United States v. Momberg

D. Montana

United States v. Momberg

378 F. Supp. 1152, 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7615

CourtDistrict Court, D. Montana

DecidedJuly 15, 1974

DocketNo. CR 74-21-M

StatusPublished

This text of 378 F. Supp. 1152 (United States v. Momberg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Montana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Momberg, 378 F. Supp. 1152, 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7615 (D. Mont. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

RUSSELL E. SMITH, Chief Judge.

I find the defendant guilty of the crime charged. The defendant is fined the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and the execution of the judgment is suspended.

I find that the defendant, a Blackfeet Indian, cut a piece of dead wood from a live tree in Glacier National Park in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.20(a.l). He did this for the purpose of testing the Indian rights in that part of Glacier Park lying east of the Rocky Mountains. The wood so cut was obviously not cut for any of the purposes mentioned in the agreement of September 26, 1895, ratified June 10, 1896 (29 Stat. 353) and hence the defendant has no defense based upon that agreement.

There has now been called to my attention for the first time the decision of the Court of Claims in The Blackfeet (and other) Tribes of Indians v. United States, 81 Ct.Cl. 101 (1935). In view of the disposition which I have made of the case it is now unnecessary to determine, and I do not now determine, whether the Court of Claims did not in fact adjudicate the rights of the Blackfeet Indians to the lands in Glacier Park lying east of the Rocky Mountains.¹ Nor do I determine the effect of the unappealed decision in United States v. Kipp, 369 F. Supp. 774 (D.Mont.1974), which reached a contrary, perhaps theoretically correct, but possibly impermissible conclusion² as to the effect of the Act of May 11, 1910 (36 Stat. 354) creating Glacier Park.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

RUSSELL E. SMITH, Chief Judge.

I find the defendant guilty of the crime charged. The defendant is fined the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and the execution of the judgment is suspended.

I find that the defendant, a Blackfeet Indian, cut a piece of dead wood from a live tree in Glacier National Park in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.20(a.l). He did this for the purpose of testing the Indian rights in that part of Glacier Park lying east of the Rocky Mountains. The wood so cut was obviously not cut for any of the purposes mentioned in the agreement of September 26, 1895, ratified June 10, 1896 (29 Stat. 353) and hence the defendant has no defense based upon that agreement.

There has now been called to my attention for the first time the decision of the Court of Claims in The Blackfeet (and other) Tribes of Indians v. United States, 81 Ct.Cl. 101 (1935). In view of the disposition which I have made of the case it is now unnecessary to determine, and I do not now determine, whether the Court of Claims did not in fact adjudicate the rights of the Blackfeet Indians to the lands in Glacier Park lying east of the Rocky Mountains.¹ Nor do I determine the effect of the unappealed decision in United States v. Kipp, 369 F. Supp. 774 (D.Mont.1974), which reached a contrary, perhaps theoretically correct, but possibly impermissible conclusion² as to the effect of the Act of May 11, 1910 (36 Stat. 354) creating Glacier Park.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

378 F. Supp. 1152, 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-momberg-mtd-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack