New Protection for "El Menchito": He Wins an Amparo

Yaqui for Borderland Beat from: Zeta

                      Complainant complained that he is prosecuted twice for organized crime

Despite the sanction imposed by the Federal Judicial Council on a circuit magistrate for issuing rulings allegedly committed to organized crime, three magistrates of a Collegiate Court in Criminal Matters granted an appeal to Rubén Oseguera González "El Menchito", son of leader "El Mencho" of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG).

Convinced unanimously of their verdict, the members revoked the amparo that had been denied by a Unitary Court with residence in Zapopan and decided to grant the protection of the justice of the Union in favor of the presumed drug trafficker who is prosecuted in two different cases for the crime of the delinquency of organized crime.

The defense of the son of Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes "El Mencho" claimed the order of formal imprisonment that was dictated to the young Michoacáno in the Sixth District Court of Criminal Proceedings in the State of Jalisco after his arrest on June 23, 2015 and that on appeal it was confirmed by the Third Unitary Court of the Third Circuit.

The reason was because Rubén was already criminally prosecuted in another criminal case for the same crime of organized crime and his lawyers say: "in the factual world, can not coexist two or more belongings to the same criminal group." In their arguments, the defenders claim that in doing so, the justice providers violate the constitutional principle that "no one can be tried twice for the same crime."

Both the judge of the case and the magistrate of appeal established that the acts imputed to "El Menchito" in two different proceedings are not the same, although in both cases it is concluded that he was part of the CJNG. Oseguera González, through his legal representatives, stated that such a hypothesis "violates the following human rights to my detriment: legality, due process and legal security."

According to the reasoning of judge and magistrate, in both processes the same evidence was not analyzed, since the eventualities that gave rise to the two cases "are not about the same facts", one of them related to the capture on  June 23, 2015 on an avenue of Zapopan , while in the other, they are not limited to a specific event, but to a series of events.

In one of the criminal cases, Rubén "El Menchito" Oseguera was prosecuted as a person who had management or administrative functions within the criminal conglomerate , ie CJNG, led by his father "El Mencho"; in the meantime, in the diverse process, it is not evident that he performs such high-ranking performance, but that he is designated as one more member of the cartel.

Due to this controversy, the lawyers of "El Menchito" filed a claim for guarantees before a Unitary Court of the Third Circuit, but on August 31, 2018, the magistrate who heard the case decided to deny the amparo to the complainant, who disagrees with the appeal of review and thus the constitutional trial was remitted to a Collegiate Court in Criminal Matters.

In review, the three magistrates of appeal concluded that "adversely to what is held by the federal resolution, the act claimed, in the part under analysis, is in violation of the fundamental rights of the complainant, here recurrent, therefore, it insists, is insufficiently reasoned, not indicating precisely the special circumstances or particular reasons that have been taken into consideration for their issuance. 

Colleagues estimate that "there was a requirement that there be adequacy between the reasons given and the applicable regulations, which, as was seen in advance, in the light of the highlighted inadequacies, did not happen in the case; hence, it is appropriate to grant the protection and protection to purge such formal vices."

The effects for which the amparo was granted to  "El Menchito", prisoner in the Federal Center of Social Readaptation number 2 "Occidente", in El Salto, Jalisco, are the following:

1. The responsible Unitary Court leaves the resolution of July 4, 2018 unsubstantiated (confirms the order of formal imprisonment for organized crime);

2. Issue a new ruling, in which, in accordance with the guidelines specified by the Collegiate, and in a well-founded manner (in law) and motivated (circumstances), respond to all the grievances raised in the appeal;

3. Addresses the formal deficiencies highlighted in the amparo under review; Y

4. In the event that this is the case, with freedom of jurisdiction, resolve what corresponds in law.

The magistrates of the Collegiate Court in Criminal Matters of the Third Circuit are not afraid of issuing an amparo sentence to what they consider to be based on the Constitution and criminal laws, unless proven otherwise.