Overview

On December 15, 2004, the Peltier attorneys filed a Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence in the U.S. District Court in the District of North Dakota. 

The federal jurisdiction conferred by the statutes under which Peltier was convicted and sentenced depended on the location of the alleged crime, not against whom the crime was allegedly committed.  The statutes required that the acts in question take place "within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States".  Because the acts occurred on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, which is neither "within the special maritime [or] territorial jurisdiction of the United States," Leonard Peltier was convicted and sentenced for crimes over which the U.S. District Court had no jurisdiction.

Peltier called on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in effect at the time of his sentencing – specifically, Rule 35(a)—that provided that the Court could correct an illegal sentence at any time for any offense committed before November 1, 1997.

If the Court does not recognize the Pine Ridge Reservation as sovereign "then one must wonder, what does sovereignty mean?" said Barry Bachrach, lead counsel for Leonard Peltier.

"Sovereignty seems to be a concept that is merely given lip service. It is raised when the government does not want to get involved, and infringed upon when the government wants to take action for its own benefit."

According to Bachrach, "Leonard Peltier was never charged with crimes over which the United States had jurisdiction. The history of the constitution, and the statutes implicated, unequivocally establish that Mr. Peltier was not convicted under the Indian Crimes Act, the only possible authority under which the government could have tried and convicted Leonard Peltier. Those convictions must be set aside as a matter of law."

Case Files

• Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence, filed on December 15, 2004, in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Southeastern Division (Word).

• Government's Brief Resisting Defendant's Motion, December 29, 2004 (PDF Format).

• Defendant's Reply Brief, January 17, 2005 (Word).

• Motion to Expedite, filed on March 9, 2005 (Word).

• On June 15, 2005, oral arguments were heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Southeastern Division.

• A denial of Peltier's motion to correct an illegal sentence was rendered in July 2005. In response, the Peltier attorneys filed an appeal with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on September 30, 2005 (PDF Format).

• On October 27, 2005, the appellee's brief was filed (PDF Format).

• In November 2005, the Legal Team submitted its Reply Brief to the court.

• Oral arguments were heard on February 13, 2006, in St. Louis, Missouri.

• The court denied the appeal on April 28, 2006 (PDF Format).