ARAKAWA v. LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM

6 NICS App. 87, ARAKAWA v. LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM (October 2001)

IN THE LOWER LEWHA KLALLAM TRIBAL COURT OF APPEALS

LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM INDIAN RESERVATION

PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON

Kenneth S. Arakawa, Jr., Appellant/Defendant,

Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Respondent/Plaintiff.

No. 00-05-0253 (October 24, 2001)

SYLLABUS^*

Following a jury trial, trial court convicted Appellant of assault. Appellant challenged trial court’s failure to apply state law regarding admissibility of evidence. Court of Appeals holds that tribal code explicitly prohibits use of state and federal rules of evidence in tribal court. Judgment affirmed.

Before: Lawrence Numkena, Chief Justice; Darwin Long Fox, Justice; Rose E. Purser, Justice.

OPINION

Numkena, C.J.:

This matter came before the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribal Court of Appeals pursuant to a Notice of Appeal filed by Appellant Kenneth S. Arakawa, Jr. Appellant appeals from the Lower Elwha Tribal Court Judgment and Sentence, entered pursuant to a jury verdict, finding him guilty of Assault IV.

Prior to deciding whether to accept his appeal for review, this Court of Appeals ordered Appellant to perfect his appeal by filing a more specific statement of his grounds of appeal, as required by Lower Elwha Tribal Code, Title I, §VII(C)(2). Appellant's written statement of his grounds for appeal assigns error to the lower court’s "refus[al] to apply state law regarding a questions of admissible evidence when tribal law is non‑existent.”

The Lower Elwha Court Procedures Ordinance specifically addresses the issue regarding rules of evidence: "The rules of evidence used in state and federal courts shall not apply to hearings in the Lower Elwha Tribal Court." Lower Elwha Court Pro. Ord. §IV(B)(1). Tribal law

6 NICS App. 87, ARAKAWA v. LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM (October 2001) p. 88

on this issue could not be more clear. The lower court did not err when it declined to apply state rules evidence to a proceeding in tribal court.

Therefore, based on the foregoing, this appeal is hereby denied.

The syllabus is not a part of the Court's Opinion. The syllabus is a summary of the Opinion prepared by the publishers of this Reporter only for the convenience of the reader. Therefore, the syllabus should not be cited in whole or part as legal authority. Only the Opinion, which follows the syllabus, may be cited as legal authority.