GRAYSON v. STATE
485 P.3d 250
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2021Background
- Kadetrix Devon Grayson was convicted by a Seminole County jury of two counts of First Degree Murder and one count of Possession of a Firearm After Former Felony Conviction; sentenced to consecutive life terms and a concurrent 10-year term.
- Grayson appealed raising five propositions (ineffective assistance for poor communication; failure to question medical examiner about broken ribs; lack of state jurisdiction under McGirt; refusal to give a credibility-of-informers instruction; cumulative error).
- Following McGirt, this Court remanded for an evidentiary hearing limited to (a) Grayson’s Indian status and (b) whether the crimes occurred within the Seminole Nation reservation boundaries; parties stipulated Grayson is a Seminole Nation member and the Seminole Nation is federally recognized.
- The District Court found the Seminole Nation reservation was established by treaty and purchase (1866 Treaty and 1881 purchase), was never explicitly disestablished by Congress, and that the crimes occurred within those reservation boundaries.
- The Court of Criminal Appeals adopted those findings, concluded McGirt governs, held Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction to prosecute Grayson, granted Proposition III, and found the other claims moot.
- Judgment and sentence vacated; case remanded with instructions to dismiss; mandate stayed 20 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ineffective assistance — poor communication | Grayson: counsel refused adequate communication and excluded him from defense preparation | State: (opposed at trial; on appeal issue preserved but merits addressed below) | Moot — court granted jurisdictional relief; other propositions rendered moot |
| 2. Ineffective assistance — failure to question ME about broken ribs | Grayson: counsel was ineffective for not probing autopsy testimony about rib fractures | State: contested at trial; not dispositive to jurisdictional question | Moot |
| 3. Jurisdiction under Major Crimes Act / McGirt | Grayson: as an Indian and offender within Seminole reservation, Oklahoma lacks jurisdiction (federal/Major Crimes Act applies) | State: initially took no position below on reservation status; did not contest stipulations on appeal | Granted — court found reservation intact, Grayson is Indian, crimes occurred in Indian Country; state court lacked jurisdiction; convictions vacated and case dismissed |
| 4. Jury instruction — credibility of informers | Grayson: requested instruction on informer credibility | State: opposed instruction | Moot |
| 5. Cumulative error / due process | Grayson: accumulation of errors deprived him of fair trial and reliable sentencing | State: contested below | Moot |
Key Cases Cited
- McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020) (holds that where Congress did not clearly disestablish reservation, crimes by Indians in Indian Country are federal, not state, matters under the Major Crimes Act)
- Seminole Nation v. United States, 316 U.S. 310 (1942) (addresses treaty and purchase history bearing on reservation boundaries)
- Mattz v. Arnett, 412 U.S. 481 (1973) (allotment statutes do not necessarily disestablish reservations)