Delta Employee Flight Benefits, Discontinued Smirnoff Flavors, Articles E

896 (S.D.Cal.1993). 3187 allow for the provisional arrest and detention of a fugitive in advance of the presentation of formal proofs. 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. In the Ruiz statement, it appears that Soto was arrested at least no later than September 15, 1996. 1462, 1469 (S.D.Tex.1992). 1274 (1913); Glucksman v. Henkel,221 U.S. 508, 512, 31 S. Ct. 704, 55 L. Ed. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO (hereinafter "Valdez" or "Respondent") [1] is accused by Mexico of having been involved with or committing various crimes in violation of . Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Cruz. A full review of the evidence, however, is the provence of the trial court in the requesting nation. En septiembre de 2002, el Juzgado Cuarto de Procesos Penales Federales en el Estado de Mxico (antes Juzgado Primero de Distrito . Appellant then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the district court. 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. *291 Michael Pancer, Law Office of Michael Pancer, San Diego, CA, for 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. California. 40). 1103. 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. This element was not challenged by the Respondent. (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. Entre los narcojuniors reales de Tijuana tambin estaba Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario prominente en la ciudad . [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. EMILIO VALDEZ MAINERO was represented by retained counsel Michael Pancer. 956 (1922). Respondent asserts that Soto lost an eye as a result of the torture used by Mexico to extract his statement[39]. [33] On June 19, 1997, Respondent filed a REPLY TO GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY requesting, among other things, that the Court "order the government to turn over any other relevant information which might help the detainee explain the `evidence' lodged against him" (Docket No. 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. As noted previously, Respondent also offers the expert opinion of Rodolfo Gastelum Perez which has been excluded under the analysis previously set forth.[31]. 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. Mxico, DF - Era el nico de los altos mandos de los Arellano Flix a quien . [26] In Respondent's REPLY TO GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY (Docket No. LOS NARCOJUNIORS. Only the criminal association (conspiracy) and murder charges satisfy the dual criminality requirement for extradition. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. Finally, the scope of admissible evidence in an extradition hearing is guided by the distinction between contradictory and explanatory evidence. 777 (N.D.Cal.1985). At the time of the June 30, 1997 hearing, a typed translation of Alejandro's personal notes was offered. 577 (1901). 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. 2d 74 (1960), as the case that establishes the possibility of a "humanitarian exception" based on the "federal court's sense of decency." 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. 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. 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. Respondent's request for discovery is denied. "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. No case authority is offered in this regard. 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. 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. 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 . [16] Further, it is not the responsibility of this Court to assess the probability that the requesting party will be able to secure a conviction. In addition to being signed by extraditee's father, other family members similarly signed attesting to the authenticity and veracity of the document. 44). *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. United States v. Manzi, 888 F.2d 204, 206 (1st Cir. 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. Background. Los narcojuniors estudiaban en colegios particulares y pertenecan a familias acomodadas. 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. 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 extradition request and supporting documents are admitted into evidence during the hearing and the post hearing submissions are properly authenticated or otherwise admissible within the discretion of the Court. Nobody threatens my brother because the moron who does it, dies."[12]. Cal. [46] Respondent's repeated request to confront and cross-examine Mexico's witnesses under Fed.R.Crim.P. On October 22, 1997, the Court issued an Order directing the United States Attorney to produce photographic evidence referenced in witness statements and related to the issue of the identity of Respondent. Respondent's reliance upon Article 11, Paragraph 3, is misplaced. