The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction of Hilario Valdez-Campos for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. The case centered on whether the district court had jurisdiction, with Valdez-Campos arguing that Congress overstepped its bounds in defining a “vessel without nationality” under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA). The court ultimately found that Congress acted within its authority and upheld the conviction.
The Incident at Sea
The case began on September 19, 2021, when a military patrol aircraft spotted a suspicious “go-fast” vessel in international waters, approximately 270 nautical miles southwest of Acapulco, Mexico. The vessel was carrying large packages, later determined to be cocaine. As a United States Coast Guard boat approached, the vessel attempted to evade capture, and those on board began throwing bales of cocaine into the sea. The Coast Guard eventually intercepted and boarded the vessel, finding five individuals aboard, including Valdez-Campos.
Claim of Nationality and Statelessness
The crew of the vessel claimed Mexican nationality. However, Mexico was unable to confirm the vessel’s nationality. This inability to verify the vessel’s flag rendered the vessel “stateless” under the MDLEA, making it subject to U.S. jurisdiction. The Coast Guard recovered a staggering 2,285 kilograms of cocaine from the vessel.
The Charges and the Plea Deal
Valdez-Campos and his four shipmates were indicted on two counts: (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine aboard a vessel, and (2) possession with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine aboard a vessel. Valdez-Campos pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charge as part of a plea agreement, in exchange for the government dismissing the possession charge.
The Jurisdictional Challenge
Following Valdez-Campos’s change of plea hearing, one of his co-defendants filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the U.S. lacked jurisdiction. Valdez-Campos joined this motion. The argument was that Congress exceeded its authority under Article I of the Constitution in how it defined a “vessel without nationality” in the MDLEA. Specifically, the defense challenged the inclusion of a vessel where the crew made a verbal claim of nationality that the claimed nation couldn’t confirm. The district court denied the motion to dismiss and sentenced Valdez-Campos to 108 months in prison.
The Court’s Reasoning
The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, as well as the interpretation of the statute, de novo, meaning it reviewed the case from scratch. The court focused on the constitutionality of the MDLEA’s definition of a “vessel without nationality.” The court cited Article I, Section 8, Clause 10 of the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to define and punish offenses like piracy, felonies on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations. This case fell under the “Felonies Clause.”
The Core of the Argument: International Law
Valdez-Campos argued that under customary international law, a verbal claim of nationality by a vessel’s master should create a presumption of the vessel’s nationality. He contended that Congress’s authority under the Felonies Clause was limited by this international law definition. The court, however, rejected this argument, citing previous rulings.
Precedent Sets the Stage
The court referenced the *United States v. Alfonso* case, in which it was held that customary international law does not limit Congress’s authority under the Felonies Clause. The court further cited a recent case, *United States v. Canario-Vilomar*, where the same argument was rejected. Therefore, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that Congress did not exceed its authority.
The Outcome
Because the court found that Valdez-Campos’s arguments were not supported by precedent, it affirmed his conviction. The court determined that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction over the case, and upheld the original sentence.