Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

127 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank OF Am.
  549 F.2d 597· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-27 ·cited 141×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the antitrust action based on the act of state doctrine and lack of jurisdiction, and that the plaintiffs should have been afforded an opportunity for full discovery.
• United States v. Nino Rinsi Cadena
  585 F.2d 1252· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-14 ·cited 136×
  The court held that the crew members' convictions for conspiracy to import and distribute marijuana were not supported by sufficient evidence of their knowledge of the conspiracies.
• United States v. DeWEESE
  632 F.2d 1267· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 116×
  The court held that the captain had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the ice hold of a commercial vessel, and that discovery violations did not warrant reversal absent a showing of prejudice.
• United States v. Smith
  680 F.2d 255· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-08 ·cited 103×
  The court held that 21 U.S.C. § 955a is within Congress's power to apply extraterritorially to stateless vessels engaged in drug trafficking affecting the United States, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellant's conviction for possession with intent to distr
• United States v. King
  552 F.2d 833· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-16 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the admission of deposition testimony under 18 U.S.C. § 3503 was constitutional, both facially and as applied, and that the defendants' departure from the deposition constituted a waiver of their objections.
• United States v. Aston Winter
  509 F.2d 975· 5th Cir.· 1975-03-13 ·cited 76×
  The court held that a district court has jurisdiction over a conspiracy charge if the conspiracy is designed to have criminal effects within the United States and at least one conspirator committed an overt act within U.S. territorial jurisdiction, and that defendants cannot chal
• Rebozo v. Wash. Post Co.
  515 F.2d 1208· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-16 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the Washington Post Company is subject to personal jurisdiction in Florida under the state's long-arm statute for a libel action, as the publication and circulation of the allegedly defamatory article constituted a "tortious act" within the state.
• United States v. Baker
  609 F.2d 134· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-02 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the possession of marijuana with intent to distribute statute applies extraterritorially to conduct occurring within the customs waters of the United States, even if no act occurred within the territorial limits of the United States, provided there was an inte
• Rocha v. United States
  288 F.2d 545· 9th Cir.· 1961-03-02 ·cited 68×
  The court held that U.S. district courts have jurisdiction over aliens found within their borders for crimes committed abroad that harm U.S. sovereignty, but reversed the conspiracy conviction due to a variance between the single conspiracy charged and the proof of multiple separ
• Chua HAN MOW v. United States
  730 F.2d 1308· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence, as the claims were either procedurally barred, without merit, or not administratively exhausted.
• Travis v. Anthes Imperial Ltd.
  473 F.2d 515· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-12 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue, finding sufficient conduct within the United States to apply the Securities Exchange Act and that venue was proper.
• Chapman v. Reddick
  41 Fla. 120· Fla.· 1899-01-01 ·cited 56×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a judgment against Sheriff Chapman for failing to levy and collect an execution on attached property. The court rejected the Sheriff's constitutional challenge to a statute authorizing writs of attachment to be issued across judicial circuit bound
• Mannington Mills, Inc. v. Congoleum Corp.
  595 F.2d 1287· 3d Cir.· 1979-04-03 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the act of state doctrine does not bar consideration of the plaintiff's antitrust claims regarding foreign patents, but remanded for a balancing of interests before exercising jurisdiction.
• United States v. Maria del Socorro Pardo Viuda De Aguilar
  883 F.2d 662· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 51×
  The court held that appellants could not present evidence of their mistaken interpretation of immigration laws as a defense to charges of smuggling, transporting, or harboring aliens, as ignorance or mistake of law is not a defense and such evidence would create undue trial burde
• United States v. Ricardo
  619 F.2d 1124· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 51×
  The court held that extraterritorial jurisdiction attaches for conspiracy if intended territorial effects are shown, even without an overt act in the U.S., and that evidence seized and admitted was lawful.
• Chandler v. United States
  171 F.2d 921· 1st Cir.· 1948-12-03 ·cited 51×
  The court held that overt acts, even if consisting of speech or preparation for speech, can constitute treason if done with intent to betray the enemy, and that motive is irrelevant if intent to betray is proven.