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635, 636 (2d Cir.1980). The magistrate judge need only determine whether there is competent evidence to justify holding the Respondent for trial, not whether the evidence is sufficient to justify conviction. 1992); Fed.R.Evid. When he appeared in court, the judge also noted, on the record, residual signs of physical injury. However, before we can indict evidence as tainted by the coercive effect of torture, satisfactory evidence must be presented. BATTAGLIA, United States Magistrate Judge. [13] The documents themselves do not have to filed in court by the 60 day period, only received by the United States. Mr. Soto also provides a physical description of Respondent. According to testimony given to . Extradition treaties do not contemplate the introduction of testimony of live witnesses by the Respondent to contradict the demanding country's proof. 1971), cert. 834 F.2d 1444, 1453. 448 (1901). As set forth in Footnote 26, the rights normally available in a criminal trial are not available in this proceeding. The contours do not lend themselves, nor invite the type of inquiry required to evaluate the humanitarian concerns of the magnitude suggested by Respondent. The law limits extradition to circumstances where the Treaty is in full force and effect. De acuerdo con un artculo del periodista Jess Blancornelas, publicado en 2002 . These declarations bear even greater indicia of competency than the police reports accepted as competent evidence in Zanazanian. [23] Cruz made several statements relative to this matter. [27] Soto actually made a series of statements relative to this matter. Tambin as reclutaron a Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, hijo de un empresario de Tijuana, quien comenz a pasar droga sin levantar sospechas pues era . When arrested, Gallardo said that the marijuana belonged to Benjamin Arellano Felix, which caused the issuance of an arrest warrant for Benjamin Arellano Felix. Ultimately, Article 9 of the Treaty invests the "executive authority" with the final discretion.[17]. 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. 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. El recordado criminal perteneca a los Narcojuniors, una clula del crtel de Tijuana que sale a relucir en la nueva temporada de la serie de Netflix. The filing of certified documents permitted Mexico to go forward with the extradition proceeding under the Treaty. 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. The two perpetrators escaped in a white Volkswagen. There is no legal support for a judicially created "humanitarian exception" in an extradition proceeding. As more clearly established by case law, the Court should not usurp the constitutional authority of the State Department in this respect. *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. denied, 454 U.S. 894, 102 S. Ct. 390, 70 L. Ed. No applicable authority was presented on this point and prevailing authority as set forth herein supports this ruling. Ms tarde contactaron a Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios, quien era hijo de un empresario acaudalado de la ciudad. Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980). In the instant case, Mexico has submitted, inter alia, sworn declarations of percipient witnesses and accomplices to the crimes alleged against Valdez. En 1995, su reinado lleg a su fin. The notes are identified by Augustin Hodoyan, Alejandro's brother. [41] The statement of Francisco Cabrera Castro, aka "Piedras" is offered in the Extradition of Alejandro Hodoyan Palacios, 96mg1828 AJB. 1462, 1464 (S.D.Tex. Miranda details numerous other criminal activities in which Valdez and others in the AFO were involved, including the assassination of Larios Guzman, the July 1994 assassination of multiple military officers, the kidnaping and murder of a person with the last name Margain, and the kidnaping of a man with the last name Baloyan. These individuals left his home the following day for Mexico City in a light grey Spirit automobile. 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. Again, no more precise recantation of the specific events exists. ", "El 5 Segundos", Ricardo Gonzalez Leon, Ricardo Emilio Valdez Mainero and Emilio Ricardo Valdez. Bingham v. Bradley,241 U.S. 511, 36 S. Ct. 634, 60 L. Ed. No charges have been filed against Anaya, and he denies the allegations. This finding could be based upon the testimony of Miranda and Alejandro, alone. The magistrate's function is to determine whether there is "any" evidence establishing reasonable or probable cause. The environment where the deposition was taken is not suggestive of any coercive circumstances. 