United States v. Alvarez-Machain
United States Supreme Court
504 U.S. 655 (1992)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
Humberto Alvarez-Machain (Alvarez) (defendant), a Mexican citizen and resident was indicted in United States federal district court for participating in the kidnapping and murder of United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) special agent Enrique Camarena-Salazar (Camarena) and a Mexican pilot working with Camarena, Alfredo Zavala-Avelar. On April 2, 1990, Alvarez, a doctor, was forcibly kidnapped from his medical office in Guadalajara, Mexico and flowed to El Paso, Texas where he was arrested by DEA officials and indicted. Alvarez moved to dismiss the indictment by claiming that his abduction constituted outrageous government conduct and that the district court lacked jurisdiction to try him because he was abducted in violation of the Extradition Treaty of 1979 between the United States and Mexico. The district court rejected Alvarez’s outrageous government conduct claim, but ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because Alvarez had been abducted in violation of the Extradition Treaty. The district court ordered that Alvarez be repatriated to Mexico. The United States government (plaintiff) appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed dismissal of the indictment and repatriation of Alvarez. The court of appeals held that although not expressly prohibited by the Extradition Treaty, forcible abduction violated the purpose of the treaty. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, C.J.)
Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 787,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.