U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain, ALVAREZ-MACHAI

Citation946 F.2d 1466
Decision Date18 October 1991
Docket NumberALVAREZ-MACHAI,No. 90-50459,D,90-50459
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Humbertoefendant-Appellee.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)

Andrew G. McBride, Asst. Deputy Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellant.

Paul L. Hoffman, ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Robert K. Steinberg, Law Offices of Robert K. Steinberg, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Charles L. Hobson, Crim. Justice Legal Foundation, Sacramento, Cal., Ellen L. Lutz, American Watch, Los Angeles, Cal., John P. Mandler, Minnesota Lawyers Intern. Human Rights Committee, Minneapolis, Minn., David Westin, Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, Washington, D.C., Ruth Wedgwood, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, New Haven, Conn., for amicus.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Before GOODWIN and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges, and KING, * District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The Government appeals the district court's judgment of dismissal. We affirm. See United States v. Verdugo Urquidez, 939 F.2d 1341 (9th Cir.1991).

Verdugo held that the forcible abduction of a Mexican national from Mexico by agents of the United States without the consent or acquiescence of the Mexican government violates the 1980 Extradition Treaty between the United States and Mexico. 939 F.2d at 1351-52. Verdugo further held that the protest of the Mexican government in letters to the district court that Verdugo's abduction violated the 1980 treaty provided standing for Verdugo to assert rights under the Treaty in United States courts. 939 F.2d at 1356. Finally, Verdugo held that the proper remedy for such a violation of the 1980 Extradition Treaty is repatriation of the Mexican nationals seized by United States agents. 939 F.2d at 1359.

These holdings apply a fortiori to the facts of this case. After a full evidentiary hearing in the district court, the court found that Alvarez-Machain is a Mexican national who was forcibly seized from his medical office in Guadalajara, Mexico. The court found that appellee's abductors were the paid agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency ("DEA") and that the abduction was accomplished at the behest of the DEA. United States v. Caro-Quintero, 745 F.Supp. 599, 609 (C.D.Cal.1990). These findings have not been disputed by the Government in this appeal.

In Verdugo, the court remanded the case to the district court for an evidentiary hearing on this and other issues. 939 F.2d at 1359. In this case, the requisite findings of United States involvement in the abduction have already been made.

An additional distinction between this case and the Verdugo case is that in this case the Mexican government has made several specific formal diplomatic protests to the United States government. The Government of Mexico has...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • United States v. Alvarez-Machain
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 15, 1992
    ...decision whether he should be returned to Mexico, as a matter outside the Treaty, is a matter for the Executive Branch. Pp. 666-670. 946 F.2d 1466 (CA9 1991), reversed and REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which WHITE, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. ......
  • Alvarez-Machain v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • September 11, 2001
    ...United States-Mexico Extradition Treaty. Both the district court and this court agreed, see United States v. Alvarez-Machain ("Alvarez-Machain I"), 946 F.2d 1466, 1466-67 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam), aff'g United States v. Caro-Quintero, 745 F.Supp. 599 (C.D.Cal.1990), but the Supreme Court......
  • Machain v. USA., ALVAREZ-MACHAI
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • September 11, 2001
    ...599, 601 (C.D. Cal. 1990). The district court and the Ninth Circuit agreed with him, see id. at 614 and United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 946 F.2d 1466, 1466-67 (9th Cir. 1991), but the Supreme Court disagreed and remanded the case for trial. See United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 6......
  • Alvarez-Machain v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • February 19, 1997
    ...the United States and Mexico. United States v. Caro-Quintero, 745 F.Supp. 599, 601 (C.D.Cal.1990), aff'd sub nom United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 946 F.2d 1466 (9th Cir.1991). The Supreme Court reversed the dismissal, however, and Alvarez-Machain was forced to stand trial. United States v.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Judicial integrity: a call for its re-emergence in the adjudication of criminal cases.
    • United States
    • Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Vol. 84 No. 3, September - September - September 1993
    • September 22, 1993
    ...Ct. at 431-32. (3) United States v. Caro-Quintero, 745 F. Supp. 599 (C.D. Cal. 1990), aff'd sub nom., United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 946 F.2d 1466 (9th Cir. 1991), rev'd, 112 S. Ct. 2188 (1992). In dealing with the issue of outrageous conduct, the district court judge indicated that no c......
  • The Sheinbein case and the Israeli-American extradition experience: a need for compromise.
    • United States
    • Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law Vol. 32 No. 2, March 1999
    • March 1, 1999
    ...police misconduct). (196.) Lujan, 510 F.2d at 68. (197.) 504 U.S. 655 (1992). (198.) Id. at 667. (199.) United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 946 F.2d 1466, 1466-67 (9th Cir. (200.) Id. at 1467. (201.) See id. (202.) Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. at 670. (203.) Id. at 669. (204.) Id. at 663. (205.)......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT