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

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (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 @ Sea Petitioner was abord, in the Court[s] error, was subject to the jurisdiction of Nicaraguan International Code[s], and therefore not the jurisdiction of the United States of American Statutory law[s]J, including Title 46 § 70503(a) OR § 70506(a), exceeding the powers of Congress under the Federal Constitution @ Art. I. Section 8, & Clause 10. hereafter then causing Montoya's judgment & sentence invalid? (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 Lawl[s], 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 acquittal, when Petitoner explained the vessel was in international Waters? C( 2. )]