State v. Hill

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Indian Law
  • Date Filed: 04-20-2016
  • Case #: A147778
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Nakamoto, J. pro tempore for the Court; Egan, J.; & Armstrong, P.J., dissenting.
  • Full Text Opinion

Consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s test, a defendant bears the burden of producing evidence concerning Indian status, and the State bears the burden of proof to show that a defendant is not Indian.

Defendant appealed conviction for crimes committed on the Umatilla Indian Reservation. The Court held that, consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s test, a defendant bears the burden of product concerning Indian status, and the State bears the burden of proof. Defendant offered no evidence at trial of his Indian status, therefore the Court vacated and remanded for Defendant to produce evidence of his status and for the State to prove that Defendant is non-Indian.

Advanced Search