Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Boome, (1990)

Decision Date05 March 1990
Docket NumberUPP-CIH-10/89-039
PartiesUPPER SKAGIT INDIAN TRIBE v. LEONARD BOOME
CourtUpper Skagit Tribal Court of Appeals

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.

Appearances: Deborah Wagner, Prosecutor for the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

Before: John Roe, Presiding Judge; Judge Emma Dulik; and Judge Rose E. Purser.

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.

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

2.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 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.

4.On January 3, 1990 at a hearing before the trial courtthe 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.

5.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

1....

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex