USA v. Esquer-Diaz
| California Southern District Court | |
| Case #: | 2:26-mj-08122 |
| Case Filed: | Feb 26, 2026 |
| Terminated: | Mar 26, 2026 |
| Last checked: Saturday Feb 28, 2026 12:16 AM PST |
|
Defendant
Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz (1)
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
USA
|
Represented By
|
| Docket last updated: 05/25/2026 12:38 AM PDT |
| Wednesday, February 25, 2026 | ||
| Arrest of Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz (no document attached) (vyc) | ||
| Thursday, February 26, 2026 | ||
| 1 | 1
2
pgs
COMPLAINT as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz. (Copies provided to Counsel in Court). Initial Appearance set for 2/26/2026 in El Centro before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez Jr.. Preliminary Hearing set for 3/12/2026 10:00 AM in El Centro before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez Jr.. Arraignment set for 3/26/2026 10:00 AM in El Centro before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez Jr..(vyc)
|
|
|
Att: 1
info sheet
|
||
| 4 | 4 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez, Jr: Initial Appearance as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz held on 2/26/2026. Appointed Attorney Federal Defenders for Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz. Bond set as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz (1) no bail. Rule 5 advisement provided. Oral proffer. Government oral motion for detention, risk of flight. Detention Hearing - RF set for 3/3/2026 10:00 AM in El Centro before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez Jr. Preliminary Hearing set for 3/12/2026 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Michelle M. Pettit. Arraignment set for 3/26/2026 10:00 AM in El Centro before Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. (CD# 2/26/2026 LR 1:23-1:32). (Plaintiff Attorney Anna Sebastian S/A). (Defendant Attorney Bacilio Varela S/A). (ccc) | |
| 5 | 5 ***English. No Interpreter needed as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz (no document attached) (ccc) | |
| 6 | 6 ORAL MOTION to Detain by USA as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz. (no document attached) (ccc) | |
| 7 | 7
2
pgs
ORDER as to Fernando Luis Esquer-Diaz: The Court orders the United States to comply with the continuing duty to disclose evidence which is favorable to the defendant as required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny. Upon finding that the government has failed to comply with this order, the Court may, as appropriate, order the production of such information, grant a continuance, impose evidentiary sanctions, or, in extreme cases, dismiss charges. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lupe Rodriguez, Jr on 2/26/26. (aum)
|
|