Opinion ID: 606126
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Unlicensed Transport of Explosives

Text: 65 The instruction given in the Florida District Court on 18 U.S.C. § 842(a)(3) charged the jury to weigh whether the government had shown that Appellants 1). were not licensed explosives dealers; and 2). had knowingly and willfully caused explosives to be transported in interstate commerce. This charge does not encompass the same activity prosecuted under Articles 26 and 27 of the Puerto Rico Law on Explosives. The Puerto Rico explosives charges addressed Appellants' vicarious responsibility for the bomb once it reached Puerto Rico. 17 Neither the unlawful use nor the unlawful possession of explosives prosecuted in Puerto Rico addresses the transportation, in interstate commerce or otherwise, of the explosive device. The United States conviction properly holds Appellants responsible for endangering lives by placing a bomb aboard a commercial airliner. 66 A comparison of indictments is not dispositive of double jeopardy analysis. To a certain extent, however, indictments reveal the behavior which is the underlying offense against society and the government's motive for criminalization. The government has criminalized the danger to the public created by unlicensed 18 possession, by unlicensed transportation 19 and by unlicensed detonation of an explosive device. Deterrence and punishment of each increasingly dangerous activity supports a separate offense. 67 The only count prosecuted in Puerto Rico which implicates Appellants' responsibility for transportation of the explosive device to Puerto Rico is the conspiracy count. The Puerto Rico indictment lists as an overt act supporting the conspiracy bringing to Puerto Rico an explosive device. The behavior targeted by the conspiracy charge was Appellants' unlawful agreement, evidence of which was supplied by proof of the predicate transportation offense. It is well-settled that prosecution for a predicate offense prior or subsequent to a prosecution for conspiracy does not offend the Double Jeopardy Clause. United States v. Felix, supra. The conspiracy was properly charged as a violation of the Puerto Rican criminal code and unlicensed transportation of the bomb to Puerto Rico was properly prosecuted as a violation of the Congressionally-enacted criminal bar. 68 For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Appellants' conviction of 18 U.S.C. §§ 842(a)(2), Unlicensed Transport of Explosives. 69