This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The Defendant, a member of the San Ildefonso Pueblo, was stopped by a state patrol officer on State Highway 84-285, located within the Tesuque Pueblo reservation. The Defendant was charged with various misdemeanor traffic offenses.
Procedural History
- Magistrate Court: Denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
- District Court: Found jurisdiction over the Defendant in state court, dismissed the Defendant's appeal, and remanded the case to magistrate court for enforcement of its sentence.
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the State of New Mexico lacked criminal jurisdiction over a Native American accused of committing offenses on another tribe's reservation, as neither the Tesuque Pueblo had consented to state jurisdiction nor had the State elected to assume such jurisdiction.
- Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Conceded on appeal that state courts lacked jurisdiction over the Defendant under the circumstances of the case.
Legal Issues
- Does the State of New Mexico have criminal jurisdiction over a Native American accused of committing offenses on another tribe's reservation?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's order and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss the charges against the Defendant.
Reasons
Per Pickard J. (Minzner C.J. and Apodaca J. concurring):
The Court held that New Mexico generally lacks jurisdiction to prosecute criminal charges against Native Americans for offenses committed within the boundaries of an Indian reservation unless such jurisdiction is specifically granted by Congress or sanctioned by the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress has allowed states to assume criminal jurisdiction over Native Americans on tribal land only with the consent of the affected tribe, which was not present in this case. Additionally, the State had not elected to assume jurisdiction over Indian country.
The district court had relied on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Duro v. Reina, which limited tribal jurisdiction over non-member Native Americans. However, Congress subsequently amended the Indian Civil Rights Act to affirm tribal criminal jurisdiction over all Native Americans, effectively overturning Duro. As a result, the Tesuque Pueblo retained jurisdiction over the Defendant, and the State lacked authority to prosecute him.
The Court clarified that its holding applied only to criminal jurisdiction and not to civil jurisdiction. Accordingly, the charges against the Defendant were dismissed.