Here are the materials in United States v. Whitetail:
Eighth Circuit
White Earth Band Awarded Millions in Tribal Court Dispute with Former Chair and Gaming Management Co.
From the Bemidji Pioneer:
An $18,562,767.45 money judgment was recently awarded to the White Earth Band of Chippewa against Angelo Medure and Gaming World International, Ltd. (GWI).
The award culminates a 14-year struggle of the people of White Earth to recover illegal profit distributions made to Medure and Gaming World International. The legal action began in White Earth Tribal Court and then removed by GWI and Medure to Federal Court and then remanded back to Tribal Court by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Medure was found to have conspired with former White Earth Chairman Darrell “Chip” Wadena to deprive the people of White Earth the benefits of the White Earth Land Settlement Act (WELSA). Although agreement provisions between GWI and Wadena required that Medure provide management services for the construction, development and operation of the Shooting Star Casino, GWI had no employees at the Shooting Star Casino at any time. In spite of having no employees at Shooting Star Casino, GWI and Medure were paid $10,153,772.61 in profit distributions. The management agreement required GWI to pay back the White Earth Land Settlement Act (WELSA) funds before any profit distributions were made to GWI.
Eighth Circuit Rejects Indian Prisoner’s Claim Feds Had No Jurisdiction Over Him under Treaty of Fort Laramie
Here are the materials in United States v. White Mountain (unpublished opinion here):
Supreme Court Denies Cert in Indian Country Voting Rights Case
The Eighth Circuit’s 7-4 en banc decision in Cottier v. City of Martin, S.D. will stand. Order list here.
Eighth Circuit Affirms Conviction of Crow Creek Sioux Member in SORNA Case
Here is the opinion in United States v. Voice.
An excerpt:
In addition to the due process contention previously discussed, Voice’s motion to dismiss the indictment argued that SORNA (1) does not apply to him because the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe has not implemented it, and (2) is unconstitutional as applied to him because it violates the Ex Post Facto Clause, the non-delegation doctrine, and exceeds Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce. On appeal, Voice acknowledges that we have recently decided these issues against him but argues the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss on these grounds to preserve them for possible Supreme Court review. We agree these arguments are foreclosed by prior panel decisions.
Eighth Circuit Affirms Upward Departure from Sentencing Guidelines Based on Seven Prior Tribal Court Convictions
Here is the opinion in United States v. Cook.
The court notes on page 3 that the seven prior tribal court convictions “alone” were enough to justify the upward departure from the sentencing guidelines. Not sure how many, if any, of the tribal court convictions were counseled.
Eighth Circuit Refuses to Intervene in North Dakota State Bar Disciplinary Action Involving MHA Nation-Licensed Attorney
Here is the opinion in Gillette v. North Dakota Disciplinary Board Counsel.
Lower federal court materials here.
Eighth Circuit Upholds Tribal Court Jurisdiction over Nonmember in Sac and Fox Leadership Dispute
Here are the materials in Attorney’s Process and Investigation Services v. Sac and Fox Tribe:
APIS v. Sac and Fox Tribe opinion
New Scholarship on Major Crimes Act Prosecutions and Race
Brian L. Lewis has published his excellent paper, “Do You Know What You Are? You Are What You Is; You Is What You Am: Indian Status for the Purpose of Federal Criminal Jurisdiction and the Current Split in the Court of Appeals,” in the Harvard Journal on Racial and Ethnic Justice (formerly the Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal).
Paper here: Lewis
The paper delves into the recent cases involving Indian status of criminal defendants prosecuted under the Major Crimes Act; and recent cases such as Cruz and Stymiest, where the Ninth and Eighth Circuits, respectively, reached conflicting conclusions on whether nonenrolled Indians are “Indian” under the statute.
Deeply Divided Eighth Circuit Panel Affirms 10-Year Sentence for Neonatcide
Apparently, this is only the second time in the history of the federal courts that there has been a person convicted of neonatcide. Thank you Major Crimes Act. 😦
The facts in this case are beyond horrible, and we usually don’t post criminal cases like this, but the dissent is so passionate in this case.
Here is the opinion: US v Deegan.
From the dissent (Judge Bright):
In the view of this judge, the procedure followed and the imposition of a ten-year-plus prison sentence on Ms. Deegan, a young American Indian woman, represents the most clear sentencing error that this dissenting judge has ever seen.
* * *
Ms. Deegan’s crime of neonaticide was a unique sort of homicide and completely unlike the usual and ordinary killings that constitute second-degree murder under federal law. As I have already observed, federal courts do not ordinarily deal with these types of cases, which may be grist for the mills of state courts. Only because this neonaticide occurred on an Indian reservation does this case become one of federal jurisdiction. There exists no basis in the statements of the Sentencing Commission or in reviewing federal appellate second-degree murder cases to conclude that the crime of neonaticide comes within the federal second-degree murder sentencing guidelines.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.