U.S. v. Pinto-Mejia
| Citation | 728 F.2d 142 |
| Decision Date | 15 February 1984 |
| Docket Number | O,PINTO-MEJI,Nos. 82-1412,s. 82-1412 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gsaac Gorgerlando Espinosa Sanchez, Jorge Eliecer Cordoba- Lezcano, Luis Ancizar Castenad-Garjales, Luis Alfonso Barker-Michel, Carlos Osorio-Alvarez, Luis Francisco Mayorga, Jose Felix Angulo-Quinones, Roberto Nunez-Riasco, Blas Enrique Vargas-Rios, Euclidez Vello-Garcia, Defendants- Appellants. 82-1413, 82-1415 to 82-1417, 82-1422 to 82-1424. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) |
Before KEARSE, PIERCE and JOHN W. PECK *, Circuit Judges.
Appellant Vargas-Rios having filed a petition for rehearing with a suggestion for rehearing en banc on October 28, 1983, and Appellee having filed a petition for rehearing with a suggestion for rehearing en banc on November 23, 1983; and
The Court having given due consideration to both petitions; and USA v. Pinto-Mejia, etc., No. 84-1412, etc.
The Court having noted in both petitions an apparent misinterpretation in one respect of the Court's opinion of October 14, 1983, 720 F.2d 248, it is now
ORDERED as follows:
(1) In order to clarify that the opinion did not mean to imply that a defendant cannot concede, or otherwise waive his right to contest, a particular fact that is essential to the court's jurisdiction, the final sentence of part II.A. of the opinion, at 255, is modified to read as follows:
Since it is a responsibility of the appellate court no less than of the trial court to see to it that the jurisdiction of the trial court, which is defined and limited by statute, is not exceeded, Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149, 152, 29 S.Ct. 42, 43, 53 L.Ed. 126 (1908), and since the stipulation is construed infra to preserve issues of fact and law arising from the stopping and boarding of the RICARDO as well as the seizure of marijuana, we will entertain on appeal defendants' challenge to the court's jurisdiction.
(2) In all other respects the petitions for rehearing are hereby denied.
* Of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Aguilar
... ... to the Attorney General of the United States on March 23, 1982, to protest "[t]he current administration of United States law [which] prohibits us from sheltering these refugees from Central America." ... The following day, several hundred people rallied at the Federal Building ... [;i]f it chooses to do so, it may legislate [contrary to] the limits posed by international law." United States v. Pinto-Mejia, 720 F.2d 248, 259 (2d Cir.1983), modified on other grounds, 728 F.2d 142 (2d Cir.1984) ... For appellants' argument to have any ... ...
-
United States v. Feola
... ... discharging this task, we must look to the whole context of this conversation, not the conversation in isolation as Rosner would apparently have us do. We notice that the preceding day, October 14th, was occupied by a series of conversations between Torsone, Farese, Feola, and Cercena. At about ... See, e.g., United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. at 86-87, 100 S.Ct. at 2550; United States v. Pinto-Mejia, 720 F.2d 248, 255 (2d Cir.1983), reh. denied 728 F.2d 142 (2d Cir.1984); United States v. Streifel, 665 F.2d 414, 419 n. 6 (2d Cir.1981), ... ...
-
U.S. v. Aguilar
... ... to the Attorney General of the United States on March 23, 1982, to protest "[t]he current administration of United States law [which] prohibits us from sheltering these refugees from Central America." ... The following day, several hundred people rallied at the Federal Building ... [;i]f it chooses to do so, it may legislate [contrary to] the limits posed by international law." United States v. Pinto-Mejia, 720 F.2d ... Page 680 ... 248, 259 (2d Cir.1983), modified on other grounds, 728 F.2d 142 (2d Cir.1984) ... For appellants' ... ...
-
US v. Gerena
... ... Vicknair, at 380-381. Similarly in United States v. Sarda-Villa, 760 F.2d at 1236, and United States v. Pinto-Mejia, 720 F.2d 248, 255 (2d Cir.1983), modified, 728 F.2d 142 (2d Cir.1984), the respective courts both held that the mere fact that the defendants were crew members on board the fishing boat and were participants in the smuggling operation was insufficient to confer standing ... ...
-
Doctrines without borders: territorial jurisdiction and the force of international law in the wake of Rasul v. Bush.
...limits posed by international law].") (citing United States v. Pinto-Mejia, 720 F.2d 248, 259 (2d Cir. 1983), modified on other grounds, 728 F.2d 142 (2d Cir. 1984)); see, e.g., United States v. Greer, 956 F. Supp. 531, 535 (D. Vt. 1997) ("Although it is clear that Congress has the power to......