Means

Means v. Navajo Nation

Good Law
420 F.3d 1037·2005 WL 2008433
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 23, 200501-17489California4,933 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

This case concerns whether an Indian tribe can exercise criminal jurisdiction over a person who is not a member of the tribe, but who is an enrolled member of another Indian tribe.

Facts

This is an appeal from a denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner, Russell Means, a member of the Oglala-Sioux Indian Tribe, seeks to prevent the Navajo Nation from criminally prosecuting him in Navajo tribal court for an incident that occurred on the Navajo Reservation.

In December 1997, Means allegedly threatened and battered his then father-in-law, who is an Omaha Indian, and allegedly threatened another man, a Navajo Indian. The offenses are misdemeanors under the Navajo Code, with potential maximum penalties of 90 days in jail and a $250 fine for each threatening, and 180 days in jail and a $500 fine for the battery.

Means moved in the Navajo tribal court to dismiss the tribal proceedings. He argued that because he was not a Navajo, the tribal court had no jurisdiction. Means testified that he is a member of the Oglala-Sioux Tribe of Indians, and a permanent resident of Porcupine, a town in South Dakota on the Pine Ridge Sioux Indian Reservation. Means lived on the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.