- Free Consultation 24/7: (813) 222-2220 Tap Here To Call Us
Submarine and Defendants Are Sunk | Tampa Cocaine Attorney
Cocaine Smuggling by Submarine: How Federal Prosecutors Target Maritime Drug Trafficking Cases
Federal cocaine trafficking cases often begin far from Florida’s shores. Some start thousands of miles away in the Pacific Ocean, involving semi-submersible vessels, international smuggling organizations, and multi-ton shipments of cocaine destined for the United States.
As a federal criminal defense attorney, I have followed maritime drug trafficking prosecutions for decades. Years ago, attorneys Steve Crawford, Michael Maddux, Ken Siegel, and I were involved in one of the first federal cases involving a submarine-like vessel intercepted near the Galapagos Islands carrying thousands of pounds of cocaine.
The vessel was destroyed, the crew was transported to the United States, and the defendants ultimately faced prosecution in federal court in Tampa.
Today, these prosecutions remain a major priority for federal law enforcement agencies, including the DEA, FBI, Coast Guard, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and the United States Attorney’s Office.
The Rise of Cocaine Smuggling Submarines
Drug trafficking organizations have become increasingly sophisticated in their efforts to transport cocaine from South America to North America.
Traditional methods once relied heavily on:
- Speedboats
- Fishing vessels
- Cargo ships
- Aircraft
However, traffickers eventually developed semi-submersible vessels designed to evade radar, aircraft surveillance, and maritime interdiction efforts.
These vessels often travel hundreds or thousands of miles across international waters while carrying several tons of cocaine.
Many are intentionally designed to be difficult to detect and are frequently scuttled or sunk when law enforcement approaches.
Federal Law Targets Drug Trafficking Vessels Before Drugs Are Even Found
One of the most significant developments in maritime drug enforcement was Congress’s enactment of the Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act (DTVIA), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2285.
The statute criminalizes operating or embarking on certain stateless semi-submersible vessels in international waters.
This law was designed to address a recurring problem faced by federal authorities. In many cases, crews would sink the vessel and destroy evidence before law enforcement could recover the cocaine.
Congress responded by creating a separate offense focused on the vessel itself.
Federal prosecutors no longer needed to prove that tons of cocaine were successfully recovered from the ocean floor if they could establish that the defendants were operating a prohibited vessel covered by federal law.
The Eleventh Circuit Upholds Federal Authority
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of federal laws targeting maritime cocaine smuggling.
Defendants challenged the statute on numerous grounds, including:
- Due process violations
- Vagueness challenges
- Double jeopardy concerns
- Congressional authority under the High Seas Clause
- Burden-shifting arguments
The Eleventh Circuit rejected those challenges and concluded that Congress possessed the constitutional authority to criminalize the operation of stateless semi-submersible vessels on the high seas.
The court emphasized that vessels operating without nationality enjoy few protections under international law and may be subject to enforcement actions by the United States.
Why Maritime Cocaine Cases Are Different
International trafficking prosecutions differ dramatically from traditional state drug cases.
Federal maritime investigations often involve:
International Investigations
Evidence may originate from multiple countries and involve foreign witnesses, intelligence reports, and international law enforcement cooperation.
Massive Drug Quantities
Maritime cases frequently involve thousands of kilograms of cocaine rather than the relatively small quantities seen in street-level prosecutions.
Mandatory Minimum Sentences
Federal trafficking statutes often impose severe mandatory minimum penalties based on drug weight.
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Defendants may be arrested thousands of miles from the United States yet still face prosecution in federal court.
Common Defenses in Federal Trafficking Cases
Although federal maritime trafficking cases are aggressively prosecuted, every case requires a careful review of the evidence.
Potential defenses may include:
Jurisdictional Challenges
Federal prosecutors must establish jurisdiction under applicable maritime statutes.
Knowledge and Intent
The government often must prove that a defendant knowingly participated in the trafficking venture.
Crew Member Defenses
Not every individual aboard a vessel occupies the same role. Some defendants may have limited involvement or knowledge compared to organizers and financiers.
Constitutional Issues
Searches, seizures, statements, and evidence collection procedures must comply with constitutional requirements.
Federal Drug Trafficking Penalties
The consequences of a federal trafficking conviction can be life-changing.
Potential penalties may include:
| Offense | Possible Penalties |
|---|---|
| Cocaine Trafficking | Mandatory minimum prison sentences |
| Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act Violations | Lengthy federal imprisonment |
| Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act Violations | Significant federal prison exposure |
| Conspiracy Charges | Additional penalties and sentencing enhancements |
| Money Laundering Allegations | Asset forfeiture and additional imprisonment |
Federal sentencing often depends on:
- Drug quantity
- Criminal history
- Role in the offense
- Acceptance of responsibility
- Cooperation considerations
Why Early Representation Matters
Federal drug trafficking investigations often begin months or years before arrests occur.
Agents may collect:
- Electronic communications
- GPS tracking data
- Vessel records
- Financial information
- Witness statements
- Surveillance evidence
Early intervention by experienced federal defense counsel can be critical when evaluating the government’s evidence and identifying potential defenses.
Tampa Federal Drug Trafficking Defense Attorney
I am W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr., a Board-Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer and former prosecutor with decades of experience handling serious state and federal drug prosecutions.