• United States v. Laurence John Layton
  855 F.2d 1388· 9th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction over charges of conspiracy and aiding/abetting the killing of a member of Congress and an internationally protected person, even though the acts occurred outside the United States. The court als
• Mounier v. State
  178 So. 2d 714· Fla.· 1965-04-14 ·cited 49×
  Two defendants were convicted of spearfishing in a prohibited area in Monroe County, Florida under a statute that banned spearfishing in the Upper Keys. The Florida Supreme Court reversed their convictions because the actual offense occurred 3.5 nautical miles offshore at Davis R
• United States v. Loalza-Vasquez
  735 F.2d 153· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court did not err in asserting jurisdiction, admitting hearsay evidence under the residual exception, denying severance, or finding no unconsented conflict of interest.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  776 F.2d 931· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-01 ·cited 46×
  The court held that precedent binds the panel to a specific interpretation of the statute, despite the concurring judge's belief that Congress intended a broader scope.
• Simonton v. State
  44 Fla. 289· Fla.· 1902-01-01 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a quo warranto judgment against Frank Simonton, Solicitor of the Criminal Court of Record of Hillsborough County, holding that County Solicitors appointed to fill vacancies hold only for the unexpired term of their predecessor, not for a full fo
• United States v. Wright-Barker
  784 F.2d 161· 3d Cir.· 1986-02-14 ·cited 42×
  The court held that U.S. narcotics statutes can apply extraterritorially to acts on the high seas if intended effects in the U.S. are proven, and that the evidence supported the jury's findings of guilt for conspiracy, possession with intent to import, and possession with intent
• United States v. Riker
  670 F.2d 987· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 40×
  The court held that Congress has the power to proscribe and the district court has jurisdiction to punish conduct aboard a U.S. vessel on the high seas, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict Riker.
• United States v. Vicars
  467 F.2d 452· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-21 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the jury charge on conspiracy was not an 'all or nothing' instruction, evidence supported a single conspiracy, and the disruptive conduct of a codefendant did not prejudice the appellants. Gonzales' claims regarding continuance, oral argument time, arrest, and
• In re Uranium Antitrust Litig. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. RIO Algom Ltd.
  617 F.2d 1248· 7th Cir.· 1980-02-15 ·cited 35×
  A default judgment against some joint tortfeasors cannot be entered while liability for others remains undecided, as this would improperly sever a single claim.
• United States v. Romero-Galue
  757 F.2d 1147· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-18 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the "customs waters" definition in the Marijuana on the High Seas Act can extend beyond twelve miles via treaty or arrangement, allowing prosecution of foreign nationals on foreign vessels.
• Bulova Watch Co., Inc. v. Steele
  194 F.2d 567· 5th Cir.· 1952-02-21 ·cited 30×
• United States v. Valois
  915 F.3d 717· 11th Cir.· 2019-02-12 ·cited 29×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, finding no error in the district court's exercise of jurisdiction, denial of a mistrial, or handling of potential attorney conflicts of interest.
• Lemire v. Galloway
  130 Fla. 101· Fla.· 1937-11-18 ·cited 29×
  A minority stockholder of a defunct corporation sought to compel corporate officers to account for assets and deliver corporate property to a court-appointed receiver. The Florida Supreme Court held that a court of equity with jurisdiction over the parties can compel such account
• United States v. Reeh
  780 F.2d 1541· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 27×
  The Coast Guard requires reasonable suspicion of drug smuggling to stop and board foreign vessels in international waters, and such suspicion was lacking in this case.
• United States v. Edmundo Howard-Arias
  679 F.2d 363· 4th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the two convictions under 21 U.S.C. §§ 955a(a) and 955a(d) did not violate the double jeopardy clause because Congress intended them to define separate offenses.
• United States v. Peterson
  812 F.2d 486· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence seized from a vessel was admissible, as the Coast Guard had statutory authority to board and search, and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied to reliance on foreign law enforcement's assurances.
• United States v. Hayes
  653 F.2d 8· 1st Cir.· 1981-06-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained from the vessel search, nor in excluding certain testimony regarding the destination of the marijuana, but reversed the conviction on Count II due to prosecutorial misstatements of
• United States v. Hernando Robinson
  843 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-18 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the convictions for drug possession and conspiracy were lawful, rejecting arguments based on international law and the ex post facto clause, and finding sufficient evidence.
