United States v. Stanley C. Edwards

942 F.2d 794 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stanley C. EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-30355. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 1, 1991. Decided Aug. 16, 1991. Before EUGENE A. WRIGHT, BEEZER and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Stanley Edwards was charged under the Lacey Act with transporting across states lines animals taken in violation of state law. The animals were taken on the Crow Indian reservation in Montana. Edwards appeals on the theory that Montana cannot regulate hunting on the reservations and therefore that the animals were not taken in violation of state law. We affirm. 3 * Edwards, who is neither an Indian nor a member of any Indian tribe, was charged with violating the Lacey Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3372 (a), 3373(d)(2), 1 by transporting across state lines two pronghorn antelopes and one black bear taken in violation of the laws of…