United States v. Clifford Bird, Sr., United States of America v. Wesley Lane Crawford

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 10169·342 F.3d 1045·2003 WL 22072088·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8187·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 18496
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 8, 200302-30246, 02-30282California2,557 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Clifford Bird Sr. and Wesley Lane Crawford (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the district court’s orders denying their motions to dismiss the indictments against them. Appellants contend that the district court erred in ruling that the Government is not required to allege that the victim is an Indian as an element of a crime filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1153 (“ § 1153”). The Government requests that we dismiss this appeal because a final judgment has not been entered.

We conclude that we have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine to address the merits of this appeal. We affirm based on this court’s holding in Henry v. United States, 432 F.2d 114 (9th Cir.1970) that federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over the crimes enumerated in § 1153 that are committed by an Indian, on an Indian reservation, against the person or property of any person.

I

On April 18, 2002, a United States grand jury indicted Mr. Bird, an Indian, for burglary in violation of § 1153, and Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-204 (1). On July 10, 2002, a grand jury indicted Mr. Crawford, also an Indian, for burglary in violation of the same codes. The alleged burglaries took place in…

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.