USA V. MARIN, No. 22-50154 (9th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this CaseThe United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed two defendants’ convictions for violating the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA), which prohibits the possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute while on board a covered vessel. The defendants were arrested after their speedboat, which was carrying at least 1,000 kilograms of cocaine, was intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard off the coast of Ecuador. The vessel carried no nationality flag, but both defendants verbally claimed Ecuadorian nationality for the vessel. The Ecuadorian government neither confirmed nor denied the nationality. The United States treated the vessel as stateless and exercised jurisdiction. The defendants challenged the government’s jurisdiction, arguing that the relevant provision of the MDLEA under which jurisdiction was exercised is unconstitutional because it conflicts with international law regarding when a vessel may be treated as stateless. The court held that the definition of “vessel without nationality” under the MDLEA does not conflict with international law, and thus affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the indictment.
Court Description: Criminal Law The panel affirmed two defendants’ convictions for violating 46 U.S.C. § 70503(a)(1) of the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, which prohibits possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute while on board a covered vessel.
Defendants were arrested after the U.S. Coast Guard interdicted their speedboat, which was carrying at least 1,000 kilograms of cocaine, on the high seas off the coast of Ecuador. The vessel carried no nationality flag, but both defendants made a verbal claim of Ecuadorian nationality for the vessel. The Ecuadorian government neither confirmed nor denied nationality. The United States treated the vessel as stateless (i.e. without nationality) and exercised jurisdiction. Under § 70502(d)(1)(C), a vessel is stateless * The Honorable Richard D. Bennett, United States Senior District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.
when the master claims registry but “the claimed nation of registry does not affirmatively and unequivocally assert that the vessel is of its nationality.” Defendants challenged the government’s jurisdiction, arguing the provision under which jurisdiction was exercised is unconstitutional because (1) Congress’s authority to “define and punish . . . Felonies committed on the high Seas,” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 10 (the “Felonies Clause”), is limited by international law principles; and (2) § 70502(d)(1)(C), enacted under the Felonies Clause, conflicts with international law as to when a vessel may be treated as stateless.
Without deciding whether the Felonies Clause is constrained by international law, the panel held that the definition of “vessel without nationality” under § 70502(d)(1)(C) does not conflict with international law. The panel therefore affirmed the district court’s denial of defendants’ motion to dismiss the indictment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.