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. The proper authority for the political decision here is, of course, the Secretary of State. Republic of France v. Moghadam,617 F. Supp. The Court is sensitive to the practical and legal limitations on Respondent's ability to challenge the evidence in the extradition proceeding. ``But it only makes the laxity which we see daily _ that should be viewed with greater and greater suspicion.. I Background Augustin also indicates that Alejandro told him that the Mexican officers intended to torture and kill Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios should he be extradited to Mexico. Fernandez v. Phillips,268 U.S. 311, 45 S. Ct. 541, 69 L. Ed. Explanatory evidence is allowed only if the evidence would, clearly, negate a showing of probable cause. "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. At approximately 9:30 p.m. Valdez and Martinez encountered Gallardo whom Valdez planned to assassinate. Soto contends that he was arrested on September 12, 1996 and held in custody for some weeks. R.Crim.P. BATTAGLIA, District Judge. Get free access to the complete judgment in MATTER OF EXTRADITION OF MAINERO, (S.D.Cal. The personal notes and translation were offered to corroborate the declaration and the explanatory evidence with regard to Alejandro's testimony. Emilio Valdez Mainero (Valdez) and Alfredo Hodoyan Palacios (Hodoyan) were certified as extraditable to Mexico on charges of murder and criminal association with the Arellano Felix drug trafficking organization (AFO). These statements do not add a great deal to Mexico's case regarding this Respondent. 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. Respondent's discovery request in this regard is denied. 290 (S.D.Cal.1996). He stated that Valdez and Martinez used a white colored vehicle and that they used another car for protection. 1028, 1049 (S.D.N.Y.1990); Republic of France v. Moghadam, 617 F.Supp. The certified documents included diplomatic note 001831 dated November 25, 1996 from the Embassy of Mexico formally requesting the extradition of Respondent on the firearms and conspiracy charges. 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. 3184, Argento v. Horn, 241 F.2d 258 (6th Cir.1957). 448 (1901); Simmons v. Braun, 627 F.2d 635 (2d Cir.1980); Charlton v. Kelly,229 U.S. 447, 461, 33 S. Ct. 945, 57 L. Ed. [40] U.S.-MEXICO DRUG WAR: Two Systems Collide, New York Times, July 22, 1997. The indicia of reliability is clearly on the November 30, 1996 deposition offered in Mexico's case in chief. Valdez also faces charges of arranging the sale of a kilogram of heroin to a fellow inmate through friends outside prison. ("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. Respondent also offers, as evidence to defeat probable cause, recantations by Cruz and Soto relative to the earlier statements[36]. 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. 526/2019. He also stated that it was Valdez who assigned him the code name "F7". Article 11, itself, cites that urgency to arrest and detain an individual supports this initial procedure. (5) Gilberto Vasquez Culebro. 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. 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. Ante una posible enfermedad terminal, Benjamn Arellano Flix pretende obtener una liberacin humanitaria, y no pagar la pena de 25 aos de prisin en Estados Unidos. On July 29, 1997, Respondent filed a Motion to Reopen Evidence in this matter. Lee tambin "Narcos Mxico 3": Bad Bunny ser un narcojunior del Cartel de Tijuana. [10] The firearms charge initially asserted by Mexico and related to the events on or about April 13, 1994 appears to have been abandoned. 000012 dated January 3, *1213 1997. 30). Neely v. Henkel,180 U.S. 109, 21 S. Ct. 302, 45 L. Ed. the arrest dates of Soto and Cruz), is unpersuasive as offered to totally obliterate probable cause under a Contreras analysis. There is no evidence, however, in this regard. 1101(d) (3); and Fed. Based on case authorities Respondent's Motion in this regard is denied. [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. Defense counsel was provided for Mr. Soto for purposes of his testimony. The Secretary of State makes the ultimate decision on whether to surrender the Respondent. The court has jurisdiction over the Respondents if they are before the court. 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. [31] See discussion at page 1213, line ___, et seq. Barrett v. United States, 590 F.2d 624 (6th Cir. There is no authority that exists that requires a magistrate judge to authorize compelled disclosures of explanatory information. Homicide is an extraditable offense under Article 2(1) and Appendix Part 1 of the treaty. [25] While there is no corroborating evidence outside of this declaration itself, that Mr. Curiel was in fact an agent of Mexico under the mutual legal assistance treaty, nor was a copy of that treaty provided, this evidence is received over respondents objection and pursuant to Article 10(6) of the Treaty and 18 U.S.C. 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. 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. He goes on to state that he signed it because he was subjected to psychological pressure and that it was a "lie". mayo 9, 2022. The holding in Gallina, however, offers no support for Valdez' claim. The Department of States's opinion is entitled to deference. 934 (D.Mass.1996). The right of confrontation,[46] specifically, has been held inapplicable, as have the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. 