DOUGLAS G. DRY, ROSIE LEE BURLISON, and JUANITA McCONNELL,

Petitioners,

vs.

COURT OF INDIAN OFFENSES OF THE CHOCTAW NATION,

Respondent, and

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA,

Real Party in Interest.

CASE NO. CIV-96-C27

On this date, April 16, 1997, the Court of Indian Appeals, Muskogee Area Tribes, considered the above styled and number cause. This action was begun by a Writ of Prohibition filed by Petitioners Douglas Dry, Rosie Lee Burlison and Juanita McConnell against the respondent Court of Indian 0ffenses of the Choctaw Nation.

The record reflects that criminal charges were filed against the petitioners individually in the Court of Indian 0ffenses of the Choctaw Nation. On September 29, 1995, the defendants/petitioners were formally arraigned.

On September 28, 1995, defendants/petitioners filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in the Choctaw Nation Trial Court. A hearing was held on the Motion on March 5, 1996. According to the record, no decision concerning this motion has been made by the Trial Court to date.

On July 24, 1996, petitioners/defendants filed a Petition for a Writ of Prohibition seeking to invoke the extraordinary writ powers of this Court.

After reviewing the pleadings, the exhibits and the briefs, this Court, finds that the threshold issue of whether this Court has jurisdiction to issue a Writ of Prohibition is dispositive of this case.

The Court of Indian 0ffenses is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may only exercise authority where and when it is properly established as a Tribal Court. There has been much discussion concerning the nuances of the CFR Court's dual character. One of which is its congressional federal grant of authority and the other the inherent sovereignty of Indian Nations for whom the CFR operates. However, one thing is clear. The CFR Courts depend fundamentally upon inherent Tribal sovereignty. Therefore, the analysis of each Tribe's specific circumstances must be done on an individualistic basis.

The Choctaws are a unique situation. The Choctaw Constitution specifically created a Tribal Court and limited its jurisdiction to disputes arising under any provisions of this Constitution or any rule or regulation enacted by the Tribal Council. The Choctaw Nation's citizenry expressly rejected an amendment provision to expand the Tribal Court's jurisdiction to civil, criminal and probate matters in 1983. The Constitution has never been amended concerning the Tribal Court's jurisdiction.

This case contains no evidence that the Court of Indian Appeals for the Muskogee Area Tribes has ever been properly established or designated as the Appellate Court of the Choctaw Nation. The Court notes that this analysis and conclusion does not in any way depend upon the validity or proper establishment of the Court of Indian 0ffenses of the Choctaw Nation. It would be improper for this Court to make such findings because it is outside of our jurisdictional scope. This Appellate Court states simply that it is not the proper forum to make such a determination.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted and this matter is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

DONE this 16th day of April, 1997.

CONCURS:
George Tah-Bone, Chief Magistrate, and
Rebecca A. Cryer, Associate Magistrate