词条 | United States v. Alvarez-Machain |
释义 |
| Litigants = United States v. Alvarez-Machain | ArgueDate = April 1 | ArgueYear = 1992 | DecideDate = June 15 | DecideYear = 1992 | FullName = United States, Petitioners v. Humberto Álvarez-Machaín | USVol = 504 | USPage = 655 | ParallelCitations = 112 S. Ct. 2188; 119 L. Ed. 2d 441 | Prior = 946 F.2d [https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/946/1466/422003/ 1466] (9th Cir. 1991); cert. granted, {{ussc|502|1024|1992|el=no}}. | Subsequent = On remand, 971 F.2d [https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/971/310/71907/ 310] (9th Cir. 1992). | Holding = The fact of respondent's forcible abduction does not prohibit his trial in a United States court for violations of this country's criminal laws. | SCOTUS = 1991-1993 | Majority = Rehnquist | JoinMajority = White, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas | Dissent = Stevens | JoinDissent = Blackmun, O'Connor | Dissent2 = | JoinDissent2 = | LawsApplied = }} United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the fact of respondent's forcible abduction does not prohibit his trial in a United States court for violations of this country's criminal laws. It re-confirmed the Ker-Frisbie Doctrine established in Ker v. Illinois (1886) and Frisbie v. Collins (1952). BackgroundHumberto Álvarez Machaín, a Mexican physician, was allegedly involved in the 1985 kidnapping, torture, and murder of DEA agent Enrique Camarena Salazar by "prolonging Agent Camarena's life so that others could further torture and interrogate him." On April 2,[1] 1990, Álvarez was abducted from Mexico by Trent Tompkins of Claysville, PA, a private citizen hired by DEA agents, and brought to trial in the United States over the protest of Mexican officials. Legal action reached the United States Supreme Court (as above) focusing upon the effect of illegal extradition upon the trial court's jurisdiction. Invoking the "Ker–Frisbie doctrine" the U.S. Supreme Court held that the trial court's jurisdiction was not affected by the manner in which the accused was brought before it. This created international alarm and concern as other nations feared that the decision would encourage further such abductions. Despite vigorous protests from the Mexican government, Álvarez was tried in United States District Court in Los Angeles; the trial, in which his defense focused intensely on the legality of the arrest, resulted in an acquittal. The trial judge (whose earlier decision dismissing the indictment had been overruled by the Supreme Court) ruled at the close of the government's case in chief that the government had not presented a prima facie case, and therefore granted an acquittal without presenting the matter to the jury for verdict. The other suspect, Javier Vasquez Velasco, was arrested for his alleged involvement in the murder, convicted, and sentenced to three life sentences. See also
References1. ^Mark S. Zaid: Military might versus sovereign right — the kidnapping of Dr. Humberto Alvarez-Machain and the resulting fallout. Houston Journal of International Law, spring 1997, cited at Findarticles.com and there retrieved April 3, 2011 Further reading
External links
| case=United States v. Alvarez-Machain, {{Ussc|504|655|1992|el=no}} | findlaw=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/504/655.html | justia=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/504/655/ | loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep504/usrep504655/usrep504655.pdf | oyez =https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/91-712 6 : United States Supreme Court cases|United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court|United States criminal investigation case law|United States foreign relations case law|1992 in United States case law|Mexico–United States relations |
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。