Opinion ID: 765927
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Constitutional and Statutory Framework

Text: 7 We address the existence of venue as a question of law reviewed de novo. United States v. Angotti, 105 F.3d 539, 541 (9th Cir. 1997). As the Supreme Court reminds us, [q]uestions of venue in criminal cases . . . are not merely matters of formal legal procedure. They raise deep issues of public policy . . . . United States v. Johnson, 323 U.S. 273, 276 (1944). Indeed, the question of venue in a criminal case extends beyond public policy to specific expression in the Constitution. The right to be tried where the crime was allegedly committed is protected twice in the Constitution. Article III, section 2 provides that [t]he Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed . . . . Under the Sixth Amendment, [i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed. . . . Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure reiterates the constitutional protection: prosecution shall be had in a district in which the offense was committed. The touchstone in each of these provisions is the place where the crime was committed. 8 To determine venue, we must examine the constitutional question of where the crime was committed in light of two venue provisions enacted by Congress. The specific venue statute applicable to violations of 8 U.S.C. S 1326 provides: 9 Notwithstanding any other law, such prosecutions or suits [under this subchapter] may be instituted at any place in the United States at which the violation may occur or at which the person charged with a violation under section 1325 or 1326 of this title may be apprehended. 10 8 U.S.C. S 1329. Also relevant is the venue statute for continuing offenses, which provides that any offense against the United States begun in one district and completed in another, or committed in more than one district, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district in which such offense was begun, continued, or completed. 18 U.S.C. S 3237. The specific issue presented--where venue lies if the government identifies a defendant as subject to prosecution under S 1326 in one judicial district, but facilitates transfer to another district and then chooses to prosecute the defendant in that judicial district--has not been addressed in any published federal court of appeals decision. 11