Opinion ID: 2599013
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act Authorizes Tribal Police Departments To Continue Fresh Pursuit across Jurisdictional Boundaries

Text: ¶ 24 In addition to the Lummi Nation's inherent authority to enforce its laws, which necessitates authority to continue the fresh pursuit of suspects, Washington state law also grants tribal police departments the power to continue pursuing beyond their jurisdiction [i]n response to an emergency involving an immediate threat to human life or property or when in fresh pursuit. RCW 10.93.070(2), (6). As aforementioned fresh pursuit is a common law and statutory exception to territorial jurisdiction allowing law enforcement to pursue suspects across jurisdictional boundaries. ¶ 25 Until the legislature passed the Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act of 1985, chapter 10.93 RCW, peace officers had no authority to arrest offenders outside their municipality's geographic boundary. See, e.g., City of Wenatchee v. Durham, 43 Wash.App. 547, 549, 718 P.2d 819 (1986). A Seattle peace officer, for example, could not have made an arrest in Tacoma. Chapter 10.93 RCW modified these artificial barriers to mutual aid and cooperative enforcement of the laws ... RCW 10.93.001(2), by empowering general authority Washington peace officer[s] to exercise authority outside their jurisdictions [i]n response to an emergency involving an immediate threat to human life or property or when ... in fresh pursuit, as defined in RCW 10.93.120. RCW 10.93.070(2), (6). ¶ 26 Eriksen argues RCW 10.93.120 prevents tribal officers from engaging in a fresh pursuit off the reservation for traffic infractions or crimes committed on the reservation. Pet. for Review at 4. She points to RCW 10.93.120(1) to argue the doctrine applies only to peace officers with authority to make an arrest and here the tribal officer was clear he had no authority to arrest because Eriksen was non-Indian. This argument is not well-founded because RCW 10.93.120(1) must not be read in isolation from the rest of the Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act of 1985  especially the legislature's statement of intent and construction in RCW 10.93.001. Indeed, RCW 10.93.120(1) refers to [a]ny peace officer who has authority under Washington law to make an arrest .... (Emphasis added.) But this subsection governs fresh pursuit arrests. It does not follow that RCW 10.93.120(1)  which outlines when an arresting officer may proceed in fresh pursuit  precludes officers from completing stops initiated on the reservation. Moreover, it is RCW 10.93.120(2), that contains the actual definition of fresh pursuit to which the operative section, RCW 10.93.070(6), refers. ¶ 27 This definition of fresh pursuit  in RCW 10.93.120(2)  broadens the common-law doctrine, which previously applied only to felonies, to include all traffic or criminal law violations: The term `fresh pursuit,' as used in this chapter, includes, without limitation, fresh pursuit as defined by the common law.  (Emphasis added.) The common law definition employed five criteria for analysis of fresh pursuit, none of which included authority to arrest. [17] ¶ 28 Most importantly, RCW 10.93.120(1) is part of the Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act of 1985; it therefore must be  liberally construed to effectuate the intent of the legislature to modify current restrictions upon the limited territorial and enforcement authority of general authority peace officers and to effectuate mutual aid among agencies. RCW 10.93.001(3) (emphasis added). The act was passed to allow courts to consider `the Legislature's overall intent to use practical considerations in deciding whether a particular arrest across jurisdictional lines was reasonable.' Vance, 116 Wash.App. at 416, 65 P.3d 668 (emphasis added) (quoting Durham, 95 Wash.App. at 881, 978 P.2d 514). ¶ 29 RCW 10.93.070(6) is the section of the act which authorizes all general authority Washington peace officer[s] [to] enforce the traffic or criminal law[] ... [w]hen the officer is in fresh pursuit, as defined in RCW 10.93.120 (emphasis added). The issue is whether the LNPD falls within the definition of general authority Washington law enforcement agency in RCW 10.93.020, not whether its officers have power to arrest. [18] General authority Washington peace officer means any ... officer of a general authority Washington law enforcement agency who is commissioned to enforce the criminal laws of the state of Washington generally.  