Quileute Indian Tribe v. Robert S. Rice

1 NICS App. 57, Quileute Tribe v. Rice (July 1989)

IN THE QUILEUTE TRIBAL COURT OF APPEALS

QUILEUTE INDIAN RESERVATION

LA PUSH, WASHINGTON

No. 89-Cr-0207 (July 14, 1989)

SUMMARY

The Appellate Court, hearing the matter at a trial de novo, found the evidence not sufficient to convict the defendant of hunting without a permit and exceeding the daily bag limit. The evidence indicated that while another person had killed the elk, the defendant was in possession and proceeded to butcher it without reporting or properly tagging it. The defendant was consequently found guilty of failure to report species of game and properly tag animal.

FULL TEXT

Before:	Rosemary Irvin, Chief Justice; John Roe, Associate Justice; and Elbridge Coochise, Associate Justice.
Appearances:	Robert S. Rice appeared pro se. Stanley B. Meyers, Jr., Prosecutor for the Quileute Indian Tribe.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IRVIN, Chief Justice:

This matter came before this Court on appeal on July 14, 1989. Pursuant to Section 3.02 of the Quileute Law and Order Code it was tried as a new trial before Rosemary J. Irvin, Chief Justice; John Roe, Associate Justice; and Elbridge Coochise, Associate Justice.

The Appellant appeals convictions on two charges: (1) Exceeding The Daily Bag Limit and (2) Failure to Report Species of Game and Properly Tag Animal.

In addition to the two convictions, the Appellant was acquitted of Hunting Without a Permit. In appealing the case the Appellant chooses to have the Court retry all three charges.

On February 12, 1989 the Appellant, an enrolled member of the Quileute Indian Tribe, and his cousin, Clyde Fisher, an enrolled member of the Hoh Indian Tribe, shot two elk. The Appellant had already killed his Tribal limit of two elk for the season. The Hoh Tribe has no agreement with the State of Washington regarding the hunting of elk. The two elk were observed by Washington State Game Agent Ron Cram on February 14, 1989 hanging at the Appellant's residence. At that time the Appellant was able to produce his B.I.A.

1 NICS App. 57, Quileute Tribe v. Rice (July 1989) p. 58

identification and one notched animal kill tag. He stated to Officer Cram that he had killed one of the elk for his grandmother, a Quileute Tribal member, and that the other elk was for Rice's sister Peggy Tisdale, also a Quileute Tribal member. Peggy Tisdale, who is disabled, was to bring the second tag but she had had car trouble.

Officer Cram returned on February 16 to find a second tag, notched for the kill of February 12 but dated as issued February 15, loose within Rice's residence.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Fisher's testimony under oath, after being advised numerous times of his right to remain silent, and with similar charges pending against him in State court, was that he, not Mr. Rice, shot the second elk for Peggy Tisdale.

The tag that the Defendant obtained for the first elk was not immediately attached to the game and notched prior to butchering being completed as required by law.

Therefore, the Court issues the following:

ORDER

The Trial Court's ruling holding the Appellant guilty of Exceeding the Daily Bag Limit of One Elk is reversed and the judgment on this charge vacated.

The Trial Court's ruling finding the Appellant guilty of Failure to Report the Species and Properly Tag the Animal is affirmed. Specifically, the Appellate Court finds the Defendant guilty of Failure to Properly Tag the Animal according to the Quileute Tribe Hunting Regulations for 1988-1989 Section VIII.

The Trial Court's ruling finding the Appellant not guilty of Hunting Without Obtaining a Permit is affirmed.

The judgment on all three charges is modified to the extent that for the conviction of Failure to Report the Species and Properly Tag the Animal the Appellant is sentenced to pay a fine of $400.00 (four hundred dollars) as provided under the Quileute Tribe Hunting Regulations 1988-1989 Section XVI. C. which provides as follows:

Any person who kills or injures, takes, captures, or possesses wildlife in any manner or by any means contrary to this regulation is guilty of an offense, and upon conviction shall be sentenced to a fine of not less than $50.00 nor more than $1000.00 per violation.

1 NICS App. 57, Quileute Tribe v. Rice (July 1989) p. 59

The fine is to be paid at the rate of $20.00 (twenty dollars) per month. The first payment is due in the Court Clerk's office by August 4, 1989 and for 19 successive months thereafter with payment on the fourth of each month, or the next day the Tribal offices are open if the fourth falls on a weekend or holiday.