FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E ALS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT March 27, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 13517 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 0 0 4 9 9 - CR- T- 2 3 - M SS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s J A M E S F E RN A N D O E S T R A D A - O B R E G O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ar c h 27, 2008) B efo re B L A C K , M A R C U S an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

J a m e s F e rna ndo E s tr a da - O br e gon appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i on a f t e rhi s pl e a of gui l ty t o c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f i ve ki l ogr a m s orm or e of c o c a in e w h ile o n b o a r d a v e s s e l s u b je c t to th e ju r is d ic tio n o f th e U n ite d S ta te s , in v i o l a t i o n o f

4 6 U . S. C. § § 7 0 5 0 3 ( a ) , 7 0 5 0 6 ( a ) a n d ( b ) ; a n d 2 1 U . S. C. § 960( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i i ) . H e a s s e r t s va r i ous i s s ue s on appe a l , w hi c h w e a ddr e s s i n turn. A f te rr e v ie w , w e a f

f irm E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n ’s c o n v ic tio n .

I . E s tr a da - O br e gon f

i r s ta s s e r t s the di s tr i c tc our tl a c ke d j ur i s di c t i on ove rthe of f e ns e , a nd hi s c onvi c t i on i s voi d, be c a us e the f a c tua l ba s i s of

hi s pl e a a gr e e m e nt di d note s t abl i s h the U ni t e d S t a t e s ’ s t a tut ory s ubj e c t - m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on ove rthe o f f e n s e , p u r s u a n t to th e M a r itim e D ru g L a w E n f o r c e m e n t A c t ( M D L E A ) . S peci fi ca l l y, E stra da-O bregon ar gu es that , al tho ug h the fa ctual basi s of hi s pl ea s h o w e d P a n a m a c o n s e n te d to th e b o a r d in g a n d s e a r c h o f th e v e s s e l, th o s e f

a c ts d id no tshow thatP anam a c on se nt ed or w ai ved o bj ec t i on t o the enforce m entof U ni t ed S t at es l aw by the U ni t ed S t at es . In addi t i on , E stra da-O bregon cont ends the fa ctual ba s i s of hi s pl e a f

a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h a n of

f e ns e puni s habl e unde rthe l a w s of the U ni t e d S t a t e s , a nd the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by a c c e pt i ng the pl e a . E s tr a da - O br e gon further a ss ert s he w ou l d n othave pl ed gu i l ty i f he had kn ow n the fa ctual proffe r w as i nsuffi ci entt o est abl i sh the U ni t ed S t at es ’ j uri sdi ct i on ov erhi m . T here fore ,3

E stra da-O bregon cont ends, hi s pl eashou l d b e vac at ed and h i s c as e r em anded for a n e w p le a o rtr ia l, w ith th e G o v e rn m e n t r e q u ir e d to p r o v e th a t P a n a m a c o n s e n te d to th e e n f o r c e m e n t o f

U n ite d S ta te s la w . T h e M D L E A p r o v id e s , “[ a ]n in d iv id u a l m a y n o t k n o w in g ly o rin te n tio n a lly m a n u f a c tu r e o rd is tr ib u te , o rp o s s e s s w ith in te n t to m a n u f a c tu r e o rd is tr ib u te , a control l ed subst ance on bo ar d . . . a ves se l subj ec tt o the j uri sdi ct i on of the U ni t ed S t a t e s . ” 46 U . S . C . § 70503( a ) ( 1) . A “ ve s s e l s ubj e c tt o the j ur i s di c t i on of the U n ite d S ta te s ” in c lu d e s , in te ra lia , “ a ves se l re gi st er ed i n a fore i gn nat i on i f that nat i on has c on se nt ed or w ai ved o bj ec t i on t o the enforce m entof U ni t ed S t at es l aw by the U ni t ed S t at es . ” 46 U . S . C . § 7 05 02 (c )( 1)(C ). “ Juri sdi ct i on of the U ni t ed S t at es w i th res pectt o a vess el subj ec tt o thi s c hapt eri s notan el em entof an of f e ns e . J ur i s di c t i ona l i s s ue s a r i s i ng unde rthi s c hapt e ra r e pr e l i m i na ry que s t i ons o f la w to b e d e te r m in e d s o le ly b y th e tr ia l ju d g e .” 4 6 U .S .C . § 7 0 5 0 4 ( a ) ; see a l so U ni ted Stat es v. T

i no co , 3 0 4 F .3 d 1 0 8 8 , 1 1 1 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) .

