Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono v. Michael Benov

Filing 18

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS by Judge Cormac J. Carney, (See document for details.) Accordingly, Ms. Madrono is charged with extraditable offenses. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (rla)

1
2
3
4
5

JS-6

6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SOUTHERN DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

)
MARY LYNN CORTEL MADRONO, ) Case No.: 2:12-cv-06288-CJC
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR
) WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
MICHAEL BENOV,
)
)
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

21
22

The petition for writ of habeas corpus of Petitioner Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono is

23

DENIED for substantially the same reasons stated by the Government in its opposition to

24

the petition filed on September 19, 2012. Ms. Madrono argues that there is no probable

25

cause in support of the charges against her, and that she is not charged with an

26

extraditable offense. However, the magistrate judge had competent evidence of probable

27

cause to support Ms. Madrono being charged with five counts of qualified theft through

28

falsification of commercial documents, two counts of qualified theft, and four counts of
-1-

1

falsification of commercial documents. The charges stem from an alleged scheme to

2

steal money perpetrated by Ms. Madrono in connection with her employment as branch

3

manager of the United Coconut Planters Bank. The allegations are supported by signed

4

affidavits by bank employees who witnessed Ms. Madrono issuing fraudulent deposits

5

and withdrawals, and “pre-terminating” accounts without permission. The allegations are

6

further supported by the signed affidavit of Raquel Burgos, a United Coconut Planters

7

Bank Audit Officer, who discovered evidence of a “lapping” scheme perpetrated by Ms.

8

Madrono, of which the charged offenses were a part.1 Additionally, the fact that Ms.

9

Madrono fled the Philippines a week after she allegedly committed the crimes is evidence

10

of her guilt.

11

The Court also finds that Ms. Madrono is charged with offenses covered by the

12
13

extradition treaty. Under the extradition treaty, an offense is extraditable if it is

14

punishable under the laws of both the United States and the Philippines by imprisonment

15

of more than one year. The Filipino crime of qualified theft through falsification of

16

documents is punishable by imprisonment between ten and forty years. The Filipino

17

crime of qualified theft is punishable by imprisonment between six and forty years. The

18

Filipino crime of falsification of commercial documents is punishable by imprisonment

19
20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26
27
28

1

A “lapping” scheme involves moving funds between accounts in order to conceal a theft in a way
reminiscent of a ponzi scheme. This explains why Ms. Madrono would allegedly make fraudulent
deposits in addition to the withdrawals.
-2-

1

between six months and six years. These crimes are analogous to U.S. federal crimes of

2

Theft, Embezzlement, or Misapplication by Bank Officer or Employee, 18 U.S.C. § 656,

3

and Bank Fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, which are both punishable by up to 30 years

4

imprisonment. Accordingly, Ms. Madrono is charged with extraditable offenses.

5
6
7
8

DATED:

October 23, 2012
__________________________________
CORMAC J. CARNEY

9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3-