extraditable offense under Article 2(1) and Appendix Part 1 of the treaty. Mr. Vasquez testified based upon his acquaintance and interaction with Respondent and his involvement in the events he describes. The United States filed certified documents in support of the extradition request at various times, the first of which was on December 4, 1996. 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. Under United States law, a conspiracy is an agreement among two or more persons to commit a crime. emilio valdez mainero. 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. The testimony of Miranda, taken by Assistant United States Attorney Curiel, corroborates the substance of the evidence collected at the *1228 scene and statements by non-involved witnesses. The purported recantation of Alejandro has been discarded with the indicia of reliability supporting the initial deposition. Twenty-eight days after he took office, Ibarra, along with two government agents and a taxi driver, was gunned down in a cab outside Mexico Citys airport. In re Petition of France for Extradition of Sauvage,819 F. Supp. 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. Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Cruz. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. [45] The thought of testimony coerced by torture is certainly abhorrent and inconsistent with tenets of our society. Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . Mr. Valdez became a top operative in the organization, arranging drug shipments and assassinations, the Mexican and American police have charged in court. As a result, the accomplice argument does not negate reliability in this instance, nor does it defeat admissibility. Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776, 789, 790 (9th Cir.1986). In the Matter of the EXTRADITION OF Emilio Valdez MAINERO. 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. (5) There is probable cause that a crime or crimes were committed and that the Respondent participated in or committed them. [38] Specifically, Cruz was charged with homicide and Soto was charged with possession of various *1224 weapons, and a narcotics related offense (possession of marijuana). 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. United States District Court, S.D. 956 (1922). mayo 9, 2022. [37] Respondent criticizes Mexico for not filing this set of documents. 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. 23. 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. 96-1798-M. United States District Court, S.D. Court documents say the threat against assistant U.S. Atty. In the Matter of Extradition of Emilio Valdez Mainero,950 F. Supp. 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. 30). The certified documents submitted by Mexico, including the statements of Cruz, Miranda, Soto, Vasquez and Alejandro are admitted into evidence in accordance with Article 10(6) of the subject Treaty and 18 U.S.C. 28). [36] A recantation of Francisco Cabrera Castro is also filed and argued to support Respondent's position. 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. He goes on to state that he signed it because he was subjected to psychological pressure and that it was a "lie". 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). LOS NARCOJUNIORS. 1136 (1916); McNamara v. Henkel,226 U.S. 520, 33 S. Ct. 146, 57 L. Ed. The long list of challenges to the probable cause finding in Mexico and the other alleged infirmities are not fully set forth herein as the Court finds the opinions of Attorney Gastelum are irrelevant to these proceedings. 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. Finally, the Respondent is accused by Mexico of criminal association (conspiracy) in violation of Mexican law. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are not applicable in extradition proceedings. 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 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. No applicable authority was presented on this point and prevailing authority as set forth herein supports this ruling. The cohorts also said the Arellanos had on their payroll Mexican immigration agents who waved cocaine shipments across the border. The Court is not limited in its receipt of this evidence by virtue of the lack of certification. 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. The contours of the extradition proceeding were shaped by the Treaty and statute. Id. A review of the evidence submitted in support of those charges meets the requirements regarding identity and probable cause sufficient to fulfill the fifth extradition requirement. Cal. Probable cause exists to believe that the Respondent committed the offenses of homicide and criminal conspiracy as charged against him in Mexico. A great number of questions exist, and many questions remain unanswered in this case. [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. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. [41] All of these individuals are described as "prisoners" in the statement. [10] The firearms charge initially asserted by Mexico and related to the events on or about April 13, 1994 appears to have been abandoned. Valdez also faces charges of arranging the sale of a kilogram of heroin to a fellow inmate through friends outside prison. [33] As such, it is argued that the statements were not credible, nor should they support extradition in this case. Los narcojuniors . Hodoyan was taken into custody for carrying an AK-47 and some marijuana. 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"). Finally, the scope of admissible evidence in an extradition hearing is guided by the distinction between contradictory and explanatory evidence. [30] Respondent's Exhibits H, I and J, respectively, docket No. On September 30, 1996, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of *292 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"). 1103. [38] These are the same statements offered in this matter to support the request for extradition. 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. at 1450-1451. One of the gang's leaders, Ramon Arellano Felix, was placed on the FBI's Most Wanted list in September. (7) Evidence which, in accordance with the laws of the requested party, would justify the apprehension and commitment for the trial of the person sought if the offense had been committed there, (i.e., probable cause). Elias v. Ramirez,215 U.S. 398, 30 S. Ct. 131, 54 L. Ed. The government's request for the stay was denied sustaining Respondent's objection and request to proceed. 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. 3184. 