SPEARS v. STATE
485 P.3d 873
Okla. Crim. App.2021Background:
- Michael Eugene Spears was tried in Rogers County, Oklahoma, convicted of first-degree murder, and sentenced to life with possibility of parole following a jury recommendation.
- Spears appealed raising five propositions: lack of State jurisdiction, insufficiency of evidence, improper expert testimony, erroneous reasonable-doubt definition, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
- After McGirt v. Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine (a) Spears's Indian status and (b) whether the crime occurred in Indian Country (historic Cherokee Nation boundaries).
- Parties stipulated Spears is an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation and that the offense occurred within the historical geographic area of the Cherokee Nation; the District Court found the Cherokee reservation was established by 19th-century treaties and never disestablished by Congress.
- Applying McGirt, the OCCA held the land is Indian Country and the Major Crimes Act confers exclusive federal jurisdiction over the offense; the Court vacated Spears’s conviction and remanded with instructions to dismiss. All other issues were deemed moot.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| State jurisdiction under the Major Crimes Act / McGirt | Spears: He is an Indian and the murder occurred in Indian Country, so federal law (Major Crimes Act) bars Oklahoma prosecution | State: Oklahoma had authority to prosecute (state court asserted jurisdiction; on remand the State presented no evidence of congressional disestablishment) | OCCA: Land lies within Cherokee Reservation; McGirt controls; Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction — conviction vacated and case dismissed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree murder | Spears argued evidence did not prove all elements | State argued evidence was sufficient | Moot (not reached due to jurisdictional disposition) |
| Admission of expert opinion testimony | Spears claimed expert testimony was improper and prejudicial | State defended admissibility | Moot (not reached) |
| Trial court allowing prosecution to define reasonable doubt; ineffective assistance of counsel | Spears argued jury instruction and counsel performance were erroneous/prejudicial | State defended instruction and counsel conduct | Moot (not reached) |
Key Cases Cited
- McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020) (held Creek reservation remained Indian Country for federal criminal jurisdiction and controls analysis here)
- Solem v. Bartlett, 465 U.S. 463 (1984) (explains that reservation disestablishment requires a clear congressional expression)
- Hagen v. Utah, 510 U.S. 399 (1994) (disestablishment may be shown by explicit cession or return to public domain language)
- Nebraska v. Parker, 577 U.S. 481 (2016) (disestablishment requires clear congressional intent)
- Mattz v. Arnett, 412 U.S. 481 (1973) (disestablishment language need not be uniform but must be clear)