About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - August 2021)

handle is hein.ali/restfrus4207 and id is 1 raw text is: THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES 4TH: SELECTED TOPICS IN TREATIES, JURISDICTION, AND SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY PART III. STATUS OF TREATIES IN U.S. LAW § 306. Interpretation of Treaties C.A.1, 2021. Subsec. (1) quot. in sup. Asylee from the Dominican Republic filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus after a magistrate judge certified the Dominican Republic's request to extradite him for arrest and questioning in anticipation of a possible prosecution arising from the shooting of three Dominican Republic drug officers. The district court granted the petition. This court affirmed in part, holding that the extradition request was not supported by a document setting forth the charges, as required under the Dominican Republic-United States Extradition Treaty. The court rejected the government's argument that the warrant for asylee's arrest could also serve as the document setting forth the charges, reasoning that the text of the Treaty did not support the government's interpretation under Restatement Fourth of Foreign Relations Law § 306. Aguasvivas v. Pompeo, 984 F.3d 1047, 1058. PART IV. JURISDICTION, STATE IMMUNITY, AND JUDGMENTS CHAPTER 1. PRESCRIPTION SUBCHAPTER A. EXERCISE OF PRESCRIPTIVE JURISDICTION BY THE UNITED STATES § 402. United States Practice with Respect to Jurisdiction to Prescribe C.A.1, 2021. Com. (b) quot. in sup.; Rptrs' Note 2 cit. in sup. After a federal grand jury issued an indictment against foreign national for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, foreign national moved to dismiss, arguing that the United States lacked jurisdiction over his person, because the U.S. Coast Guard seized him and the drugs in international waters while he was on board a stateless vessel. The district court denied defendant's motion to dismiss and defendant entered a guilty plea. This court affirmed defendant's conviction and remanded for resentencing, holding that international law permitted sovereign nations to exercise jurisdiction over any persons seized while on board a stateless vessel. Citing Restatement Fourth of Foreign Relations Law § 402, the court observed that courts in the United States unanimously supported the notion that a state's jurisdiction over a stateless vessel also conferred jurisdiction over persons onboard. United States v. Aybar-Ulloa, 987 F.3d 1, 9. COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.