United States v. Curtis Anderson

Good Law
391 F.3d 1083·2004 WL 2853229·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 25777
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 14, 200403-10516California2,494 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rymer, J.

This appeal by Curtis Anderson, a member of the Robinson Ranchería Band of Pomo Indians, turns on whether 18 U.S.C. § 1162 gives the State of California exclusive jurisdiction over all crimes committed in Indian country within its borders, thereby depriving the district court of jurisdiction in this case. Anderson was convicted of theft, and conspiring to commit theft, from an Indian tribal organization in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1163. He argues that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction by virtue of § 1162, and that § 1163 both offends the Indian Commerce Clause and cannot be applied to Indians. We hold that § 1162 does not give the state exclusive jurisdiction precluding federal jurisdiction over offenses that arise under federal laws of general applicability such as §§ 371 and 1163. We also conclude that § 1163 applies to Indians, and that applying § 1163 to Indian lands does not exceed congressional power under the Commerce Clause. Accordingly, the district court had jurisdiction and we affirm.

I

Anderson was the chairperson in 1997 and 1998 of the Robinson Ranchería Band of Porno Indians (the Tribe), a federally recognized tribe whose reservation…

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.