No. 18-1081
Curtiss Wilson v. Horton's Towing, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: 4th-amendment 5th-amendment civil-rights drug-law-enforcement drug-laws due-process forfeiture indian-law indian-tribe-authority montana-exception montana-v-united-states non-native-americans non-native-seizure tribal-jurisdiction tribal-law tribal-sovereignty vehicle-forfeiture
Key Terms:
DueProcess CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-04-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether an Indian tribe has authority under the Montana exception to forfeit automobiles owned by non-Native Americans for violation of tribal drug laws on tribal land
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does an Indian Tribe have authority under the second exception of Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), to forfeit automobiles owned by non Native Americans for violation of tribal drug laws while on tribal land? 2. If so, does the Tribe have authority to seize a motor vehicle off reservation if it has probable cause to believe that the automobile previously contained illegal drugs while on tribal lands?
Docket Entries
2019-04-22
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/18/2019.
2019-03-25
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-03-20
Waiver of right of respondent Horton's Towing to respond filed.
2019-02-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 25, 2019)
Attorneys
Horton's Towing
Robert W. Novasky — Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S., Respondent
Robert W. Novasky — Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S., Respondent
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent