United States v. Waldir Forbes-Suarez ( 2014 )

Case: 13-10711 Date Filed: 01/27/2014 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-10711
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:09-cr-00486-SCB-EAJ-3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
WALDIR FORBES-SUAREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(January 27, 2014)
Before HULL, MARCUS, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Waldir Forbes-Suarez appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute
cocaine while aboard a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. He
Case: 13-10711 Date Filed: 01/27/2014 Page: 2 of 2
contends that the district court plainly erred by failing to dismiss his indictment
because the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (“MDLEA”) is unconstitutional
as applied to his conduct. He points to United States v. Bellaizac-Hurtado, 700
F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 2012); then, he argues that the phrase “through international
waters” set forth in his plea agreement does not mean (and thus does not admit)
that his boats actually left territorial waters.
Forbes-Suarez waived the right to raise his present challenge to his
conviction by entering an unconditional guilty plea. See United States v. Ternus,
598 F.3d 1251, 1254 (11th Cir. 2010); United States v. Yunis, 723 F.2d 795, 796
(11th Cir. 1984). In addition, no decision of this Court or the Supreme Court
supports Forbes-Suarez’s contention that his admitting the vessels in his
conspiracy used “international waters” fails to include inherently a concession that
the vessels went outside of “territorial waters.” In a case like this one,
“international waters” has a customary meaning and is not ambiguous. For
MDLEA proceedings, territorial waters ≠ international waters, at least in the
absence of binding precedent saying something else. Therefore, the district court
did not commit plain error by failing to dismiss his indictment sua sponte.
AFFIRMED.
2