Facts: Petitioner Loretta Eriksen was prosecuted for driving under the influence (DUI) of an intoxicant after operating a motor vehicle on an Indian reservation in a manner that aroused suspicions by a tribal police officer. The tribal officer pursued and stopped Eriksen beyond the reservation’s boundary and detained her until a county sheriff’s deputy arrived to make the arrest in the county’s jurisdiction. Eriksen appealed, challenging the tribal officer’s authority to detain a non-tribe member outside the reservation’s boundary, and the Superior Court for Whatcom County affirmed the district court’s conviction. The Supreme Court of Washington granted Eriksen’s petition for direct discretionary review to resolve the issue of first impression.

Question(s): Did the tribe officer have authority to continue pursuing Eriksen’s vehicle beyond the reservation’s borders and then detain the non-Indian driver until authorities with jurisdiction to arrest for DUI arrived?

Conclusion: Justice Sanders’ opinion for the Court affirmed the judgment of the tribal court, holding that the tribal police department was a general authority Washington law enforcement agency and, therefore, its officers could engage in “fresh pursuit” as defined in RCW §10.93.120(2). Further, whenever tribe police officers arrest lawbreakers on their reservation who were Indian, or stop and detain lawbreakers who were non-Indian and then transferring them to local authorities for prosecution, they are generally enforcing Washington criminal law within the meaning of RCW §10.93.120(2).

Docket No. 80653-5

Petitioner: Loretta Eriksen

(Counsel: William J. Johnston)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: David S. McEachran and Ann L. Stodola)

Briefs:

Argument: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, September 17th, 2009

Vote: 9-0

Opinion: 166 Wn.2d 953 (2009)

Court: Alexander4 Court (2008-2009)

Alexander

Johnson

Madsen

Sanders
(Majority)

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens