FORT PECK TRIBAL COURT
OF APPEALS
FORT PECK INDIAN RESERVATION
ASSINIBOINE AND SIOUX TRIBES
POPLAR, MONTANA
**********************************
Fort Peck Tribes, vs. Dana Mireau,Respondent/Appellee |
APPEAL NO. 355 |
**********************************
OPINION
**********************************
This matter arises from an order of dismissal of a criminal complaint "without prejudice" clue to failure of service of two material prosecution witnesses. The factual and legal setting is essentially the same as in FPCOA #351 Tribes v. Stafne (2002).
On the day of trial, two of the prosecution's material witnesses had not been served and were not present. The Tribal Prosecutor requested a continuance and the defendant made a motion to dismiss. The Tribal Court dismissed the matter without stating its legal basis for doing so. A review of the procedural history of the case shows no threat of undue delay. Defendant did not raise 'speedy trial' as an issue, nor do we find such issue existing based upon the following chronology:
11 -25-99 Alleged assault
11-29-99 Complaint issued
12-01-99 Arraignment
01 -06-00 Pre-trial conference
05-10-00 Bench trial - complaint dismissed
Based upon the reasoning set forth in Stafne we find that the Tribal Court abused its discretion in denying the Tribal Prosecutor's motion for continuance, therefore we set the order of dismissal aside and remand for further proceedings as deemed appropriate
Dated this 22nd day of February 2002.FOR THE FORT PECK COURT OF APPEALS
BY____________________________________
Gary P. Sullivan
Chief Justice
CONCUR
BY____________________________________
Gerard M. Schuster
Associate Justice
I respectfully dissent for the same reasons set forth in my dissent in FPCOA #351 Tribes v. Stafne (2002).
BY____________________________________
Carroll J. DeCoteau
Associate Justice