United States v. Nueci-Pena
711 F.3d 191
1st Cir.2013Background
- Coast Guard interdicted a go-fast vessel on the high seas and arrested six passengers, including Nueci-Peña, after discovering 396 kg of cocaine and 123 kg of heroin on board.
- Nueci claimed the vessel was Colombian; Colombian authorities could not confirm or deny registry, so the vessel was deemed without nationality and subject to U.S. MDLEA jurisdiction.
- Defendants were charged with aiding-and-abetting and conspiracy under the MDLEA for possession with intent to distribute controlled substances on a vessel subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
- Before trial, defendants sought dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, arguing improper use of gunfire under a treaty and questionable vessel registry.
- The district court and magistrate judge denied the motions; Mitchell-Hunter later pleaded guilty, and Nueci proceeded to trial.
- Nueci was convicted on both counts and sentenced to 24 years; he appeals arguing MDLEA authority without nexus and the Confrontation Clause implications of certificates used to establish jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MDLEA authority without a United States nexus is constitutional | Nueci contends Piracies and Felonies Clause forbids without-US nexus. | United States argues Congress may punish high-seas felonies without nexus; MDLEA valid | Not plain error; MDLEA upheld under Piracies and Felonies Clause |
| Confrontation Clause applicability to pretrial jurisdiction determinations | Nueci asserts certificates used to prove jurisdiction are testimonial and violate Crawford/Melendez-Diaz. | Mitchell-Hunter controls; Confrontation Clause not invoked in pretrial jurisdiction. | Confrontation Clause does not apply in pretrial jurisdiction determinations |
| Preservation and standard of review for challenging MDLEA jurisdiction | Nueci preserved the nexus challenge and other constitutional arguments; seeks de novo review. | Challenge not properly preserved; plain-error review applies for the nexus issue. | Plain-error review governs; substantial arguments not preserved |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mitchell-Hunter, 663 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2011) (MDLEA jurisdiction; pretrial Confrontation Clause not applicable)
- United States v. Matos-Luchi, 627 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2010) (MDLEA authority under Piracies and Felonies Clause)
- United States v. Estupinan, 453 F.3d 1336 (11th Cir. 2006) (MDLEA authority without jurisdictional nexus; circuit view cited)
- United States v. Ledesma-Cuesta, 347 F.3d 527 (3d Cir. 2003) (circuit interpretation of MDLEA jurisdiction)
- United States v. Suerte, 291 F.3d 366 (5th Cir. 2002) (MDLEA foundational authority discussion)
- United States v. Martinez-Hidalgo, 993 F.2d 1052 (3d Cir. 1993) (early MDLEA authority)
- United States v. Cardales-Luna, 632 F.3d 731 (1st Cir. 2011) (confrontation and jurisdictional challenges in MDLEA context)