(1.)Was the criminal jurisdiction of the United States based
upon territorial principle, and unlawfully conferred to the
U.S.A. by implication given to extraterritorial effect. Both the
District Court & Appeals Court[s] err in opining that the VESSEL
Petitoner was seized from, was not subject to the jurisdiction of
the U.S.A. , and because criminal jurisdiction of the U.S.A. is
wholly statutory & without standing in another sovereignty, as in
Nicaragua Central America international water jurisdiction?

(2.)The VESSEL (a) Sea Petitioner was abord, in the CourtEs]
subject to the jurisdiction of Nicaraguan
International CodeEs], and therefore not the jurisdiction of the
United States of American Statutory lawEs], including Title 46 §
70503(a) OR § 70506(a), exceeding the powers of Congress under
the Federal Constitution (a) Art. I. Section
hereafter then causing Montoya's judgment & sentence invalid?error , was
8, 10. & Clause

(3.)Because the subject VESSEL was not from the registry of the
U.S.A., nor any of the territories therefrom, the Congress was
without POWER, to kidnap Montoya from an international vessel, to
thereafter be punished by Maritime Drug LawEs], as that
enforcement ACT was unconstitutional in the Nicaraguan Waters?

(4.)The U.S. District Court, as well the U.S.A. Court of
APPEAL'S for the Eleventh Circuit, both knew, or should have
known there cannot be jurisdiction to hold Maritime Drug Law
Enforcement Act, of Title 46 U.S.C.A., but refused to allow
Counselor Victor Daniel Martinez, argue for an acguittal, when
Petitoner explained the vessel was in international Waters?

Was the criminal jurisdiction of the United States based upon territorial principle, and unlawfully conferred to the U.S.A. by implication given to extraterritorial effect