White Mountain Apache Tribe

Here is the petition in Dupris v. Proctor:

Questions presented:

1. Whether this Court should resolve a split among the circuit courts of appeal, created by the Ninth Circuit panel decision in this matter, as to whether federal agents have “discretion” to arrest an individual without probable cause, for purposes of sovereign immunity under the “discretionary function” doctrine of the Federal Tort Claims Act?

2. Whether this Court should resolve a split among the circuit courts of appeal as to whether a law enforcement officer’s pre-arrest consultation with a prosecutor, standing alone, entitles the officer to qualified immunity?

3. Given the federal agents’ testimony that there were not any “positive identifications” of Petitioners, contradictory to what the agents told the tribal prosecutor, whether this Court should remand pursuant to this Court’s recent holding in Tolan v. Cotton, — U.S. –, 134 S.Ct. 1861 (2014), to ensure that the Court of Appeals properly viewed all evidence in the light most favorable to the Petitioners?

Lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Rejects FTCA/Bivens Claims against Federal & Tribal Officers

February 10, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the unpublished opinion in Dupris v. McDonald.

An excerpt:

In 2006, Jesse Dupris and Jeremy Reed (the “Plaintiffs”) were arrested on tribal charges for assaults they did not commit. In 2008, they commenced this action against the members of the federal Task Force that arrested them and the United States under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and Plaintiffs have appealed. We affirm, concluding that: (1) the Plaintiffs’ claims against two members of the Task Force are barred by the applicable statute of limitations; (2) the remaining individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity; and (3) the United States is immune from liability under the FTCA pursuant to the discretionary function exception.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Briefing in Dupris v. Procter (FTCA Claim against White Mountain Apache Officers)

August 27, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the briefs:

Dupris Opening Brief

Officers’ Answer Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Dupris Reply to Federal Brief

Dupris Reply to Officers Brief

Lower court materials are here.

Challenge to Federal Prosecution under Double Jeopardy Clause Fails

June 26, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in United States v. Gatewood (D. Ariz.):

DCT Order Denying Gatewood Motion to Dismiss

An excerpt:

Defendant argues that because the Tribe receives federal funding, regulatory oversight, and law enforcement assistance from the BIA, “it no longer makes sense to maintain the fiction that federal and tribal governments are so separate in their interests that the dual sovereignty doctrine is universally needed to protect one from the other.” (Doc. 137 at 7). Defendant further contends that this cooperation transforms the Tribe from a “dependant sovereign power” into a “political subdivision” of the federal government. Id. at 6.

Although the financial and regulatory relationship between tribal authorities and the federal government may be significant, this mutual cooperation does not create a “de facto divestiture of tribal sovereignty” or rise to the level of collusion necessary to meet the Bartkus exception.

And:

Defendant also claims that “Agent Hawkins assisted the White Mountain Apache Tribal Prosecutor John Major in securing information about the case,” citing activities by Agent Hawkins such as faxing Defendant’s criminal history to the White Mountain Apache Tribal Prosecutor’s Office and his presence at nearly all investigation and interviews after being notified of the allegations. (Doc. 137 at 2). Mere assistance and the sharing of records, however, is insufficient proof of manipulation or undue coercion by federal authorities. Since Defendant has not provided the Court with specific allegations of coercion or collusion that would justify an evidentiary hearing, Defendant’s request for a hearing is denied.

Federal Court Dismisses FTCA Claim against White Mountain Apache and BIA Police Officers

January 13, 2012January 12, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Dupris v. McDonald (D. Ariz.):

DCT Order Dismissing Dupris Complaint

BIA Motion to Dismiss Complaint

US Motion to Dismiss Complaint

Dupris Motion for Partial Summary J

US Response to Motion for Partial Summary J

U.S. Attorney Declines to Prosecute White Mountain Election Fraud Claims

November 16, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the report:

US Atty Declination on WMAT Referral

Here is our posting of the independent investigative report.

New Mexico Appellate Court Dismisses Worker’s Comp Claim against Inn of the Mountain Gods

February 25, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the unpublished opinion in Pena v. Inn of the Mountain Gods.

Detroit News on U-M Decision to Repatriate Culturally Unidentifiable Remains

March 17, 2010Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Detroit News:

The University of Michigan will work with tribes on the disposition of unidentified Native American human remains held by the university to comply with newly released federal rules.

The National Park Service on Monday announced the rule to establish a process to repatriate remains in museums or on exhibit which have not been culturally affiliated with a tribe.

The rules, which go into effect May 14, require universities and federal agencies with unidentified remains in their collections to work with tribes that lived in the areas where the remains were exhumed.

There are more than 124,000 unidentified Native American human remains in the United States, including some held by U-M’s Museum of Anthropology.

Continue reading →

Turtle Talk