# United States v. Delgado-Garcia, Jose

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · July 23, 2004 · 374 F.3d 1337

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9439403

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jose DELGADO-GARCIA, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** July 23, 2004
- **Citations:** 374 F.3d 1337; 362 U.S. App. D.C. 512; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 15275
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Randolph
- **Judges:** Sentelle, Randolph, Rogers
- **Cited by:** 68 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9439403

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a statute that "protects the borders of the United States against illegal immigration" would apply to extraterritorial acts by foreign nationals despite the lack of a clear statement of extraterritorial application because "`the natural inference from the characte…
- explaining, without deciding, that even if due process requires a sufficient nexus, the indictment in that case “clearly alleged that appellants intended to smuggle aliens into the United States, thereby causing effects there” so that “there was no arguable facial constitution…
- concluding that statutes prohibiting inducement of aliens to enter United States illegally applied extraterritorially because, inter alia, they were "fundamentally international" in "focus and effect"
- reasoning that “[m]any incomplete attempts” to bring aliens to the United States “occur outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States” because the offender “will ordinarily also be outside the United States during the attempt”
- finding that defendants' argument that the statute of conviction did not apply extraterritorially, and thus that no offense had been stated against them, did not deprive the district court of subject matter jurisdiction

## Opinion text

RANDOLPH, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I join all of the court’s opinion except its statement that by pleading guilty a defendant waives any claim that the offense to which he pled guilty is not a crime. United States v. Idowu, 105 F.3d 728 (D.C.Cir.1997), suggests a view contrary to the court’s. The issue was neither briefed nor argued and, for the reasons the court gives, did not need to be reached.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9439403. Public record. Not legal advice.