Here is the unpublished opinion in Oviatt v. Reynolds.
Briefs:
ICRA habeas
Federal Magistrate Recommends Granting ICRA Habeas Petition of Kewa Pueblo Prisoner [Van Pelt III]
Here are the materials in Van Pelt III v. Geisen (D.N.M.):
Federal Magistrate Recommends Granting ICRA Habeas Petition of Kewa Pueblo Prisoner [Tortalita]
Here are the materials in Tortalita v. Geisen (D.N.M.):
Federal Magistrate Recommends Granting ICRA Habeas Petition of Kewa Pueblo Prisoner [Garcia]
Here are the materials in Garcia v. Geisen (D.N.M.):
Federal Court Dismisses ICRA Suit re: Elem Indian Colony of Pomo Indians Disenrollments
Here are the materials in John v. Garcia (N.D. Cal.):
Federal Court Dismisses Habeas Petition by Kickapoo Member for Failure to Exhaust Tribal Remedies
Here are the materials in Darnell v. Merchant (D. Kan.):
An excerpt:
Petitioner Bobbie Darnell, a member of the Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas (the “Tribe”), filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1303 seeking relief from her tribal court convictions and sentence. Petitioner requests that the Court issue a writ of habeas corpus commanding her immediate release from jail in Brown County, Kansas, overturning her convictions in Kickapoo criminal cases numbers CRM016-11 and CRM016-23, and staying all further tribal court action against her (Doc. 1). In addition, Petitioner has filed a motion for release on her own recognizance (Doc. 25). As explained below, the Court denies the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus because Petitioner has not exhausted her tribal remedies. The Court further denies Petitioner’s motion for release on her own recognizance as moot.
Federal Court Finds Tribal Court Exhaustion Futile, Grants ICRA Habeas Petition
Here are the materials in Toya v. Toledo (D.N.M.):
19 DCT Order Adopting Magistrate Report
Prior post here.
Tavares v. Whitehouse Cert Petition (United Auburn Indian Community Banishment)
Here:
Question presented:
This case presents a question that divides the circuits: Should the “detention” requirement for habeas review under the ICRA be construed “more narrowly than” the “custody” showing required under other federal habeas statutes?
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE (10/27/17): Amicus Brief
Federal Court Orders Indian Prisoner to Add Charging Tribe to Suit in ICRA Habeas Action
Here is the order in Talk v. Southern Ute Detention Center (D.N.M.):
ICRA Habeas Claim Arising from Bishop Paiute Reservation Intra-tribal Property Dispute Dismissed
Here are the materials in Napoles v. Rogers (E.D. Cal.):
20-1 Tribal Judge Motion to Dismiss
An excerpt:
At the core of this case is an intra-tribal dispute regarding the ownership of certain parcels of land on the Bishop Paiute reservation located in eastern California. The amended petition alleges petitioners were unlawfully detained by respondents when they were denied access to their family land and were cited for trespass when attempting to enter the disputed land. Petitioners are all descendants of Ida Warlie, who purportedly received an assignment of eleven lots on the Bishop Paiute reservation in 1941, in exchange for relinquishing possession of other land in Inyo County. These lots were purportedly then assigned to her descendants, petitioners here, following her death. According to petitioners, a land assignment ordinance enacted by the members of the Bishop, Big Pine, and Lone Pine Reservations in 1962 validated all prior land assignments, including Ms. Warlie’s. This ordinance was enacted by the Owens Valley Board of Trustees, which governs a number of tribes now living in the Owens Valley of California, including those on the Bishop Paiute reservation.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.