RCW 10.93.020(3) (emphasis added). General authority Washington law enforcement agency means: any agency, department, or division of a municipal corporation, [or] political subdivision, or other unit of local government of this state, and any agency, department, or division of state government, having as its primary function the detection and apprehension of persons committing infractions or violating the traffic or criminal laws in general. ... RCW 10.93.020(1) (emphasis added). While this statute is not unambiguous, the Lummi Nation  like all federally recognized tribes  is unquestionably a political entity. Chief Justice Marshall classified Indian tribes as domestic dependent nations whose relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1, 17, 8 L.Ed. 25 (1831), and the Supreme Court has consistently recognized Indian tribes as political communities. See McClanahan v. Ariz. State Tax Comm'n, 411 U.S. 164, 168, 174, 93 S.Ct. 1257, 36 L.Ed.2d 129 (1973) (citing Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515, 559, 8 L.Ed. 483 (1832)). But see Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 344 U.S.App. D.C. 133, 234 F.3d 714 (2000) (holding the National Labor Relations Board did not act arbitrarily in determining exemption from coverage for states or political subdivisions did not apply to tribes with respect to activities conducted off-reservations). Moreover, the LNPD's primary function is to detect and apprehend Indians who violate the law on the reservation and to detect and apprehend non-Indians who violate the law on the reservation and then turn them over to local authorities. CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS OF THE LUMMI TRIBE OF THE LUMMI RESERVATION, art. VI, § 1; TREATY OF POINT ELLIOTT art. 9, 12 Stat. 927 ([T]he said tribes agree not to shelter or conceal offenders ... but to deliver them up to the authorities for trial.  (emphasis added)). ¶ 30 Any interpretation of the Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act of 1985 that would limit the Lummi Nation's tribal sovereignty must be construed strictly: When we are faced with these two possible constructions [of a statute], our choice between them must be dictated by a principle deeply rooted in this Court's Indian jurisprudence: [S]tatutes are to be construed liberally in favor of the Indians, with ambiguous provisions interpreted to their benefit. County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation, 502 U.S. 251, 269, 112 S.Ct. 683, 116 L.Ed.2d 687 (1992) (second alteration in original) (quoting Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759, 766, 105 S.Ct. 2399, 85 L.Ed.2d 753 (1985)). Under such a construction  which resolves ambiguities in RCW 10.93.020(1), (3) in favor of the Lummi Nation  the LNPD is a general authority Washington law enforcement agency and therefore its officers may engage in fresh pursuit as defined in RCW 10.93.120(2). McClanahan, 411 U.S. at 174, 93 S.Ct. 1257 (`[d]oubtful expressions are to be resolved in favor [of the Indian tribe]') (quoting Carpenter v. Shaw, 280 U.S. 363, 367, 50 S.Ct. 121, 74 L.Ed. 478 (1930)); Blackfeet Tribe, 471 U.S. at 766, 105 S.Ct. 2399 ([T]he standard principles of statutory construction do not have their usual force in cases involving Indian law.). ¶ 31 The LNPD is the primary responder to all dispatch calls within the Lummi Reservation, regardless of Indian status. Br. of Amicus Curiae Lummi Nation, App. I (Aff. of Chief Gary James) at A-3. [19] The reservation is located on a peninsula and has many non-Indian residences. Id. It also contains the only public access to Lummi Island, an island beyond the reservation and home to many non-Indians. Id. Lummi Nation police officers therefore generally enforce Washington criminal law within the meaning of RCW 10.93.020(3) whenever they arrest lawbreakers on their reservation who are Indian, or stop and detain lawbreakers who are non-Indian and then transfer them to local authorities for prosecution. [20] ¶ 32 In sum, LNPD officers may exercise authority outside their jurisdictions when continuing in fresh pursuit of a suspect because these officers are general authority Washington peace officers within the meaning of the Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act of 1985. RCW 10.93.070, .001; accord 12 ROYCE A. FERGUSON, JR., WASHINGTON PRACTICE: CRIMINAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 3108, at 49 n. 2 (3d ed. Supp.2008-09) (referring to tribal police officer[s] as general authority Washington peace officer[s] with authority to enforce the criminal and traffic laws of the state).