## Facts

- Federal prosecutors alleged Javier Vasquez-Velasco was a member of a Guadalajara-based drug trafficking enterprise that distributed narcotics into the United States in the early 1980s.
- The government contended that aggressive U.S. drug enforcement efforts caused major financial losses to the enterprise and triggered retaliatory violence against persons believed to be connected to U.S. enforcement.
- In January 1985 in Guadalajara, Mexico, John Walker (a U.S. citizen) and Alberto Radelat (a U.S. lawful permanent resident) were visiting Mexico and were not linked to drug activity or the DEA.
- The government alleged cartel members, including Vasquez-Velasco, mistook Walker and Radelat for DEA agents and beat and killed them as part of a campaign intended to intimidate U.S. law enforcement and its potential local collaborators.
- Vasquez-Velasco was indicted and convicted in the Central District of California for violent crimes in aid of racketeering under 18 U.S.C. § 1959, based on the murders committed to further his position in the enterprise.
- He received a sentence exceeding ten years, including a life sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1959 may be applied to murders committed in Mexico when the alleged purpose was to further a racketeering enterprise tied to drug trafficking into the United States.
2. Whether applying § 1959 to this conduct is consistent with international law principles governing extraterritorial jurisdiction.
3. Whether joinder with co-defendants and the denial of severance created unfair prejudice requiring separate trials.
4. Whether a sentence greater than ten years could be imposed without a special jury verdict specifying particular predicate conduct.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held that § 1959 may be applied extraterritorially to the Mexico murders on the facts shown.
- The court concluded extraterritorial jurisdiction was reasonable and consistent with international law, including the objective territorial and protective principles.
- The court held joinder was proper and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, relying in part on limiting instructions and the jury’s ability to separate the evidence by defendant.
- The court rejected the argument that a special verdict was required to impose a sentence above ten years, finding the indictment and instructions sufficiently clear that the jury convicted on participation in the murders.

## Legal Principles

- A federal penal statute may be applied to conduct abroad when there is a sufficient nexus to U.S. interests and the application is reasonable under international law.
- Under the objective territorial principle, the United States may assert jurisdiction over foreign conduct that causes detrimental effects in the United States.
- Under the protective principle, the United States may assert jurisdiction over foreign conduct that threatens U.S. security or governmental functions, including intimidation directed at U.S. law enforcement.
- Joinder of defendants is proper where charges arise from a common scheme or plan; severance is warranted only upon a strong showing that limiting instructions and trial management cannot prevent unfair prejudice.
- When the indictment and instructions make clear the basis of conviction for an offense carrying enhanced penalties, a court may impose the authorized sentence without a special verdict form identifying specific acts.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit sustained the extraterritorial use of the VICAR statute for cartel-related murders committed in Mexico because the violence was directed at U.S. law enforcement interests and connected to a U.S.-targeted trafficking enterprise, and it affirmed the joint trial rulings and the life sentence without requiring a special verdict.


United States v. Vasquez-Velasco, 15 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 1994)