SD: Local officers called tribal officers and respected tribal authority before arresting def

Defendant was wanted for assault and found at an Indian casino hotel on a reservation. They took him into custody and towed his vehicle. The search of his hotel room and vehicle by search warrants was reasonable and respected tribal sovereignty. Also, officers knew from looking in the window that he was in his room, but he wasn’t responding to calls to the room and his cell phone. The warrantless entry was reasonable. State v. Evans, 2021 SD 12, 2021 S.D. LEXIS 17 (Feb. 26, 2021):

[*P53] Even if we presume the Tribe has an interest in all law enforcement activity occurring within reservation borders, the state officers here respected such an interest, not only by way of notification, but also by seeking the assistance of tribal law enforcement. In fact, tribal officers were present during the execution of the arrest warrant and were invited to assist in the execution of the search warrant. Therefore, Evans’s suggestion that “tribal sovereignty” principles were ignored in this case is simply misplaced. He has not identified in what way the State’s execution of the search warrants here infringed on the right of the Tribe to make its own laws and be ruled by them. The circuit court did not err in denying Evans’s motion to suppress.

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Community caretaking function, Emergency / exigency. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.