Federal Court Rejects Stacked Sentences in Tribal Courts — UPDATED

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

Miranda Motion for Summary J

PYT Objection to Magistrate Report

Federal Objections to Magistrate Report

PYT Court of Appeals Brief

4 thoughts on “Federal Court Rejects Stacked Sentences in Tribal Courts — UPDATED

  1. Geoffery Stauffer January 13, 2010 / 5:45 pm

    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.

  2. Tom Murphy January 19, 2010 / 12:03 pm

    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.

Comments are closed.