“ [A ] gu i l ty pl eado es no tbar a n app ea l thatra i se s aj uri sdi ct i on al qu es t i on . ” U ni te d State s v . R e

y nolds , 2 1 5 F .3 d 1 2 1 0 , 1 2 1 5 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . “[ D ]e f e c ts in subj ec t -m att erj uri sdi ct i on re qu i re corr ec t i on re gardl es s of w hether the error w as ra i se d i n d i stri ctcourt . ” U ni te d State s v . C ot ton , 1 2 2 S . C t. 1 7 8 1 , 1 7 8 5 ( 2 0 0 2 ) .4

A “ di stri ctcourt ’ s f

ac tual fi nd i ng s w i th res pectt o j uri sdi ct i on . . . ar e re vi ew ed for c l ea r e rr or. ” T i no co , 304 F . 3d a t1114. “ [ T ] he gove rnm e ntbe a r s the bur de n of

e s t abl i s hi ng tha tthe s t a tut ory r e qui r e m e nt s of s ubj e c tm a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on i m po se d b y the M D L E A have been m et . ” I d. W e r evi ew for pl ai n err or, ho w ever , an ar gu m entra i se d for the fi rs tt i m e on app ea l thatthere w as an i nsuffi ci entfa ctual b a s is f o ra g u ilty p le a . U

ni te d Stat e s v . E v ans , 47 8 F . 3d 13 32 , 13 38 (11th C i r. ), ce rt. deni ed , 128 S . C t . 257 ( 2007) . I n or de rf ore rr ort o be pl a i n, the r e m us tbe b in d in g p r e c e d e n t c le a r ly h o ld in g th a t it is s u c h . U ni te d State s v . Chau , 426 F . 3d 1 3 1 8 , 1 3 2 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . A l though E s tr a da - O br e gon a r gue s a n i s s ue of s ubj e c t - m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on w hi ch i s notw ai ved, the basi s of hi s a rgum enti s thatthe G ov ernm entdi d n otm ee t its b u r d e n to p r o v e a f

a c t u n d e r ly in g th e ju r is d ic tio n a l r e q u ir e m e n t o f th e M D L E A . A l tho ug h a di stri ctcourt ’ s f ac tual fi nd i ng s w i th res pectt o j uri sdi ct i on general l y a re r e v ie w e d f

o rc le a re rr o r , T

i no co , 3 0 4 F .3 d a t 1 1 1 4 , b e c a u s e E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n d id n o t o b ject to th e f

ac tu al p ro ff

erb elo w , w e r ev iew fo r p lain er ro r th e d istrict co u rt’s i m pl i c i tf a c tua l f i ndi ng tha tP a na m a c ons e nt e d t o the e nf or c e m e ntof

U . S . l a w f

or p u rp o s e s o f

th e M D L E A ’s ju r is d ic tio n a l r e q u ir e m e n t. See 4 6 U . S. C. § 7 0 5 0 2 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( C ) ; E v ans , 478 F . 3d a t1338.5

T he G ove rnm e nt ’ s f

a c tua l pr of

f e ra tthe pl e a c ol l oquy doe s notc ont a i n a s t a t e m e nttha tP a na m a e xpl i c i t l y c ons e nt e d t o the e nf or c e m e ntof

U . S . l a w by the U n ite d S ta te s . A ls o , th e r e c o r d c o n ta in s n o d o c u m e n ta tio n o f P a n a m a ’s e x p lic it c o n s e n tt o th e e n f

o r c e me n to f

U . S. l a w . Ra th e r , th e G o v e rn me n ts t a t e d Pa n a ma c ons e nt e d t o U . S . a uthor i t i e s ’ boa r di ng a nd s e a r c h of the ve s s e l . B y a c c e pt i ng E s tr a da - O br e gon’ s gui l ty pl e a , the di s tr i c tc our ti m pl i c i t l y f ound P a na m a ’ s c ons e nt t o boa r di ng a nd s e a r c h i m pl i e d a tl e a s ta w a i ve rof obj e c t i on t o the e nf

or c e m e ntof U .S . la w f

o rp u rp o s e s o f

th e M D L E A ’s ju r is d ic tio n a l r e q u ir e m e n t. See 4 6 U . S. C. § § 7 0 5 0 2 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( C ) , 7 0 5 0 3 ( a ) ( 1 ) . W here the U . S . C oastG uard rout i nel y i nt er ce pt s boat s i n i nt ernat i on al w a te r s f o rth e p u rp o s e o f

e n f o r c in g U .S . la w , p a r tic u la r ly U .S . d ru g la w s , it is re as on abl e t o con cl ud e thatU . S . autho ri t i es re qu es tperm i ss i on t o b oard and sear ch v e s s e l s f o rth a tp u rp o s e , a n d a f

l a g n a t i o n th a to b

j e c t e d t o th e e n f

o r c e me n to f

U . S. l a w w oul d notgr a ntpe r m i s s i on t o boa r d a nd s e a r c h. N e i the rthe M D L E A nor c o n tr o llin g c a s e la w p r o v id e s w h a t th e g o v e rn m e n t s p e c if ic a lly m u s t d o o rs a y to m e e ti t s bur de n of

