No. 21-7257

Jimmy Dale Stone v. Oklahoma

Lower Court: Oklahoma
Docketed: 2022-03-02
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: Criminal-Jurisdiction Due-Process Fourteenth-Amendment Indian-Status native-american-rights post-conviction-relief Public-Law-83-280 Treaty-Provisions
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2022-04-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals violate Mr. Stone's Fourteenth-Amendment-right-to-Due-Process

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Did the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals violate Mr. Stone’s Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process by: | a) affirming the district court's Denial of Mr. Stone’s application for Post-Conviction relief even though Mr. Stone had shown prima facie evidence of his Indian Status and the | locale of the alleged Crime? b) affirming the district court's decision to deny Mr. Stone’s application for Post-Conviction based on the erroneous legal analysis in State ex rel. Matloff v. Wallace, 2021 OK CR 21, . __P3d_? | 2) Whether Oklahoma courts may exercise criminal jurisdiction over a Choctaw Indian in violation of treaty provisions between the Choctaw Indians and the United States? | 3) Does U.S. Constitution Art. 1, Section 8, deny criminal jurisdiction to any State absent a | grant by Congress? | 4) Since the State of Oklahoma did not enact Public Law 83-280, how can the State exercise jurisdiction over Indian territory? “ii

Docket Entries

2022-05-02
Petition DENIED.
2022-04-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/29/2022.
2022-02-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 1, 2022)

Attorneys

Jimmy Dale Stone
Jimmy Dale Stone — Petitioner