Overview
Case summary
Draper, a non-Indian, was convicted in federal court for murdering another non-Indian on the Crow Indian reservation in Montana. He appealed, arguing the federal court lacked jurisdiction because the crime should have been tried in state court. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that under United States v. McBratney, when a state is admitted to the Union with an enabling act that does not exclude jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians on Indian reservations, state courts have jurisdiction. The Court interpreted Montana's enabling act provision about 'absolute jurisdiction and control' over Indian lands as referring to land title and allotment policies, not criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians. The federal court was ordered to deliver the prisoner to Montana authorities.
Abstract
A non-Indian convicted in federal court for murdering another non-Indian on an Indian reservation appealed, arguing state court jurisdiction. The Supreme Court reversed, interpreting the state's enabling act as granting state jurisdiction over such crimes by non-Indians, not federal courts. The federal court was directed to transfer the prisoner to state authorities for proceedings.
Opinion of the court
opinionMr. Justice Whitejoined by All other justices
- Follows United States v. McBratney precedent
- Montana's enabling act does not deprive state of jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians on reservations
- Provision about 'absolute jurisdiction and control' refers to land title matters, not criminal jurisdiction
- State courts have jurisdiction when enabling act contains no exclusion
Jurisdiction
challenged- Case appealed from Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Montana
- Involves interpretation of Montana's enabling act and federal Indian law
Procedural posture
- Jurisdiction of federal court to try non-Indian for murder on Indian reservation
Legal categories
Case record
Issues & holdings
de novo
Federal court lacked jurisdiction because Montana state courts had jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians on Indian reservations under the enabling act
Issue preserved for review
Holdings of the court
Error analysis
- Circuit Court exercised jurisdiction over crime committed by non-Indian on Indian reservation — jurisdictional · error foundJurisdictional error is not subject to harmless error analysis as it goes to the court's power to hear the case · not applicable
Statutory interpretation
2Standards of review
- Interpretation of enabling act and jurisdictional question — de novo Questions of statutory interpretation and jurisdiction are reviewed de novo
Timeline
Procedural path
Territory of Montana organized by act of Congress
Established territorial boundaries that included future Crow reservation
Crow Indian reservation created by treaty
Reservation established within Montana Territory boundaries
Congress confirmed agreement with Crow Indians for sale of portion of reservation and survey of remaining lands
Showed federal policy toward Crow reservation lands
General Allotment Act (Dawes Act) passed, providing for allotment of Indian lands in severalty
Established federal policy for gradual extinction of Indian reservations
Montana enabling act passed, providing for state admission
Key statute at issue in jurisdictional question
Case submitted to Supreme Court on writ of error
Appeal properly before Supreme Court
Supreme Court decision reversing Circuit Court judgment
Outcome: Reversed and remanded
Final disposition of appeal
Draper indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced to death for murder on Crow reservation
Outcome: Conviction and death sentence
Underlying criminal case giving rise to appeal
Draper moved to arrest judgment based on lack of federal jurisdiction
Outcome: Motion denied
Preserved jurisdictional issue for appeal
Facts & evidence
Incident
Key facts
5 facts- Defendant Draper (non-Indian) was indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced to death for murder
- Victim was also non-Indian (negro, as conceded by both parties)
- Crime occurred on Crow Indian reservation
- Defendant moved to arrest judgment based on lack of federal jurisdiction
- Trial court denied motion and asserted jurisdiction
Procedural history
4 steps- Indictment in Circuit Court of the United States for District of Montana
- Trial and conviction
- Motion to arrest judgment denied
- Appeal to Supreme Court on writ of error
Evidence in the record
- Concession by both counsel that accused and deceased were negroes (non-Indians)
- Indictment
- Treaty creating Crow reservation
- Montana enabling act
- General Allotment Act of 1887
- Act confirming Crow agreement of 1882
Jury
Sentencing
Objects of relevance
Authorities
Cited authorities (4)
Related cases (4)
Statutes
- Act of May 26, 1864 (organized Montana Territory)
- Treaty of 1868 (created Crow reservation)
- Act of February 22, 1889 (Montana enabling act)
- Act of March 3, 1885 (Major Crimes Act)
- Act of February 8, 1887 (General Allotment Act/Dawes Act)
- Act of April 11, 1882 (confirmed Crow agreement)
Standards & doctrines
- McBratney rule on state jurisdiction over non-Indian crimes on reservations
- Equality of statehood doctrine
Legal principles applied
- State courts have jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians on reservations unless enabling act expressly provides otherwise
- Equality of statehood is the rule, exceptions must be clear