• United States v. Elio Perez-Herrera
  610 F.2d 289· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-23 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the statute prohibiting attempts to import controlled substances applies to attempts made wholly outside of U.S. borders, as Congress intended extraterritorial application to combat international drug trafficking.
• Marin v. United States
  352 F.2d 174· 5th Cir.· 1965-11-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the United States has jurisdiction to indict and try an alien found physically within its jurisdiction for a crime committed against the United States, even if the offender was corporeally outside the United States at the time of the offense.
• Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank OF Am. Nat'l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n
  749 F.2d 1378· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-27 ·cited 22×
  The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of both the antitrust action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the act of state doctrine and the tort actions on forum non conveniens grounds.
• United States v. Erdos
  474 F.2d 157· 4th Cir.· 1973-02-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction and venue to try the defendant for a crime committed in a U.S. embassy abroad, and that while restricting cross-examination from a learned treatise was error, it was not prejudicial.
• The Scotch Whisky Ass'n v. Barton Distilling Co. (now known as Barton Brands
  489 F.2d 809· 7th Cir.· 1973-11-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Lanham Act applies to a U.S. company's vicarious involvement in a foreign country's false designation of origin, and that injunctive relief was not an abuse of discretion, but attorneys' fees were not recoverable.
• Pensacola Transit, Inc. v. Douglass
  160 Fla. 192· Fla.· 1948-02-24 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the Railroad Commission's order granting a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Frank Petelinski and Red Ball Motor Lines to operate motor bus service on specified routes in the Pensacola area. The Court rejected challenges from exis
• United States v. Heinz Golitschek
  808 F.2d 195· 2d Cir.· 1986-12-19 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the jury instructions erroneously presumed the defendant's knowledge of the law, shifting the burden of proof and requiring reversal of the conviction.
• Parts MFG. Corp. v. Lynch
  129 F.2d 841· 2d Cir.· 1942-07-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a second seizure, conducted under a search warrant, was not rendered illegal by information obtained from a prior illegal seizure, as the warrant was supported by independent probable cause.
• United States v. Birch
  470 F.2d 808· 4th Cir.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 15×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 499 applies extraterritorially and the indictment sufficiently charged offenses against the United States, and that the defenses of justification and duress were properly excluded.
• United States v. Henriquez
  731 F.2d 131· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the issue of the vessel's statelessness was preserved for appeal and remanded for further findings on that issue and the government's burden of proof. Regarding the destroyed tapes, the court found no prejudice to the defendants but issued a directive to preve
• United States v. Zemater
  501 F.2d 540· 7th Cir.· 1974-07-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the indictment's charge under the Travel Act was legally insufficient because it failed to allege the required sequence of interstate travel followed by an act in violation of state law in the place where committed. The court also vacated convictions on other
• United States v. Girgenti
  197 F.2d 218· 3d Cir.· 1952-02-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant made a sufficient showing to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, thus reversing the contempt conviction.
• State v. Stepansky
  761 So. 2d 1027· Fla.· 2000-04-20 ·cited 13×
  Florida's Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of section 910.006(3)(d), which grants Florida jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed on cruise ships outside state territorial waters when a majority of paying passengers embarked and plan to disembark in Florida. The Cour
• United States v. Davis
  905 F.2d 245· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act applies extraterritorially to the defendant, and the Fourth Amendment does not extend to the search of a non-resident alien's vessel on the high seas.
• Willard v. Barry
  113 Fla. 402· Fla.· 1933-12-30 ·cited 13×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed orders in a suit brought by Bishop Patrick Barry (as a corporation sole) against A.G. Willard to quiet title to church properties and remove a judgment lien. The court held that while it had extraterritorial jurisdiction to hear the quiet title
• United States v. Felix-Gutierrez
  940 F.2d 1200· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant can be prosecuted in the United States for being an accessory after the fact to crimes committed abroad, provided the underlying offense is subject to extraterritorial application and the accessory's conduct has sufficient nexus to U.S. interests.