Post by Okwes on Jun 21, 2006 20:38:45 GMT -5
Private Indian land off-limits to state
By Associated Press
June 16, 2006
www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_state/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19863_4779822,0\
0.html
SANTA FE - The New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled that the state does
not have jurisdiction to prosecute American Indians for crimes on
private land within pueblo boundaries.
Such privately held lands "remain Indian country," the Supreme Court
said Wednesday, reversing decisions by the state Court of Appeals.
The ruling, which was issued in consolidated cases involving Taos and
Pojoaque pueblos, would leave it to the federal government or tribes to
prosecute those crimes.
A spokesman for the tribes and pueblos that filed written arguments in
the case said they were "very pleased" with the ruling.
"This decision is extremely important in reaffirming the Indian country
status of all lands within pueblo boundaries," said Santa Fe lawyer
Richard Hughes.
There was no immediate comment from the office of Attorney General
Patricia Madrid. Spokeswoman Sam Thompson said the opinion was being
reviewed.
Del Romero of Taos Pueblo was indicted by the state in 2001 for
aggravated battery against another pueblo member at the privately owned
Pueblo Alegre Mall in the town of Taos, within the exterior boundaries
of the Taos Pueblo Land Grant.
Matthew Gutierrez of Pojoaque Pueblo was indicted in 2002 on charges
including aggravated battery and child abuse, after a stabbing on
private land, within pueblo boundaries, owned by his father-in-law. The
victims were not American Indians.
The defendants challenged the indictments, arguing that the state didn't
have jurisdiction to prosecute American Indians in Indian country.
State district courts agreed, and the state appealed; the Court of
Appeals overturned the lower courts' rulings.
But the definition of Indian country in federal law includes "dependent
Indian communities," and the state Supreme Court said a pueblo fits that
definition.
The private land within a dependent American Indian community is Indian
country as well, and Congress has never changed that status, the court
said.
"In sum, location within the exterior boundaries matters more than who
holds title," Justice Patricio Serna wrote for a unanimous court.
The court rejected what it called the state's "overly broad" argument
that the federal Pueblo Lands Act of 1924 - which set up a mechanism to
resolve the land claims of non-Indians within pueblos - had extinguished
Indian country status by allowing non-American Indians to have title to
certain parcels.
"The fact that Taos town ended up within the exterior boundaries of Taos
Pueblo does not diminish or extinguish Indian country; nor does the
individually owned private claim land in the middle of Pojoaque Pueblo
affect Indian country status there," the court said.
By Associated Press
June 16, 2006
www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_state/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19863_4779822,0\
0.html
SANTA FE - The New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled that the state does
not have jurisdiction to prosecute American Indians for crimes on
private land within pueblo boundaries.
Such privately held lands "remain Indian country," the Supreme Court
said Wednesday, reversing decisions by the state Court of Appeals.
The ruling, which was issued in consolidated cases involving Taos and
Pojoaque pueblos, would leave it to the federal government or tribes to
prosecute those crimes.
A spokesman for the tribes and pueblos that filed written arguments in
the case said they were "very pleased" with the ruling.
"This decision is extremely important in reaffirming the Indian country
status of all lands within pueblo boundaries," said Santa Fe lawyer
Richard Hughes.
There was no immediate comment from the office of Attorney General
Patricia Madrid. Spokeswoman Sam Thompson said the opinion was being
reviewed.
Del Romero of Taos Pueblo was indicted by the state in 2001 for
aggravated battery against another pueblo member at the privately owned
Pueblo Alegre Mall in the town of Taos, within the exterior boundaries
of the Taos Pueblo Land Grant.
Matthew Gutierrez of Pojoaque Pueblo was indicted in 2002 on charges
including aggravated battery and child abuse, after a stabbing on
private land, within pueblo boundaries, owned by his father-in-law. The
victims were not American Indians.
The defendants challenged the indictments, arguing that the state didn't
have jurisdiction to prosecute American Indians in Indian country.
State district courts agreed, and the state appealed; the Court of
Appeals overturned the lower courts' rulings.
But the definition of Indian country in federal law includes "dependent
Indian communities," and the state Supreme Court said a pueblo fits that
definition.
The private land within a dependent American Indian community is Indian
country as well, and Congress has never changed that status, the court
said.
"In sum, location within the exterior boundaries matters more than who
holds title," Justice Patricio Serna wrote for a unanimous court.
The court rejected what it called the state's "overly broad" argument
that the federal Pueblo Lands Act of 1924 - which set up a mechanism to
resolve the land claims of non-Indians within pueblos - had extinguished
Indian country status by allowing non-American Indians to have title to
certain parcels.
"The fact that Taos town ended up within the exterior boundaries of Taos
Pueblo does not diminish or extinguish Indian country; nor does the
individually owned private claim land in the middle of Pojoaque Pueblo
affect Indian country status there," the court said.