e s t abl i s hi ng tha ta f

l a g na t i on ha s c ons e nt e d orw a i ve d obj e c t i on to th e e n f

o r c e m e n t o f

U .S . la w . See T

i no co , 3 0 4 F .3 d a t 1 1 1 4 ; se e g e n e r a lly 46 U . S . C . §§ 70502- 70504. U nde rthe s e c i r c um s t a nc e s , a ny pos s i bl e e rr orby the di s tr i c tc our ti n f

i ndi ng tha tP a na m a a tl e a s tw a i ve d obj e c t i on t o the e nf or c e m e ntof6

U .S . la w c a n n o t b e p la in . See Mo r ia r ty , 4 2 9 F .3 d a t 1 0 1 9 ; Chau , 4 2 6 F .3 d a t 1 3 2 2 . A c c o r d i n g l y , h a v i n g f

o u n d th a tPa n a ma w a i v e d o b j e c t i o n t o e n f

o r c e me n to f

U . S. l a w , the di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rri n f a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te di sm i ss the ca se for l ac k of s t a tut ory j ur i s di c t i on unde rthe M D L E A , a nd di d notpl a i nl y e rri n a c c e pt i ng E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n ’s p le a . See 46 U . S . C . §§ 70 50 2(c) (1)( C ), 70 50 3(a) (1). II . E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n n e x t a r g u e s f o u rc o n s titu tio n a l c la im s . H e c o n te n d s : ( 1 ) h is o f f e n s e c o n d u c t h a d n o n e x u s w ith th e U n ite d S ta te s , a n d , th u s , h is p r o s e c u tio n v io la te d d u e p r o c e s s ; ( 2 ) th e M D L E A v io la te s d u e p r o c e s s b e c a u s e it i s “ f unda m e nt a l l y unf

a i rt o the e xt e nttha ti ta l l ow s f orum s hoppi ng [ by the go vernm ent ] , re m ov es the el em entof j uri sdi ct i on fr om the j ury, and p re cl ud es de f e nda nt s f r om a s s e r t i ng vi ol a t i ons of i nt e rna t i ona l l a w a s a de f e ns e ; ” ( 3) the M D L E A vi ol at es the D ue P roce ss C l ause and the S i xth A m endm entri gh tt o a j ury tr i a l be c a us e the M D L E A doe s notr e qui r e j ur i s di c t i on be pr ove n t o a j ury be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubt ; a nd ( 4) the M D L E A r e pr e s e nt s a n ul tra vi re s e xe r c i s e of c o n g r e s s io n a l p o w e ru n d e rth e P ir a c ie s a n d F e lo n ie s C la u s e . E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n a r g u ab ly w a iv e d ap p e a l o f th e s e c la im s b a s e d o n th is C our t ’ s r e c e ntde c i s i on i n U n i ted S ta tes v. D e L a G a rza , __ F . 3d __, N o. 06- 13 39 6, 20 08 W L 39 74 56 , at*4 (11th C i r. F eb. 15 , 20 08 ). H i s pl eaagre em entw asEstrada -Obre g on cites Ninth and Sec ond Circuit case s that require d a nexus between 1 conduct on f

oreign-re g istered ve ssels and the United States analog ou s totheminimum c ontac ts require d for personal jurisdiction. See United States v. Zakharov , 468 F.3d 1171, 1177 ( 9th Cir. 20 06 ); United States v. Y

ousef , 3 27 F .3 d 5 6, 11 1 ( 2d

Cir . 2 00 3) . E stra da -Obre g on re c ognize s, ho wever, that ot

her c irc uit s h avehe ld t

hat none xus isre quire d when th efl agnatio n c on sentsto the enf orcement of U.S. law. See , e.g. , United States v. Perez Oviedo , 281 F.3d 400, 403 ( 3d Cir. 2002); United States v. Cardales , 168 F.3d 548, 553 ( 1st Cir. 1999). 7 subst ant i al l y the sa m e a s the pl eaagre em enthel d t o w ai ve al l no n-j uri sdi ct i on al c ha l l e nge s i n D e L a G a rza . E v e n if th e s e c la im s a r e n o t w a iv e d , th e y e a c h f a il u n d e rp la in e rr o rr e v ie w . Se e Mo r ia r ty , 429 F . 3d a t1018. F i r s t , the S upr e m e C our tha s notrul e d on the ne xus i s s ue , a nd E s tr a da - O br e gon r e c ogni z e s a c i r c ui ts pl i t . E s tr a da - O br e gon 1 a c know l e dge s tha ti n U ni te d State s v . Me na , 8 6 3 F .2 d 1 5 2 2 , 1 5 2 7 , th is C o u r t d id notf i nd a ne xus r e qui r e m e nti n the c a s e of f or e i gn- r e gi s t e r e d ve s s e l s , buthe d i s t i n g u i s h e s h i s c a s e f

