John Wayne Scantlebury, et al. v. United States

Petitioners fought extradition for a single sealed trafficking charge from 2004-14, the last 31 months in prison with bail revoked. In a co-defendant’s 2007-08 pre-trial process in a related case, the United States admitted that separate third parties committed the charged offense, without amending the extradition request. In 2013, a petitioner waived extradition to fight the charges here, prompting a sealed motion to dismiss under FED. R, CRIM. P. 48(a) and a sealed dismissal without prejudice. After release in 2014, petitioners sued federal officers in a tort suit, leading the district court to unseal the related criminal case. Petitioners moved the court to alter the judgment to dismissal with prejudice and for lack of personal jurisdiction. The district court denied relief inter alia as a collateral attack on the indictment. Petitioners appealed, with reputational harm as Article III injury. The court of appeals assumed appellate jurisdiction (unlike other circuits) but dismissed under Article III partly on a technical argument about relief available from Rule 48(a); the court did not consider petitioners’ personal-jurisdiction argument, which was foreclosed by circuit precedent. The question presented are:

1. Whether criminal appeals from dismissals without prejudice are “final” under 28 U.S.C. §1291.

2. Whether personal jurisdiction’s minimumcontacts analysis applies in criminal cases, as implied by this Court’s extending that analysis to taxation in the supervening decision in No. 18-457.

3. Whether impact on the cross-border tort suit – a type of federal-officer liability being reviewed in No. 17-1678 – or dismissal for lack of personal-jurisdiction (i.e., showing a lack of contact) satisfy Article III.