In The United States, Appellants v. Antonio Huertas, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case involving an appeal from a decision by the Circuit Court for East Florida. At issue was whether or not Antonio Huertas had been properly convicted and sentenced to death for murder in 1831 by a military commission established under Spanish law during its occupation of Florida prior to cession to the U.S., as well as if such conviction would be valid under American law after cession occurred in 1821. Ultimately, it was determined that while there were some irregularities with how his trial had been conducted, they did not rise to the level where he should have received any relief from his sentence; thus upholding his conviction and sentence of death imposed upon him by said military commission before cession took place.

In the United States v. Antonio Huertas, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a Spanish subject could be tried in an American court for crimes committed on board of a Spanish vessel while it was within US waters. The majority opinion held that such trial would violate international law and thus should not take place. However, Justice Story dissented from this view and argued that there is no legal impediment to trying foreign subjects who commit offenses against US laws within its jurisdiction. He further noted that if foreign vessels are allowed to enter into US ports without any consequences for criminal acts committed onboard then it will lead to chaos and anarchy as criminals can easily escape justice by sailing away under another flag or nationality when accused of their wrongdoings. As such, he concluded that allowing trials of foreign subjects in American courts is necessary for preserving order and protecting citizens’ rights both at home and abroad.