Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

United States v. Pickett

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided March 2, 2010No. 09-30142Published

1Concurring in the judgmentEdith Brown Clement, Circuit Judge

Pickett’s sole argument on appeal is that there was no “border crossing” within the meaning of Stone because he moved to shore from a federal enclave as defined in OCSLA and government agents were aware that he had not made an intervening stop in a foreign country. Confronting this argument requires, as a first step, that we determine whether CM15 is an OCSLA *236situs and thus a federal enclave in international waters. Applying longstanding Fifth Circuit precedents, I would hold that CM15 is not an OCSLA situs and affirm the district court on this ground, without reaching the question whether we…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Stewart v. Dutra Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  2. Ronnie W. Longmire v. Sea Drilling Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
  3. United States v. James Cabaccang, United States of America v. Richard T. Cabaccang, United States of America v. Roy Toves CabaccangCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. Producers Drilling Company and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Luther GrayCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
  5. Grand Isle Shipyard Inc. v. SEACOR MARINE, LLC.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API