UTE INDIAN TRIBE P. O. Box 190

Fort Duchesne, Utah 84026 Phone (435) 722-5141 • Fax (435) 722-5072

~. .~ ~

~ . !'.;

~ ~'t> ~ <1 ec'~

lid Oura~ ¥-'

January 20, 2011

Uintah County Commission 152 E. 100 N. Vernal, Utah 84078

Re: Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction over Rights-of-Way for United States, State and County Roads

Dear Board of Commissioners:

On behalf of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation ("Tribe"), we request the support and cooperation of the Uintah County Commission to immediately cease and desist any and all further patrolling and arrest and detention of members of the Ute Indian Tribe by State and county officers on Tribal lands or roads, and over rights-of-way for United States, state and county roads running through and across the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.

Based on the plain language of 18 U.S.C.A § 1151 and current case law, State officers do not possess criminal jurisdiction over highways or roads running through reservation lands or alternatively lands meeting the definition of Indian country.

The United States Congress defined Indian Country for the purposes of criminal jurisdiction as:

(a) All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through the reservation, .. . and (c)all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way running through same. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

In addition, for jurisdictional purposes on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation the Court in Ute V concluded that "Indian country extends to all trust lands, the National Forest Lands, the Uncompahgre Reservation, and the three disputed categories of non-trust lands that remain within the boundaries of the Uintah Valley Reservation." Ute Indian Tribe v. Utah, 114 F.3d 1513, 1530-1531 (10th Cir. 1985) (hereinafter "Ute V'). The three disputed categories of non-trust land include:

(1) Lands apportioned to the mixed blood Utes under the Ute Partition Act, Act of Aug. 27,1954, Pub. L. No. 97-698, ch. 1009,68 Stat. 868 (codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 677-677aa); (2) Lands allotted to individual Indians that have passed into fee status after 1905; and (3) Lands that were held in trust after the Reservation was opened in 1905 but that since have been exchanged into fee status by the Tribe for then-fee (now trust) lands in an effort to consolidate its land holdings pursuant to the Indian Reorganization Act, Act of June 18, 1934, ch. 576, 48 Stat. 984 (codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 461-79) and the Indian Land Consolidation Act of 1983, Pub. L. No. 97-459, 96 Stat. 2517 (codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 2202-11).Ute V, 114 F.3d at 1529.

As stated above, Indian country encompasses all trust lands within the limits of an Indian reservation, all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way for purposes of criminal jurisdiction. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1151 does not distinguish between fee and usufructuary rights-of-way. Thus, a tribe retains criminal jurisdiction over any right-of-way running through Indian country as that term is defined.

Here, any United States highway, county road or individual right-of-way (fee or usufructuary) running through the Uintah and Ouray Reservation as defined by the Court in Ute V and U.S. code is Indian country for the purposes of criminal jurisdiction. Therefore, the Ute Indian Tribe retains jurisdiction over said rights-of­way. This is further acknowledged by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeal in Ross v. Neff, 905 F.2d 1349 (10th Cir. 1990) (hereinafter "Ross").

We are concerned that the rights-of-way granted by the Tribe for United States highways, state and county roads are being unlawfully used by law enforcement officers in Duchene and Uintah Counties to carry out unauthorized law enforcement activities, which has had a detrimental effect on the Tribe's criminal jurisdiction. Here, the rights-of-way (fee or usurfructurary) for all roads (United States highways, county or access) running within the exterior boundaries of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation are Indian country within the meaning of the federal criminal code and Ute V. The granting of an easement for a right-of-way does not confer criminal jurisdiction to the State of Utah or its officers. Therefore, the Ute Indian Tribe retains criminal jurisdiction over United States highways, county and access roads running through the exterior boundaries of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation and all other lands identified as coming within the meaning of Indian country pursuant to the federal criminal code and Ute V.

Based on case law and federal statute, state officers do not have criminal jurisdiction over Indians with Indian Country including rights-of-way through reservations. In addition, without a valid warrant or consent of the tribe, state officers cannot legally pursue tribal members onto the reservation to gather evidence. Additionally, as a general rule, state officers may not make a valid arrest outside their territorial jurisdiction . Furthermore, state officers have no authority to investigate criminal activity involving Indians occurring within Indian country.

2

As stated above, for criminal jurisdictional purposes, rights-of-way are included in the definition of Indian country. Therefore, any road, be it a United States highway, county road or individual access road, built upon a right-of-way located within the reservation is Indian country. The fact that the right-of-way remains within Indian country divests the State of jurisdiction. Thus, lacking jurisdiction over United States highways, county and access roads running through Indian Country, State officers should not be making arrests of Indians on those portions of roads running through the Uintah and Ouray Reservation. The Tribe urges the Uintah County Commission to immediately cease and desist any and all further patrolling and detention of members of the Tribe by State and county officers over rights-of-way for United States, state and county roads running through and across the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, and other trust or tribal lands on the Reservation.

If you do not immediately instruct your law enforcement officers to cease and desist from engaging in further law enforcement activities that result in the unlawful arrest, detention or harassment of our tribal members, we will seek to have all pending criminal prosecutions associated with such arrests removed to federal court for violations of our tribal members civil and due process rights. In addition, we will seek immediate legal action against all law enforcement officers and other public officials involved in the unlawful execution of police powers on the reservation for civil rights violations of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and other related legal claims. In addition, the Tribe will seek to fully enforce its jurisdictional authority to the maximum extent permitted by Federal law on the reservation, and will further review and evaluate all ongoing activities occurring on the reservation that in the past may not have been subject to tribal regulatory jurisdiction and control based on a disclaimer of the Tribe's interest.

Based on the issues we have raised in this letter, we request that the Uintah County Commission give this matter special priority and take all steps necessary to expedite our request.

Ve Truly Yours,

Richard Jen Chairman, Uintah and Ouray Tribal Business Committee

Cc: Utah State Governor Gary Herbert American Civil Liberties Union U.S. Attorney Trina Higgens U.S. Dept. of Justice Rose Salamonca U.S. Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Larry Echohawk BIA Superintendent Daniel Picard Ute Indian Tribe Police Chief Jay Mountain Lion BIA Special Agent in Charge Dist. 3 S. MacDonald Uintah County Attorney Duchene County Attorney Ute General Counsel

3