Order: STATE OF OKLAHOMA V. BRADLEY JOSEPH MATTIODA

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Tit Te
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF McINTOSH COWSATY

STATE OF OKLAHOMA JAN 19 2022
LI ERU
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) "Siepoun conte
Plaintiff, ) By. ___Deputy
vs. ) No. CF-20-144A —

)
)
BRADLEY MATTIODA, )
)
Defendant. y

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Now on this the 49- day of January, 2022, comes on for hearing Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. The State of Oklahoma appears by and
through Assistant District Attorney Gregory Stidham. The Defendant appears in
person and with counsel, Ryan Ferguson.

Procedural Background

The Defendant is charged with Burglary in the Second-Degree violation of
Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1435.

The Defendant’s sole proposition in his motion to dismiss is the State of
Oklahoma lacks jurisdiction to prosecute. Citing McGirt, the Defendant urges his
status as an Indian under federal law bars State prosecution when the criminal
offense also occurs within the historical boundaries of the Muskogee Creek Nation.
The Defendant further argues the crime the State alleges is such as would fall within
the definition of “major” for the purpose of the Major Crimes Act (MCA), 18 U.S.C.A.

§ 1153. If the MCA grants the federal government jurisdiction in this proceeding, itwould be exclusive to the United States and the State lacks concurrent jurisdiction
to prosecute.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

At the outset, the Court accepts the evidentiary stipulations of the parties.
These evidentiary stipulations being the Defendant is an Indian under federal law
and the crime occurred within the historical boundary of the Muskogee Creek Nation.
These evidentiary stipulations find support in defense exhibit (1) admitted to trial.
On the basis of the stipulations the Court first finds the Defendant is an Indian under
federal law. See Goforth v. State, 1982 OK CR 48, 644 P.2d 114. Specifically, the Court
finds the Defendant’s tribe is Choctaw and the Defendant possesses a degree of
Indian blood. Furthermore, the Court finds the offense occurred within the historical
boundaries of the Creek Nation reservation.

Pursuant to McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. ___, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020)] the
Court finds the State lacks jurisdiction to prosecute criminal offenses which occur in
McIntosh County by those with legal status as Indians when the offense also occurred
within the historical boundaries of the Creek Nation.

Community safety is of the upmost importance to this Court. As previously set
forth, McGirt impacts the entirety of McIntosh County. The safety of our community,
including our Native American population, causes this Court to be extremely cautious
in interpreting McGirt. Nevertheless, it is this Court’s duty to follow the law. Itisa
basic principal of government to say there always exists a need for a prosecutorial

authority and a court available to address potential criminal conduct. This protectsboth the alleged victims, the public, and the Defendant who carries the presumption
of innocence and has due process rights to a speedy trial. The Court cannot say with
certainty this basic principle currently exists in McIntosh County. There appears to
be much confusion among sovereigns in our County as to whom has the prosecuting
authority over certain offenses. It pains this Court to contemplate the potential harm
which will inevitably arise from these new and abrupt jurisdictional challenges. This
Court hopes for prompt cooperation between all sovereigns to ensure McIntosh
County remains safe, stable, and just.

For the reasons above, the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support
is GRANTED and these proceedings are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction upon the
expiration of the Stay set forth below.

Due to the severity of the alleged crime this decision shall be Stayed for (20)
days (exclusive of today) unless an appeal is taken. The Court stays this matter
pursuant to Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 22, § 845, 846. The State of Oklahoma is directed
to notify the United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Oklahoma, of this
decision by mail with proof of mailing reflected in the file within (5) days. A copy of
this Order is also to be mailed by the Clerk, registered mail, return receipt requested,
the expense of which to be paid from the Court fund.

It is the intent of this Order to be final for the purposes of appeal.

BE IT SO ORDERED!
Ze IC, Z

Prendon Bridges
Associate District Judge McIntosh CountyCERTIFICATE OF MAILING

Thereby certify on the day of January, 2022, I mailed a true and correct copy of
the foregoing document to the following:

Ryan Ferguson at P.O. Box 149, Checotah, Oklahoma 74426

McIntosh County District Attorney Office at P.O. Box 125, Eufaula, OK 74432

United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District, 520 Denison Ave,
Muskogee, OK 74401 (registered mail, return receipt requested).

ge Bkendon Bridges

McIntosh County