Additionally, although we have concluded that the district court's factual determination that the drugs administered to Garcia Abrego had no deleterious effect on his mental condition was not clearly erroneous, it is worth noting that the district court found, on the basis of Agent Hensley's testimony, that United States law enforcement officials had no involvement in the administration of drugs to Garcia Abrego. be both the operations manager and chief hit man for the cartel. Saul Hernandez-Rivera, a reputed drug trafficker who was killed outside a bar Agent Hensley testified at the suppression hearing without objection that Garcia Abrego had used Valium on a daily basis for a number of years prior to his arrest.15. As the district court observed, the government certainly [did] not act [] with diligence in giving [the] notice required by 3505(b). (U.S. Jan. 26, 1998) (No. Rep. No. 726, 139 L.Ed.2d 664 (1998), and cert. Garcia Abrego had dominated cocaine . Garcia Abrego has thus failed to demonstrate that any error on the part of the district court in connection with its jury instructions on the CCE offense prejudiced him and thereby affected his substantial rights. Therefore, the evidence of Garcia Abrego's involvement in the murders was not inadmissible under Rule 404(b)'s prohibition on [e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts [offered] to show action in conformity therewith. Fed. Assuming, merely for the sake of argument, that a juror strictly complying with this instruction-as we assume that the jurors in this case did, see United States v. Jimenez, 77 F.3d 95, 99 (5th Cir.1996)-could have, as a theoretical matter, found Garcia Abrego guilty of conducting a CCE on the basis of his association with persons who could not have constituted his supervisees as a matter of law,11 we are unconvinced that such error rises to the level of plain error. 2. We disagree. Sounds like J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde from the FBI. denied, 519 U.S. 1128, 117 S.Ct. Resendez testified that Garcia Abrego met directly with Luis Medrano, Oscar Malherbe, and Sergio Checo Gomez regarding the narcotics trafficking business. Law enforcement officers maintained surveillance on the Monterrey Street house until April 11, 1990. An FBI agent testified that, prior to this seizure, law enforcement officials intercepted a telephone conversation between Tomas Gringo Sanchez and Hilario Gonzales. An FBI agent walked by the residence and overheard the sound of heavy objects being dropped and dragged across the floor of the garage. ; United States v. Pineda-Ortuno, 952 F.2d 98, 105 (5th Cir.1992). Rivas testified that he moved between 30,000 and 40,000 kilograms of cocaine through the Bass Boulevard location. The government adduced a great deal of evidence in the form of testimony from coconspirators indicating that Garcia Abrego was the leader of a very large narcotics trafficking enterprise with a pyramid-like hierarchy. sentence was a symbolic gesture because of the brutality of the crime, During direct examination, counsel for Garcia Abrego questioned Dr. Coleman regarding his medical examination of Garcia Abrego upon his arrival in the United States and about the effects of a number of the medications that Mexican authorities had administered to him. Subsection (b) also contains a requirement that the party opposing admission of a foreign record under 3505 must object before trial or otherwise waive the objection. Romero, a city criminal prosecutor. El 17 de mayo de 1965, obtiene el certificado de nacimiento . In Narcos: Mexico, Garca Abrego is portrayed by Flavio Medina. unrelated, attacked their accomplice Alejandro and left him for dead. Law enforcement officials also observed a Jeep Wagoneer at the Monterey Street house. However, [a] defendant's mental condition still properly figures into the voluntariness calculus. He started in the cartel under the tutelage of his uncle Juan Nepomuceno Guerra. The statement was thus admissible as substantive evidence at Garcia Abrego's trial. At the mall, they turned the van over to Fernando Cordona and Henry Cortez, who had arrived at the mall in another vehicle. Once led by Juan Garcia Abrego, it is now believed to be under the On or around 11 October 1978, another The content here may be outdated or no longer functioning. 17. Jaime Rivas testified that he transported cocaine from Harlingen to Houston for Luis Medrano and that he met with Medrano regarding the transportation of cocaine up to two or three times per week. He therefore contends that his convictions for the substantive drug offenses cannot stand because insufficient evidence exists to prove that he is directly liable for these offenses-that is, insufficient evidence exists for the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that he actually or constructively possessed the cocaine in question with intent to distribute it. this nickname for his baby face and/or for being a sharp dresser. He then turned the vehicle over to some individuals at that residence and left for the airport. The district court's instructions cautioning the jury regarding its evaluation of the testimony of accomplices and paid informants tracks the language of the Fifth Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions relating to these issues. denied sub nom., 519 U.S. 1045, 117 S.Ct. However, the authorities that Garcia