r o m Me na on the basi s thathe i s pre se nt i ng an as -app l i ed c ha l l e nge t o the M D L E A r a the rtha n a f a c i a l c ha l l e nge a s i n Me na . A l though Me na a d d r e s s e s a f

a c ia l r a th e rth a n a n a s - ap p lie d c h a lle n g e to th e M D L E A , it s u g g e s ts th e r e is n o n e x u s r e q u ir e m e n t f o rf o r e ig n - r e g is te r e d v e s s e ls . See Me na , 863 F . 2d a t1527. B e c a us e the r e i s no bi ndi ng pr e c e de ntc l e a r l y hol di ng the M D L E A re qu i re s anexu s betw ee n a fore i gn -r egi st er ed vess el and the U ni t ed S t a t e s , a ny e rr orby the di s tr i c tc our ti n notdi s m i s s i ng the c a s e f orl a c k of

ne xus c o u ld n o t b e p la in . See Chau , 4 2 6 F .3 d a t 1 3 2 2 . A c c o r d in g ly , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id8

notpl a i nl y e rri n f

a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te di s m i s s the c a s e f orl a c k of

a ne xus w i th the U n i t ed S t at es. S e c ond, the di s tr i c tc our tdi d notpl a i nl y e rri n f a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te d i sm i ss th e c a s e a g a in s t E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n o n th e b a s is th a t th e M D L E A w a s f u n d a m e n ta lly u n f a ir . See Chau , 42 6 F . 3d at13 22 . W e have previ ou sl y a dd re ss ed al l of E stra daO br e gon’ s a r gum e nt s r e ga r di ng thi s i s s ue , w i th the e xc e pt i on of the pr e c l us i on of i nt ernat i on al l aw defe nse, and h el d the M D L E A i s f ac i al l y c on st i tut i on al as appl i ed to f o r e ig n c itiz e n s . See U

ni te d State s v . R e ndon , 3 5 4 F .3 d 1 3 2 0 , 1 3 2 5 - 2 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ; T

i no co , 3 0 4 F .3 d a t 1 1 0 9 - 1 0 ; Me na , 8 6 3 F . 2 d at1 5 2 7 . W e h av e al so decl i ned t o con cl ud e the M D L E A i s “ fund am ent al l y unfai r. ” See U ni ted Stat es v. Es tupi nan, 4 5 3 F .3 d 1 3 3 6 , 1 3 3 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . F urther, E stra da-O bregon concedes hi s a rgum ent s thatthe M D L E A vi ol at es the D ue P r oc e s s C l a us e a nd the S i xth A m e ndm e ntr i ghtt o a j ury tr i a l be c a us e the M D L E A d o e s n o t r e q u ir e ju r is d ic tio n b e p r o v e n to a ju ry b e y o n d a r e a s o n ab le doubt , a nd tha tthe M D L E A r e pr e s e nt s a n ul tra vi re s exer ci se of cong re ss i on al pow e runde rthe P i r a c i e s a nd F e l oni e s C l a us e , a r e f or e c l os e d by ourpr i or pr e c e de nt . W e ha ve he l d s ubj e c t - m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on i s nota n e l e m e ntof the o f f e n s e a n d , th e r e f

o r e , ju r is d ic tio n d o e s n o t n e e d to b e s u b m itte d to a ju ry . R e ndon , 354 F . 3d a t1326- 27. W e ha ve a l s o he l d a di s tr i c tc our t“ c om m i tt e d no9

e rr ori n f a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te rul e tha tC ongr e s s e xc e e de d i t s a uthor i ty unde rthe P i ra ci es and F el on i es C l ause i n enact i ng the M D L E A . ” Se e Es tupi nan , 45 3 F . 3d at 1 3 3 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) ; see a l so U .S . C o n s t. A r t.I , § 8 , c l.1 0 . T h u s , th e r e is n o p la in e rr o ro n th e s e c la im s a s w e ll. II I. T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rri n f a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te di sm i ss the ca se for l ac k o f s ta tu to ry ju r is d ic tio n u n d e rth e M D L E A . E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n a r g u ab ly w a iv e d h is const i tut i on al cl ai m s, bu teven i f he di d n otw ai ve these cl ai m s the di stri ctcourt pl a i nl y e rri n f

a i l i ng t o s u a s

p o n te di s m i s s the c a s e on the ba s i s of a ny of the c o n s titu tio n a l a r g u m e n ts . A c c o r d in g ly , w e a f f ir m E s tr a d a - O b r e g o n ’s c o n v ic tio n . AF F I RME D.