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. Miranda also identifies Respondent as the person depicted in various photographs reference as numbers 53, 54, 55, 73 and 74. See Reply to Extraditees Response to Extradition Request and Request for Release, Page 8, lines 1-5, inclusive (Docket No. On June 26, 1997, respondent filed a SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION RE: EXTRADITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY[34], with an attached declaration of Augustin Hodoyan (Alejandro's brother) with Alejandro's personal notes which were used to create the March 3, 1997 declaration. The papers have provided a behind-the-scenes look at an assassination already widely believed to be the work of the Arellanos. Emilio Valdez Mainero seemed an appropriately upper-tier husband, but he too allegedly found employment in the Arellano Felix organization, recruiting 'young assassins who belong to Tijuana's . Mexico's evidence does support a finding of probable cause with regard to the criminal association charge. November 4, 1997. Under United States law, a conspiracy is an agreement among two or more persons to commit a crime. [21] The real issue in this proceeding is whether or not there is probable cause to establish that Respondent was one of the perpetrators. 2d 476 (1968), is also unpersuasive in this regard. The government's request for the stay was denied sustaining Respondent's objection and request to proceed. Respondent's roles and activities in these regards is specifically referenced. [19] Respondent's requests for cross examination of Petitioner's witnesses pursuant to Fed. In the Matter of the Extradition of Contreras,800 F. Supp. 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." [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. 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. 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. The Court finds that the videotapes do show a cooperating witness. Mexico also takes the position that the statement is inaccurate and not properly certified or executed. Collins v. Loisel,259 U.S. 309, 317, 42 S. Ct. 469, 66 L. Ed. United States District Court, S.D. But the deal fell apart when the other inmate couldn't pay the promised . 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. [35] This evidence was received under seal in 96mg1828 and as a result, the specifics are not detailed or recited herein. "The rationale is that such matters are to be determined solely by the executive branch." Valdez shot and killed Gallardo as well as Sanchez who happened to be in the corridor at the time of Gallardo's murder. 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. United States v. Valdez-Mainero. 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. 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. Quines son los narcojuniors en los que est basada la historia . 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. Valdez and Martinez drove off in the white Volkswagen and Cruz and Contreras followed them in a navy blue Cutlass.[24]. 253 (1910); Rice v. Ames,180 U.S. 371, 21 S. Ct. 406, 45 L. Ed. In Escobedo v. United States, 623 F.2d 1098, 1107 (5th Cir. 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." Cruz describes his mistreatment and torture at the hands of the Mexican authorities. He referred to Ibarras murder and seven other major assassinations in the past 15 months that remain unsolved. 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. Emilio Valdez Mainero was a boyhood buddy Mr. Hodoyan chose years later to be the godfather at his first daughter's baptism. Lastly, there is no authority that requires a magistrate judge to compel disclosure of explanatory information. Soto also explains the details of the alleged abuse visited upon him. 1989), cert. Mr. Valdez became a top operative in the organization, arranging drug shipments and assassinations, the Mexican and American police have charged in court. January 1997: Hodin Gutierrez Rico, a . In re Sindona,450 F. Supp. The principle argument regarding changed circumstances is the existence of the practice of torture by Mexican authorities. Mexico), they could have easily added that provision. ("Miranda") In his November 19, 1996 declaration, Miranda states that he knows the Arellano Felix brothers. Another court has correctly characterized the above sentence from the Second Circuit as "dicta." emilio valdez mainerospiral pattern printing in c. phillies front office salaries This is defined as an individual who is a member of a group or gang of three or more persons whose purpose is to carry out criminal activity (Article 164). The 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. In re Petition of France for Extradition of Sauvage,819 F. Supp. [11] More fully identified as the "Criminal Code in local matters and for all the Republic in federal matters.". [28] See, IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTRADITION OF ALFREDO HODOYAN PALACIOS, U.S.D.C. Soto acknowledges having signed the statement as well as affixing his fingerprints. For this reason, Respondent's challenge in this regard is denied.