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. "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. Respondent had indicated that a recantation by Vasquez would be filed, but no such document has been offered in evidence in this case. 96-1798-M. United States District Court, S.D. Specifically, Respondent asserts that evidence included in the second extradition packet should not be received or considered by the Court. [6] The Court also directed the United States to request from Mexico, a signed statement of Seargent Ruiz and evidence of all dates of arrest after September 1, 1996 of witnesses Soto, Alejandro Hodoyan, Francisco Cabrera Castro and Gerardo Cruz Pacheco.[7]. BATTAGLIA, District Judge. 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 . [9] See ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE filed October 23, 1997 (Docket No. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 517, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. 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). EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. This element was not challenged by the Respondent. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. An extradition hearing is not a criminal proceeding and the person whose return is sought is not entitled to the rights available in a criminal trial at common law. 44). No charges have been filed against Anaya, and he denies the allegations. Bruton v. United States,391 U.S. 123, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 20 L. Ed. 1978). 3184, et seq. one strange rock gasp quizlet New Lab; glider timetable dundonald park and ride; 12 gauge 100 round drum; 1971), cert. [43] The balance of the evidence, as noted, does not lead to the conclusion that Alejandro was under duress, nor, that the November 30, 1996 deposition is unreliable. Valdez was ordered detained following arraignment. In Emami v. United States, 834 F.2d 1444 (9th Cir.1987), Emami contended that Germany had presented no competent evidence upon which the district court could make a finding of extraditability because Germany relied on facts which prosecutor Keller related in his affidavit which consisted solely of inadmissible hearsay statements made by Emami's former patients and employees. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. [44] There are some inconsistencies in the testimony when various statements are compared, but these are not significant differences affecting this analysis. Treaties, by design, live well beyond the administration involved in their enactment. de Sicor 1 Acdo. In the Matter of Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. Under United States law, (i.e., California Penal Code 187-199) murder is unlawful and similarly defined. 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. *1209 *1210 *1211 *1212 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michel Pancer, San Diego, CA, for Emilio Ricardo Valdez. The court, for reasons explained below, grants the petition, finding the detainee extraditable. The Ninth Circuit held that "[t]his contention lacks merit because under general extradition of the United States and under the provisions of Treaty, the hearsay statements Keller summarized in his affidavit are competent evidence." You're all set! While the Court has wide latitude in admitting evidence, and hearsay evidence is admissible, the Ruiz statement is without any legally reliable corroborating or authenticating evidence in this case. 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. An analysis of whether this Court should enact a humanitarian exception into foreign extradition begins with a recognition of the rule of non-inquiry. (4) Alejandro Enrique Hodoyan Palacios In his November 30, 1996 deposition, Alejandro not only discussed the murder of Gallardo and Sanchez, but he also discussed other criminal activity involving the AFO and including the activities of Respondent Valdez. Valdezs attorney said some of the statements were extracted under torture. 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. denied, 405 U.S. 989, 92 S. Ct. 1251, 31 L. Ed. [48] Authority for this proposition is gathered from dicta in some case law in that there is no direct authority for this proposition. The principle argument regarding changed circumstances is the existence of the practice of torture by Mexican authorities. If reliable, the recantations and the Ruiz statement would be evidence which would undermine the voluntariness of the statements offered by Mexico in their case in chief, and as a result, the evidence in support of probable cause for extradition. At the time, Emilio Valdez Mainero, a member of the Arellano Flix cartel, said in a bugged conversation with a inmate-turned-informant that he wanted to kill Curiel. [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. Mexico did not produce a signed statement of Sergeant Ruiz or evidence of dates of arrest of the referenced witnesses. [30] These statements challenge the "motive" for the Gallardo murder as stated by Cruz and Miranda. 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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. Barrett v. United States, 590 F.2d 624 (6th Cir. 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). The admissibility of Miranda's statement, as taken by Assistant United States Attorney Curiel, was previously discussed. 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.". 3190 having been properly and legally certified and authenticated by Bruce A. Beardsley, principal counsular officer of the U.S. in Mexico. Thus, it has been held appropriate to permit evidence that tends to obliterate probable cause but not evidence which merely contradicts the same. The court has jurisdiction over the Respondents if they are before the court. 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 Court denied the motion.[3]. 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. The interviews of Alejandro in the United States confirm the uncoerced willingness of Alejandro to provide testimony concerning the criminal activities of the AFO and Respondent's role therein. [3] See Memorandum Decision Denying Bail Pending Extradition Proceedings filed 10/21/96 (Docket No. Mexico more correctly characterizes the Ruiz statement as a summary of statements by Seargent Ruiz. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. Oen Yin-Choy v. Robinson, 858 F.2d 1400, 1407 (9th Cir.1988). Opinion for Matter of Extradition of Mainero, 950 F. Supp. The personal notes and translation were offered to corroborate the declaration and the explanatory evidence with regard to Alejandro's testimony.
Stephanie Dougherty Singer, Midlife Crisis Husband Wants To Be Alone, 2 Player Secret Hideout Tycoon Script Pastebin, Mcdonalds Glasses 1977, Articles E