## Facts

- Mauricio Alvarez operated as captain of the *Miami Vice*, a Florida-registered 91-foot yacht offered for commercial charters for hire.
- United States Coast Guard (USCG) regulations require charter-for-hire vessels to have a USCG-licensed captain who has completed a USCG-approved captain’s-license course covering passenger-safety practices (including steps to take before starting engines, such as taking a passenger count).
- Alvarez never took the USCG course and never held a USCG captain’s license.
- Alvarez knew a license was required and had previously been cited and warned by authorities that the way the *Miami Vice* was being chartered was illegal in part because he lacked a valid license.
- During a charter, Alvarez brought the *Miami Vice* to an island and ran the yacht onto the shore rather than using an anchor.
- Passengers C.M. and R.M.P. swam behind the yacht; Alvarez also swam in that area.
- Alvarez raised the swim ladder and went to the helm to leave, but he did not clearly announce that the yacht was departing right away.
- C.M. and R.M.P., unaware the engines were about to start, jumped back into the water behind the stern.
- Alvarez did not check that everyone was back on board, did not keep watch behind the yacht, and did not assign someone to watch the stern before starting the engines.
- Alvarez started the engines and immediately put the yacht in reverse to back away from the island.
- R.M.P. was pulled under the yacht and killed by the propeller.
- Alvarez tested positive for cocaine after the incident.
- A federal grand jury indicted Alvarez for negligently causing R.M.P.’s death under the Seaman’s Manslaughter Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1115.
- Alvarez moved to dismiss the indictment on constitutional grounds; after the motion was denied, he pleaded guilty while reserving the right to appeal that denial and received a 33-month prison sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1115 is unconstitutional because it permits criminal conviction based on simple negligence.
2. Whether § 1115 is void for vagueness as applied to a charter captain’s conduct causing a passenger’s death.
3. Whether § 1115 is unconstitutionally overbroad.
4. Whether § 1115 violates the presumption of innocence or the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by allegedly shifting the burden to the defendant.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Alvarez’s motion to dismiss the indictment.
- The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1115 is constitutional, including its use of a negligence standard in this maritime safety setting.
- The court rejected Alvarez’s vagueness and overbreadth challenges.
- The court rejected Alvarez’s arguments that § 1115 violates the presumption of innocence or the right to remain silent.
- The court affirmed Alvarez’s conviction and 33-month sentence.

## Legal Principles

- Congress may define certain public-safety offenses to allow criminal liability based on negligence, particularly where the defendant is responsible for the safety of others in a tightly regulated activity such as commercial vessel operations.
- A statute is not void for vagueness as applied when a person of ordinary intelligence has fair notice of what conduct is prohibited and the statute supplies standards that limit arbitrary enforcement; this may be assessed in light of the regulated context and the defendant’s role.
- Overbreadth is generally a limited doctrine most often used for laws affecting speech; outside that setting, courts typically evaluate the statute as applied rather than invalidating it based on hypothetical marginal situations.
- A criminal statute does not violate the presumption of innocence or the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination merely because it defines elements that the government must prove; the prosecution must still prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defendant need not testify.

## Conclusion

United States v. Alvarez, 809 Fed. Appx. 562 (2020), upheld a seaman’s manslaughter prosecution arising from a charter passenger’s death after an unlicensed captain backed a large yacht away from shore without basic passenger-safety checks. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss, holding that 18 U.S.C. § 1115 constitutionally permits negligence-based liability in this setting and is not void for vagueness, overbroad, or inconsistent with the presumption of innocence or the right to remain silent.
