United States v. Vasquez-Velasco
15 F.3d 833
Procedural History:
Appeal of criminal conviction.
Overview:
-Javier Vasquez-Velasco (D), a member of a drug cartel in Guadalajara, and several other members, beat and killed (John] Walker [an American citizen writing a novel in Mexico] and [Alberto] Radelat [a photographer and U.S. legal resident].
-D was convicted under U.S. law. On appeal, Vasquez-Velasco (D) argued that U.S. penal laws do not apply extraterritorially. United States v. Felix-Gutierrez, 940 F.2d 1200 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 906 (1993), a case in which a defendant was convicted of kidnapping and murdering Enrique Camarena, an American Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agent, and Alfredo Zavala, a DEA informant, was the basis for the appeal by the defendant in this case, Javier Vasquez-Velasco (D). Vasquez-Velasco (D), a member of a drug cartel in Guadalajara, and several other members, beat and killed (John] Walker [an American citizen writing a novel in Mexico] and [Alberto] Radelat [a photographer and U.S. legal resident].
-At trial, the U.S. government (P) argued that Vasquez-Velasco (D) and his three co-defendants committed the crimes to further their positions in a Guadalajara drug cartel. The murders Velasco (D) was charged with were allegedly retaliatory actions against a DEA crackdown.
-He was convicted in a jury trial of committing violent crimes in aid of a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959. On appeal, Vasquez-Velasco (D) argued that U.S. penal laws do not apply extraterritorially.
Issue:
Is the extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a U.S. citizen mistaken for a federal agent consistent with principles of international law?
Rule:
Extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a US citizen mistaken for a federal agent is consistent with the principles of intl. law.
Analysis:
-The objective territorial and protective principles apply because the defendant in this case murdered the two U.S. citizens on the mistaken belief they were DEA agents, and their murders might intimidate the DEA and local police and drug agencies, who might otherwise cooperate with the DEA.
-The case therefore turns on the defendant’s subjective beliefs; if the government had been unsuccessful in its argument that the murders were committed as retaliation against the DEA, extraterritorial jurisdiction would be harder to apply.
Outcome:
-Yes. Extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a U.S. citizen mistaken for a federal agent is consistent with principles of international law.
-International law generally permits the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction under the objective territorial principle, under which jurisdiction is asserted over acts performed outside the United States (P) that produce detrimental effects within the United States (P), and the protective principle, under which jurisdiction is: asserted over foreigners for an act committed outside .the United States (P) that may impinge on the territorial integrity, security, or political independence of the United States (P).
-Extraterritorial application of 18 U.S.C. § 1959 to violent crimes associated with drug trafficking is reasonable under international law principles, since it is a serious and universally condemned offense. Despite the fact that the crimes in this case did not involve the murder of a DEA agent, extraterritorial jurisdiction is still appropriate because, according to the government’s theory, the cartel members mistook Walker and Radelat for DEA agents.
-As in Felix-Gutierrez, the crime was directed against the United States (P) .
15 F.3d 833
Procedural History:
Appeal of criminal conviction.
Overview:
-Javier Vasquez-Velasco (D), a member of a drug cartel in Guadalajara, and several other members, beat and killed (John] Walker [an American citizen writing a novel in Mexico] and [Alberto] Radelat [a photographer and U.S. legal resident].
-D was convicted under U.S. law. On appeal, Vasquez-Velasco (D) argued that U.S. penal laws do not apply extraterritorially. United States v. Felix-Gutierrez, 940 F.2d 1200 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 906 (1993), a case in which a defendant was convicted of kidnapping and murdering Enrique Camarena, an American Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agent, and Alfredo Zavala, a DEA informant, was the basis for the appeal by the defendant in this case, Javier Vasquez-Velasco (D). Vasquez-Velasco (D), a member of a drug cartel in Guadalajara, and several other members, beat and killed (John] Walker [an American citizen writing a novel in Mexico] and [Alberto] Radelat [a photographer and U.S. legal resident].
-At trial, the U.S. government (P) argued that Vasquez-Velasco (D) and his three co-defendants committed the crimes to further their positions in a Guadalajara drug cartel. The murders Velasco (D) was charged with were allegedly retaliatory actions against a DEA crackdown.
-He was convicted in a jury trial of committing violent crimes in aid of a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959. On appeal, Vasquez-Velasco (D) argued that U.S. penal laws do not apply extraterritorially.
Issue:
Is the extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a U.S. citizen mistaken for a federal agent consistent with principles of international law?
Rule:
Extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a US citizen mistaken for a federal agent is consistent with the principles of intl. law.
Analysis:
-The objective territorial and protective principles apply because the defendant in this case murdered the two U.S. citizens on the mistaken belief they were DEA agents, and their murders might intimidate the DEA and local police and drug agencies, who might otherwise cooperate with the DEA.
-The case therefore turns on the defendant’s subjective beliefs; if the government had been unsuccessful in its argument that the murders were committed as retaliation against the DEA, extraterritorial jurisdiction would be harder to apply.
Outcome:
-Yes. Extraterritorial application of a penal statute to the murder of a U.S. citizen mistaken for a federal agent is consistent with principles of international law.
-International law generally permits the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction under the objective territorial principle, under which jurisdiction is asserted over acts performed outside the United States (P) that produce detrimental effects within the United States (P), and the protective principle, under which jurisdiction is: asserted over foreigners for an act committed outside .the United States (P) that may impinge on the territorial integrity, security, or political independence of the United States (P).
-Extraterritorial application of 18 U.S.C. § 1959 to violent crimes associated with drug trafficking is reasonable under international law principles, since it is a serious and universally condemned offense. Despite the fact that the crimes in this case did not involve the murder of a DEA agent, extraterritorial jurisdiction is still appropriate because, according to the government’s theory, the cartel members mistook Walker and Radelat for DEA agents.
-As in Felix-Gutierrez, the crime was directed against the United States (P) .
No comments:
Post a Comment