Turtle Talk

Here is the unpublished opinion in In re Civil Confinement of Beaulieu.

The holding could be rendered moot if the Minnesota Supreme Court reverses certain aspects of the Johnson case referenced in the excerpt here:

Because Johnson was released by this court less than two months ago, we are constrained to follow it. See State v. Lee, 706 N.W.2d 491, 494 (Minn. 2005) (requiring that under the principle of stare decisis, a court must be extremely reluctant to overturn its own precedent and must have “compelling reason” for doing so). However, we are sympathetic to appellant’s arguments regarding the potential for fruitful cooperation between various entities of this state’s government and the White Earth Band of Ojibwe in the future to address mutual interests in protecting the public from SDP and SPP persons and in treating those afflicted with such disorders. While Indian self-governance and self-sufficiency are not encouraged when this state takes control of an Indian sex offender, such action is necessitated at this time because appellant has offered no evidence that the White Earth Band of Ojibwe has a civil commitment law or that it has any structure in place to treat SDP or SPP individuals. Thus, we conclude, as did this court in Johnson, that federal law does not preempt state jurisdiction, and exceptional circumstances exist to permit this state to exercise subject-matter jurisdiction over the SDP/SPP civil commitment involving appellant.