## Facts

- Emmanuel Ormand Neil, a citizen of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, worked as a cabin steward on the *Elation*, a Panamanian-registered cruise ship owned by Carnival Cruise Lines.
- The *Elation* operated a round-trip cruise departing from and returning to San Pedro, California, with predominantly U.S. passengers and stops in Mexico.
- A 12-year-old U.S. citizen was assigned to a cabin Neil serviced.
- On October 5, 6, and 7, 2000, while the ship was in Mexican territorial waters, Neil touched the child’s breasts and buttocks through her clothing.
- After the voyage, the child’s parents reported the conduct; the matter was referred to the FBI, and Neil admitted the conduct and signed a written confession.
- The child missed school for psychological counseling, costing the family approximately $2,000.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(3), through the “special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 7(8), authorized U.S. criminal jurisdiction over sexual contact occurring on a foreign-flag vessel in Mexican territorial waters when the victim was a U.S. national and the voyage departed from and returned to the United States.
2. Whether applying the statute to this conduct was consistent with international law.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Neil’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
- The court held that Congress clearly extended the relevant criminal prohibition extraterritorially by incorporating § 7(8)’s definition of special maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
- The court concluded the facts fit the statutory conditions because the offense was committed against a U.S. national on a vessel during a voyage with scheduled U.S. departure and arrival.
- The court held that exercising jurisdiction in these circumstances did not violate international law.
- The judgment of conviction (entered on Neil’s conditional guilty plea) and sentence were affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- Federal criminal statutes generally do not apply extraterritorially absent a clear indication of congressional intent; where Congress clearly provides for extraterritorial reach, courts apply the statute as written.
- 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(3) applies within the “special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,” and § 7(8) extends that jurisdiction to specified offenses on certain voyages outside U.S. territory when committed by or against a U.S. national.
- Extraterritorial application of U.S. criminal law is permissible if consistent with international law; jurisdiction may rest on accepted bases such as the nationality principle (protecting U.S. nationals abroad).
- A foreign flag and the offense location in a coastal state’s territorial sea do not preclude U.S. jurisdiction when Congress has extended jurisdiction and international law permits concurrent jurisdiction.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that §§ 2244(a)(3) and 7(8) authorized U.S. jurisdiction over sexual contact against a U.S. minor on a foreign-flag cruise ship in Mexican territorial waters during a round-trip voyage to and from a U.S. port, and that this exercise of jurisdiction was consistent with international law.


United States v. Neil, 312 F.3d 419 (9th Cir. 2002)