U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1999

United States v. Guassac

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided March 2, 1999 · Kozinski, Lovell, Scannlain

169 F.3d 1188 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

Keith H. Rutman, San Diego, California, for defendant-appellant Guassac., Ben L. Coleman, Federal Defenders, San Diego, California, for defendant-appellant Necochea., Peter A. Frandsen, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, San Diego, California, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. Norton (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 2004)
United States v. Carlos Reubern Guassac, and Grace Barbara Necochea (9th Cir. 1999)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

Appellants contend that the Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians is not an “Indian Tribal Organization” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1163 and, therefore, that we must reverse their conviction because the district court lacked jurisdiction over them. The Tenth Circuit rejected a *1189similar claim in United States v. Palmer, 766 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir. 1985). We agree with their reasoning and conclude that “federal criminal statutes are applicable uniformly to all tribes within the jurisdiction of Congress.” Id. at 1444. Accordingly, this case was properly brought under 18 U.S.C. § 1163.

AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.