Here is the order in Miranda v. Nielson [Pascua Yaqui Tribe] (D. Ariz.): Order MSJ Granted.
The Magistrate’s report is here.
Briefs are here:
Tribes X Motion Summary Judgment Habeas-Miranda
PYT Objection to Magistrate Report
4 thoughts on “Federal Court Rejects Stacked Sentences in Tribal Courts — UPDATED”
Comments are closed.
Turtle Talk 
It would have been nice if the Dist. Judge would have bothered reading the Tribal objections (or the better yet the PYT Appeals Court’s opinion) and at least explained how this fact pattern is even remotely similar to Spears (or why Spears is even good law)! Rubber stamping a magistrate’s R&R on a critical issue like this is a tremendous problem and a huge disservice to the Tribe.
I agree. This is a conclusory order “rubber stamping” a poorly reasoned case (Spears). The phrase “any one offense” in 25 U.S.C. sec. 1302(7) necessarily requires reference to tribal law as to what constitutes an offense, as it is tribal law which defines the offense. In holding that two laws enacted almost 100 years apart constitute a legislative “scheme,” Spears also did not take into account the grim reality–that many tribes are forced to prosecute serious offenses (because of USA declinations) and, with the one year limitation, consecutive sentencing is one of a limited number of options tribes have to deal with violent crime.