Opinion ID: 203028
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to Admit Proof of Certification

Text: Cabello claims that the document certifying Bolivia's consent to the Coast Guard's boarding of the Sea Atlantic was marked as an exhibit but never formally introduced into evidence. Bolivia's consent was necessary to establish United States jurisdiction over the vessel, and Cabello argues that, without the certification, there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. Because Cabello did not raise this issue in the district court, it is subject to review only for plain error. See United States v. Pratt, 496 F.3d 124, 127 (1st Cir.2007). We find no such error. Even if the document was technically not admitted, [35] its content was introduced into evidence through the testimony of USCG Officer Cieblik, who identified the document as the agreement between the government of Bolivia and the United States government to allow us to board the vessel Sea Atlantic.  The defendants had the opportunity to cross-examine Cieblik concerning the document's authenticity, but did not. The issue of jurisdiction was for the district court to decide, 46 U.S.C. app. § 1903(f); Bravo, 489 F.3d at 8. We have no doubt that, given Cieblik's testimony and the availability  if not admission  of the certification, no plain error occurred.