Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Leonard Boome

1 NICS App. 86, Upper Skagit Tribe v. Boome (March 1990)

IN THE UPPER SKAGIT TRIBAL COURT OF APPEALS

UPPER SKAGIT INDIAN RESERVATION

SEDRO WOOLLEY, WASHINGTON

No. UPP-CIH-10/89-039 (March 5, 1990)

SUMMARY

The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's dismissal of a charge of an improperly noticed elk tag. An agreement by the parties to continue the hearing past the 60 day limit did not require dismissal of the charge. The trial court improperly applied the speedy trial rule to a civil hunting violation when it dismissed the charge against the defendant.

FULL TEXT

Before:	John Roe, Presiding Judge; Judge Emma Dulik; and Judge Rose E. Purser.
Appearances:	Deborah Wagner, Prosecutor for the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

This matter came on for a hearing before the Upper Skagit Court of Appeals on February 14, 1990. The Tribe was represented by Deborah Wagner, Prosecutor. The Respondent, Leonard Boome filed a notice with the Court Clerk advising he would not be able to attend the appeal hearing and that he waived his right to be present.

The Court heard arguments from the Appellant and reviewed the records and files herein. The Court being fully advised in the premises does now make the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT

On January 8, 1990, the Trial Court applied the Upper Skagit Law and Order Code's speedy trial rule, Section 4.250 (4) and dismissed the charge of an improperly notched elk tag, a civil charge.

On January 9, 1990, the Tribe's Prosecutor filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's Order of dismissal, dated January 8, 1990.

On January 10, 1990, the trial court denied the motion for reconsideration and attempted to correct its error by citing Section 3.080 (a) of the Hunting Code which provides that a hearing is to be set no more than 60 days from initial appearance. The trial court also found that Defendant was not advised of his right to a hearing within

1 NICS App. 86, Upper Skagit Tribe v. Boome (March 1990) p. 87

sixty (60) days by the Court at the reading of charges, at the time of original setting of trial November 29, 1989 or on January 3, 1990.

On January 3, 1990 at a hearing before the trial court the Defendant, Mr. Boome, stated "yes" to the Court's query of whether he wished a continuation and the parties agreed to set the hearing on a later date.

That Judge Emma Dulik, at the request of all the parties, granted a continuance of this matter on November 29, 1989 to January 3, 1990. Judge Dulik had no other contact with this case and no objection was heard to her sitting on this Court of Appeals.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

That on January 8, 1990 the Trial Court improperly applied the speedy trial rule of the Law and Order Code to a Civil Code hunting violation of an improperly notched elk tag when it dismissed the charge against Leonard Boome.

On January 10, 1990, the requirement of a hearing to be set by the Court to contest the allegations was met within the 60 days of the initial hearing but did not occur within that time due to Respondent's affirmative response to the Trial Court's question and subsequent agreement to a continuance beyond the sixty (60) day period.

That the agreement of the parties to continue the hearing beyond 60 days did not violate the sixty (60) day requirement of Section 3.080 (a) of the Hunting Ordinance.

The Court of Appeals finds no requirement in the law to advise the Defendant of a right to a hearing within 60 days by the Court's reading of the charges.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

That the Trial Court's Order of dismissal of charges against Leonard Boome for an improperly notched elk tag, dated January 8, 1990 is hereby reversed.

That the Trial Court's Order, dated January 10, 1990, denying the Upper Skagit Tribe's motion for reconsideration of the trial court's order of January 8, 1990 is reversed.

That the case of the Upper Skagit Tribe vs. Leonard Boome is remanded back to the Upper Skagit Tribal Court for a hearing.