Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings United States v. Dustin Sean McCabe — S.D. Fla., No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC TRIAL BRIEF by USA as to Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 75)

Court filing

TRIAL BRIEF by USA as to Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 75)

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Filed2025-03-01

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC · Doc. 75 · 2025-03-01 · Docket on CourtListener

Summary

A joint proposed jury instruction and special verdict form as to seaman's manslaughter in United States v. Dustin Sean McCabe, Case No. 24-80103-CR-CANNON, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered March 1, 2025 as Document 75. The United States and the defendant state that it supersedes their proposals at Docket Entries 54 and 70. The proposed instruction for Count One under 18 U.S.C. § 1115 sets out three elements, naming the M/V SOUTHERN COMFORT, and defines negligence and proximate cause. The proposed verdict form has the jury decide separately whether a loss of life was caused in the defendant's role as a person employed on the vessel or as its owner or charterer. The four-page filing is signed by an Assistant United States Attorney and defense counsel.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 24-80103-CR-CANNON 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
v. 
 
DUSTIN SEAN McCABE, 
 
 
Defendant. 
___________________________________/ 
 
JOINT PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION AND SPECIAL VERDICT FORM 
AS TO SEAMAN’S MANSLAUGHTER 
 
 
The United States of America and Defendant Dustin Sean McCabe, by and through their 
undersigned counsel (collectively, the “Parties”), respectfully submit this Joint Proposed Jury 
Instruction and Special Verdict Form as to Seaman’s Manslaughter. This joint proposal supersedes 
the proposals the Parties submitted at Docket Entries 54 and 70.  
PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION: SEAMAN’S MANSLAUGHTER 
Seaman’s Manslaughter 
18 U.S.C. § 1115 
 
Count One charges the Defendant with seaman’s manslaughter. It’s a Federal crime for 
a captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on a vessel to engage in misconduct, 
negligence, or inattention to his duties that proximately causes the loss of a life, or for an owner 
or charterer of a vessel to engage in fraud, neglect, connivance, misconduct, or violation of law 
that proximately causes the loss of a life. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following facts are 
proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) The Defendant was an owner, charterer, captain, engineer, pilot, or other 
person employed on the M/V SOUTHERN COMFORT; 
 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 75   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2025   Page 1 of 4

2 
 
 
(2) A person lost his or her life; and 
 
(3) The Defendant was a captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on 
the vessel, and a loss of life was proximately caused by the Defendant’s 
misconduct, negligence, or inattention to his duties on the vessel; 
 
or  
 
The Defendant was an owner or charterer of the vessel, and a loss of life 
was proximately caused by the Defendant’s fraud, neglect, connivance, 
misconduct, or violation of law as the owner or charterer of the vessel.1 
  
“Negligence” is a breach of duty, which means an omission to perform some duty, or a 
violation of some rule or standard of care, which is made to govern and control one in the 
discharge of some duty. 
Negligent conduct “proximately causes” a loss of life if the loss of life resulted from the 
negligence and it was reasonably foreseeable that the negligent conduct was or could be a threat 
to the lives of others. 
As you will see in the Verdict Form, when evaluating the third element, you must decide 
each of the two subparts separately. First, if you unanimously decide that the Defendant was a 
captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on the vessel, then you must decide whether a 
loss of life was proximately caused by the Defendant’s misconduct, negligence, or inattention 
to his duties on the vessel. Second, if you unanimously decide that the Defendant was an owner 
or charterer of the vessel, then you must decide whether a loss of life was proximately caused by 
the Defendant’s fraud, neglect, connivance, misconduct, or violation of law as the owner or 
 
1 While the Government’s prior submission had “if a person lost his or her life”  and “upon which 
he was employed” in its third element based on the O’Keefe jury instruction, the proposal here 
eliminates that language as surplusage because the first element already specifies that the person 
was employed on the vessel and the second element already specifies that the jury must 
unanimously find that a person lost his or her life. This edit is an effort to streamline and simplify 
the third element. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 75   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2025   Page 2 of 4

3 
 
charterer of the vessel.  
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM AS TO SEAMAN’S MANSLAUGHTER 
 We, the Jury, as to Count 1 of the Indictment, unanimously find as to the Defendant 
DUSTIN SEAN McCABE:  
 
a. That the Defendant was a captain, engineer, pilot, or other person employed on the vessel 
and that a loss of life was proximately caused by the Defendant’s misconduct, negligence, 
or inattention to his duties on the vessel. 
 
GUILTY _____  
NOT GUILTY _____ 
 
b. That the Defendant was an owner or charterer of the vessel and that a loss of life was 
proximately caused by the Defendant’s fraud, neglect, connivance, misconduct, or 
violation of law.  
 
GUILTY _____  
NOT GUILTY _____ 
 
CONCLUSION 
Based on the authority set forth in the Parties’ submissions, see DE 29; DE 54 at 22-26, 
and after conferral and oral argument before the Court, the Parties respectfully request that this 
Court instruct the jury and use a special verdict form as proposed herein for Count One.  
 
 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 75   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2025   Page 3 of 4

4 
 
Dated: March 1, 2025 
 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
HAYDEN P. O’BYRNE 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
 
By: 
 /  Terrence O’Sullivan                             
            TERRENCE O’SULLIVAN 
            Attorney for Defendant 
            Florida Bar No. 0644031  
            3810 Murrell Road #340 
            Rockledge, Florida 32955 
            Tel: (321) 422-2882 
            Terrence@TerrenceOSullivanLaw.com  
    
 
/s/ Zachary A. Keller_______                       
 
ZACHARY A. KELLER 
 
Assistant United States Attorney 
 
U.S. Attorney’s Office – SDFL 
 
Court ID No. A5502767 
 
99 NE 4th Street, 6th Floor 
 
Miami, Florida 33132 
 
Tel: (305) 961-9196  
 
Email: zachary.keller@usdoj.gov 
 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 1, 2025, I electronically filed the foregoing document 
with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF.  
 
/s/ Zachary A. Keller  
ZACHARY A. KELLER 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 75   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2025   Page 4 of 4

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.75.0.pdf
Size
149,730 bytes
SHA-256
7dc702a49ff135c28c7d58f5ac0deb9ffdbbc317b5ba1431c3afc15f1161cf98
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.75.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top