Abrego cites in support of this proposition establish nothing more than that the jury charge must inform the jury of the Pinkerton principle in order for a conviction of a substantive offense to be sustainable on the basis of coconspirator vicarious liability. The individuals who worked directly with Garcia Abrego, along with Sanchez, arranged for the transportation of drugs and proceeds from their sale in the United States through a number of other individuals. slayings of the writer and her investigator husband--both of whom had Acts committed in furtherance of the charged conspiracy are themselves part of the act charged. From there, members of Garcia Abrego's organization arranged the shipment of the cocaine to Houston. See United States v. Ross, 33 F.3d 1507, 1517 (11th Cir.1994) (holding that admission of foreign records pursuant to 3505 did not violate the defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause); United States v. Sturman, 951 F.2d 1466, 1490 (6th Cir.1991) (same). and who could have inflicted it. His arrest in 1996 led to Osiel Cardenas Guillen and his brothers taking over the cartel. MEXICO CITY In the months that writer Yolanda never know. 15. 1770, 1776-79, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). A conviction for [CCE] requires proof that a defendant organized, supervised or managed five or more persons in a continuing series of drug violations from which the defendant obtained substantial income. United States v. Sotelo, 97 F.3d 782, 789 (5th Cir. One of the FBI agents involved in the seizure at the Almeda-Genoa warehouse testified that he was conducting surveillance at the Wharton airport in Houston and that he observed a blue pickup registered to Guadalupe Velez. J.Validity of Garcia Abrego's Waiver of His Miranda Rights. denied, 522 U.S. 878, 118 S.Ct. The high-security penitentiary is housed on the same sprawling complex in Colorado as the supermax but affords privileges and a new lifestyle that the supermax does not, according to a Bureau of Prisons handbook for inmates. While the ultimate determination of voluntariness is a question of law reviewed de novo, this court must accept the factual conclusions underlying the district court's determination of voluntariness unless they are clearly erroneous. 3578, 3581. 97-8083). for his drug trafficking. Horace Vega testified that he moved $7.5 million for the organization. See Todd, 735 F.2d at 150. On December 3, 1996, Vega testified that, in January 1991, he met with Luis Medrano and discussed building a frozen food warehouse that would be used to distribute cocaine. denied, 522 U.S. 902, 118 S.Ct. 988, 136 L.Ed.2d 869 (1997); United States v. Witek, 61 F.3d 819, 822-24 (11th Cir.1995); United States v. Delgado, 4 F.3d 780, 785-86 (9th Cir.1993). In concluding that admission of records under 3505 does not violate a defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause, we join a number of other circuits that have addressed the issue. Carlos Resendez testified that Garcia Abrego told him that he had $30-35 million in Ricardo Aguirre's name. The fact that the evidence offered by the government consisted only of out-of-court statements accompanied by no physical evidence of murder merely goes to the weight of the evidence rather than its admissibility.22 We therefore conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony regarding Garcia Abrego's involvement in murders. Guaid says he traveled to the U.S . Romero, a Mexico City deputy attorney general, said his detectives also suspect a possible settling of accounts in the killings. 14. Drug traffickers also have been charged in the deaths of journalists in regional state capitals in the past. Moreover, the district court dismissed the drug conspiracy count only because it constituted a lesser-included offense of the CCE count of which the jury also found Garcia Abrego guilty. in Matamoros in 1987 along with corrupt policeman Toms Morlet Borquez. Because the amount that the district court ordered Garcia Abrego to forfeit is within the limits set by Congress, the criminal forfeiture comports with the Double Jeopardy Clause. On cross-examination, the government asked Dr. Coleman a number of questions regarding his medical education, training, and experience. were unable to get a hold of him for more than a decade. Garcia Abrego contends that the district court erred in allowing Dr. Coleman to testify regarding the effects of habitual Valium use because he admitted during direct examination that he was not an expert in the area of Valium dependency. He wrote an autobiography and was active on social media for a while but hasn't posted since 2014. Medrano agreed to pay the $3.5 million necessary to set up the warehouse. Carlos Rodriguez testified that he began trafficking cocaine at the direction of Medrano and Malherbe in 1986 and that they dictated the Colombian cartel with whom he was allowed to do business. the Mexico City prosecutor's office, had been sexually abusing the two stealing vehicles. Section 3505 was not intended to add technical roadblocks to the admission of foreign records, but, rather, to streamline the admission of such records. United States v. Strickland, 935 F.2d 822, 831 (7th Cir.1991). Death: Immediate Family: Son of Capitn Diego Flores de Abrego; Diego Flores Abrego de Valdez and Ana de Olarte. corruption, and in the past worked for Mexico City's