Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-18-41129/USCOURTS-ca5-18-41129-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Edward Javier Catano Lopez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-41129

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EDWARD JAVIER CATANO LOPEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:17-CR-1-7

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Edward Javier Catano Lopez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to 

conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base 

while on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and 

aiding and abetting. He was sentenced to a prison term of 180 months. He 

appeals his conviction.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 19, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 18-41129 Document: 00515314825 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2020
No. 18-41129

2

As an initial matter, the Government filed a motion to summarily 

dismiss the appeal, or alternatively, for an extension of time to file a merits 

brief. The motion was carried with the case, and the Government was ordered 

to file an appellee brief, which it has done. Thus, summary dismissal is no 

longer appropriate, and the motion for summary dismissal is denied as moot.

On appeal, Catano Lopez argues that 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503(a)(1) and 

70506(b) were not intended to apply to possession of illicit substances aboard 

a boat by a Colombian citizen traveling between two foreign nations with 

intent to distribute in a foreign country, because such an application is a 

violation of international law. He also argues that the extraterritorial 

application of 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503(a)(1) and 70506(b) to his conduct violates due 

process because there is no nexus between his conduct and the United States, 

and he did not have notice that he could be haled into court and prosecuted in 

the Eastern District of Texas. In light of United States v. Suerte, 291 F.3d 366 

(5th Cir. 2002), Catano Lopez fails to show reversible plain error. See Puckett 

v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED, and the 

motion for summary dismissal is DENIED.

Case: 18-41129 Document: 00515314825 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2020