From international cocaine trafficking allegations to federal conspiracy charges and maritime drug enforcement cases, I have represented individuals facing some of the most serious drug allegations prosecuted in federal court.
If you or a family member is under investigation or has been charged with federal drug trafficking, cocaine smuggling, conspiracy, or maritime drug offenses, immediate legal representation is critical.
Learn more about my experience at https://drug2go.com/about/
Contact my office at https://drug2go.com/contact/ or call (813) 222-2220 for a confidential consultation.
Fighting for you or a friend.
Original Post 2011
A Submarine and the Crew / Defendants Are Sunk after this recent ruling from the Eleventh Circuit. Years ago my friends Steve Crawford, Michael Maddux, Ken Siegel, and I litigated the first case where thousands of pounds of Cocaine were found in the Pacific Ocean near the Galapagos Islands. We were quit troubled that the submarine was destroyed and the crew were brought to Tampa’a Middle District of Florida Federal Courthouse.
The Complete Opinion is Here for a Free Download:
Free Federal Submarine Case Online for Download | Complete Opinion.
Here is Tip From One of Our friends at the Federal Public Defender’s Office:
Begin Quote
“In this second published decision in as many days addressing the semi-submersible statute, the Eleventh Circuit once again rules that in enacting the Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2285, Congress did not exceed its power under the High Seas Clause of the Constitution. Today s panel, however, disagrees with the rationale employed by yesterday s panel (without mentioning yesterday s decision). Yesterday s panel, in United States v. Valencia, 09-14204, relied on the international law principles on which it had previously relied in addressing the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act to conclude that Congress acted properly within its constitutional authority under the High Seas Clause in passing the DTVIA.
Today’s panel, however, held that those international law principles only apply to laws that govern the conduct of flagged vessels, and have no applicability to the stateless vessels governed by the DTVIA, because such vessels are international pariahs that have no internationally recognized right to navigate freely on the high seas.
Because the defendants in today s case did not plead guilty but were convicted following a bench trial before Judge Lazzara, the Eleventh Circuit was also required to address other constitutional challenges found waived by defendant s guilty pleas in yesterday’s case.
The Court found that the statute was not void for vagueness as applied to defendants.
The Court also upheld the statute against a procedural due process challenge, rejecting defendants argument that the DTVIA places the burden on them to prove that they are not trafficking drugs. The Court held that even if appellants proved that they were not trafficking drugs, they would still be guilty of violating the DTVIA if the government proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, all of the elements of the crime. Because the DTVIA does not shift the burden of proof to the accused as to any element of the crime, the Court wrote, but rather creates a wholly new crime that Congress is within its right to define, the Due Process Clause is not violated.
The Court also summarily rejected appellants argument that the DTVIA violates their substantive due process rights because it is not rationally related to any legitimate government interest.
The Court further found that appellants were not punished in violation of the double jeopardy clause, noting that the Federal Government s has a long history of charging and convicting defendants of both conspiracies and substantive offenses, that the legislative history of DTVIA makes no mention of a desire to make each offense in that section exclusive, and that the DTVIA specifically provides for both a conspiracy charge and a substantive offense.
Moving from constitutional issues to one of statutory construction, appellants argued that the statutory phrases navigating . . . through, or from waters beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea of a single country or a lateral limit of that country s territorial sea with an adjacent country and without nationality are elements of the crime which must be proved by the government beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the government must prove scienter with respect to these elements.
The Court held that the phrase beginning navigating . . . through, or from waters is solely jurisdictional and does not bear on culpability, and thus need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt nor proven with scienter. It determined that it need not address whether the without nationality element bears solely on jurisdiction or on jurisdiction and culpability, because it concluded from the record that there was ample evidence that Appellants knew the Vessel was not registered in Columbia and any error would be harmless.”
End Quote
Cocaine Submarine Bust Video
Tampa Cocaine Attorney | Lawyer Near Tampa 33601
Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220
Share this:
Like this:
Like Loading…
Related
Typical Drug Bust Story
Drug Crimes Possession and Distribution Drugs / Marijuana in State or Federal Court Stories of Typical Drug Busts Frequently, we see drug busts for drug crimes when police conduct a simple traffic stop. Sometimes narcotics squads obtain a search warrant based upon someone tattling to the police. Sometimes…
April 26, 2019
In “Marijuana Laws”
6 Drugs The Feds Like to Prosecute and the Consequences
Drugs The Feds Like to ProsecuteTrafficking in these 6 drugs constitutes 97 percent of Federal Drug Prosecutions. How does the DEA, law enforcement, and Federal Prosecutions impact drug trafficking? Sometimes these policy choices impact society in ways that are counter-intuitive. When the focus goes to synthetic opioids like oxycodone, the…
May 21, 2014
In “Crack Cocaine”
Drug Sentences Slashed in Cocaine Cases
Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Lawyer for cocaine cases notes new United States Supreme Court case law on Mandatory minimum sentencing for Drug offenses under the Fair Sentencing Act’s more lenient mandatory minimum provisions.The Court ruled today that the favorable provisions apply to offenders who committed crack cocaine crime before effective…
We Accept the Following Credit Cards:
