## Facts

- A federal grand jury in Miami returned a twelve-count indictment charging Manuel Antonio Noriega and Luis Del Cid with participating in an international conspiracy to import cocaine and related materials into and out of the United States, along with related RICO and narcotics offenses.
- The indictment alleged Noriega used senior positions in Panama’s security forces to assist and protect drug traffickers, including members of the Medellín Cartel, in exchange for payments.
- Alleged conduct included protecting cocaine shipments moving through Panama to the United States; facilitating transshipment and sale of chemicals used to produce cocaine; providing refuge and operational support to traffickers; agreeing to protect a cocaine laboratory in Panama; and enabling movement of narcotics proceeds into Panamanian banks.
- Del Cid, a Panamanian Defense Forces officer and Noriega’s personal secretary, was alleged to have served as liaison, courier, and emissary in dealings with traffickers.
- Before Noriega was in U.S. custody, counsel made a special appearance and moved to dismiss on jurisdictional and immunity grounds; after Noriega’s capture and transfer to the United States in January 1990, defendants renewed and expanded motions to dismiss.
- The district court issued an omnibus order resolving the motions to dismiss.

## Issues

1. Whether U.S. narcotics and RICO statutes could be applied to alleged conduct occurring largely outside U.S. territory when the charged scheme targeted and affected the United States.
2. Whether Noriega was immune from prosecution based on claimed head-of-state status or diplomatic immunity.
3. Whether alleged prisoner-of-war status under the Geneva Conventions required dismissal or otherwise barred prosecution for pre-capture narcotics crimes.
4. Whether the asserted illegality under international law of the U.S. military intervention and Noriega’s capture deprived the court of personal jurisdiction or required dismissal.
5. Whether due process or abuse-of-process principles required dismissal based on the circumstances of apprehension and prosecution.

## Decision

- The court denied all motions to dismiss and held it had jurisdiction over Noriega and Del Cid.
- The court held the charged statutes could apply extraterritorially because the alleged conspiracy was directed at the United States and produced substantial domestic effects.
- The court rejected head-of-state immunity, relying on the Executive’s nonrecognition of Noriega as Panama’s legitimate head of state.
- The court rejected diplomatic immunity because Noriega was not accredited or otherwise within protected diplomatic categories.
- The court held that any prisoner-of-war claim under the Geneva Conventions did not bar prosecution for pre-capture narcotics offenses.
- The court held the manner of apprehension and alleged international-law defects in the military action did not divest the court of jurisdiction and did not amount to a due process bar.

## Legal Principles

- U.S. criminal statutes may reach extraterritorial conduct when Congress so intends and the conduct is aimed at, or has substantial effects within, the United States, consistent with objective territorial and protective jurisdiction principles.
- Head-of-state immunity in U.S. courts depends on recognition determinations of the U.S. Executive; a nonrecognized claimant cannot invoke such immunity.
- Diplomatic immunity requires satisfaction of statutory and treaty-based criteria (including accreditation or qualifying status); it is not available absent those conditions.
- The Geneva Conventions principally regulate treatment and detention; they do not confer immunity from domestic prosecution for pre-capture, non-belligerent crimes such as narcotics trafficking.
- A court’s criminal jurisdiction is generally not defeated by the method of a defendant’s capture once the defendant is before the court, absent conduct so extreme as to violate due process.

## Conclusion

The district court sustained federal jurisdiction over foreign defendants charged with an international narcotics and RICO conspiracy affecting the United States, rejected asserted head-of-state and diplomatic immunity, held that claimed prisoner-of-war status did not preclude prosecution for pre-capture drug offenses, and declined to dismiss based on the circumstances of military capture and transfer to U.S. custody.


United States v. Noriega, 746 F. Supp. 1506 (S.D. Fla. 1990)