## Facts

- Omar Mohammed Ali Rezaq, a Palestinian associated with a terrorist organization, participated in the hijacking of EgyptAir Flight 648 after boarding in Athens on November 23, 1985.
- Shortly after takeoff, Rezaq and two accomplices used weapons to seize the aircraft and demanded that the pilot fly to Malta.
- During the incident, Rezaq shot multiple passengers at close range, killing two.
- Maltese authorities prosecuted Rezaq; he pleaded guilty to murder charges, served seven years, and was released in February 1993.
- After his release, U.S. authorities took Rezaq into custody in Nigeria and transported him to the United States.
- The United States prosecuted him in the District of Columbia for one count of aircraft piracy under 49 U.S.C. app. § 1472(n) (1994).
- At trial, Rezaq did not contest the hijacking but asserted insanity and obedience to military orders.
- A jury convicted him of aircraft piracy resulting in death; the district court imposed a life sentence and ordered restitution.

## Issues

1. Whether the air piracy statute or the Hague Convention barred a U.S. prosecution after Malta had prosecuted Rezaq for related conduct.
2. Whether the air piracy statute or international-law limits precluded prosecution because Rezaq was forcibly brought to the United States.
3. Whether the statute’s mandatory life sentence when “death results” required additional jurisdictional ties beyond those supporting the underlying air-piracy charge.
4. Whether admission of evidence concerning passenger deaths and injuries (including graphic materials) was unfairly prejudicial and required exclusion or bifurcation.
5. Whether publicity about an unrelated airplane crash during deliberations deprived Rezaq of an impartial jury.
6. Whether the restitution order was authorized and properly calculated.
7. Whether the district court’s handling of classified materials under CIPA, including use of substitutions and in camera review, violated Rezaq’s rights or required reversal.

## Decision

- The D.C. Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence in full.
- The court held that neither the air piracy statute nor the Hague Convention barred sequential prosecution by the United States after Malta’s prosecution.
- The court held that Rezaq’s presence in the United States satisfied the statute’s “found in the United States” requirement even if he was forcibly brought here; the Ker–Frisbie doctrine foreclosed relief based on the manner of rendition.
- The court upheld application of the “death results” provision, concluding no additional jurisdictional elements were required once statutory jurisdiction for the offense existed and deaths resulted.
- The court found no abuse of discretion in admitting evidence of the deaths and injuries and in declining to bifurcate or further limit that proof under Rule 403.
- The court found no basis to conclude that unrelated crash publicity tainted the jury’s deliberations.
- The court upheld the restitution award.
- The court upheld the district court’s CIPA process, including substitutions, and found no prejudice warranting reversal after appellate review of the classified record.

## Legal Principles

- Absent express statutory or treaty language to the contrary, a foreign prosecution does not bar a subsequent U.S. prosecution for the same episode under the separate-sovereigns principle.
- Under the Ker–Frisbie doctrine, a federal court generally may exercise jurisdiction over a defendant regardless of the means by which the defendant is brought before it, where statutory and constitutional jurisdictional requirements are otherwise satisfied.
- An air-piracy statute requiring life imprisonment (or death) when “death results” applies when (1) the statute’s jurisdictional basis for the offense is met and (2) deaths result from the piracy; additional jurisdictional ties are not required unless the statute states otherwise.
- Evidence relevant to elements of the offense and statutory sentencing factors may be admitted despite emotional impact if its probative value is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice under Rule 403; bifurcation is not required absent a showing of abuse of discretion.
- CIPA permits in camera judicial review and allows classified materials to be provided through substitutions or summaries if they afford the defendant substantially the same ability to present a defense.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit affirmed Rezaq’s aircraft-piracy conviction and mandatory life sentence, rejecting challenges based on prior Maltese prosecution, forcible rendition, statutory sentencing limits, evidentiary prejudice, juror publicity, restitution, and CIPA handling of classified materials.


United States v. Rezaq, 134 F.3d 1121 (D.C. Cir. 1998)