Preview:

No 12244
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

STATE OF MONTANA, ex rel., THOMAS E McDONALD, Petitioner,
THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, in and for the County of Missoula, JUDGE JACK L GREEN, presiding,
Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING:
Counsel of Record:
For Petitioner:
Edward A Cummings, argued, Missoula, Montana.
For Respondent:
Hon Robert L Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena,
Montana.
David V Gliko, Assistant Attorney General,
Helena, Montana.
Robert L Deschamps, 111, County Attorney,
Missoula , Montana.
Michael G McLatchey, Deputy County Attorney,
argued, Missoula, Montana.

Amicus Curiae
David J Patterson, argued, Missoula, Montana. Barney Reagan, argued, Helena, Montana.
Submitted: April 10, 1972
Decided : APR 19 1972
Filed : AP!? 19 1972
Mr. Justice Frank I. Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court.
This is an original appl ication for an appropriate extraordinary writ to determine the jurisdiction of a state district court over criminal proceedings against an Indian for alleged crimes committed on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The district court of Mi ssoul a County, the Honorable Jack L. Green, district judge, held that the district court had such crim- inal jurisdiction and denied defendant's motion to dismiss. Defendant now seeks review of the district court's ruling in the proceeding before us.
Thomas E. McDonald, relator here, and the defendant in the district court, is an enrolled member of the Confederated Sal ish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Indian Reservation. On June 12, 1971 he was arrested at his home on the reservation and subsequently charged with three counts of criminal sale of dangerous drugs and one count of criminal possession of dangerous drugs. Each of the four alleged offenses is a felony under Mon- tana's Dangerous Drug Act, sections 54-132, 54-133, R.C.M. 1947; and each was alleged to have been committed on that part of the Flathead Indian Res- ervation lying within Missoula County.
On July 12, 1971, McDonald filed a motion to dismiss the criminal action against him on the ground that the state courts of Montana do not have jurisdiction. Following hearing thereon, the district court of Missoula County denied defendant's motion to dismiss. On March 21, 1972 McDonald applied to this Court for an appropriate extraordinary writ to review the district court's ruling.
This court set the matter for adversary hearing on April 10, 1972 and invited briefs and oral argument from the United States district attor- ney, the area director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the superintendent of the Flathead Indian Reservation, as we1 1 as counsel for the respective parties. Subsequently leave was granted to file briefs and participate in oral argument as amicus curiae to Mr. Barney Reagan, director of Montana Legal Services, and to Mr. David J. Patterson, Montana Defender Project.
Briefs were filed and oral argument heard from Edward A. Cummings, attorney for McDonald; M. Gene McLatchy, deputy county attorney of Missoula County; David J. Patterson, amicus curiae; and Barney Reagan, amicus curiae. Addi-tionally David Gliko appeared for the Montana attorney general, and documen- tary material was filed by James A. Canan, area director of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. Following hearing, the matter was taken under advisement by the Court.
The ultimate question before the Court in this proceeding is whether the state district court has jurisdiction of a criminal case charg- ing a Flathead Indian with alleged crimes committed on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Two issues underlie this ultimate question:
(1)
Did Montana acquire jurisdiction over such criminal proceed-ings pursuant to legislative enactments by the United States Congress and the Montana 1egislature?

(2)
Did the Flathead Tribal Council subsequently revoke their consent to state jurisdiction?


The historical background to these legal issues is necessary as a preface to their determination. In 1889 when Montana was admitted to state- hood, the Montana Constitution contained, among other things, two provisions pertinent to the present controversy. Ordinance I, Sec. 2 provided that all Indian lands "shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the congress of the United States". Ordinance I, Sec. 6 provided "That the ordinances in this article shall be irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of the state of Montana."
In 1953 the Congress of the United States enacted Public Law 280 (Act of August 15, 1953, 67 Stat. 588, 590, 18 U.S.C.,

Download 2468a084-9f18-4cf8-a078-ffdb3aa25e28.pdf

Montana Law