STATE ex rel. MATLOFF v. WALLACE
497 P.3d 686
Okla. Crim. App.2021Background
- Clifton Parish was convicted by jury of second-degree felony murder in 2012 and his conviction became final in June 2014 after direct appeal.
- Parish filed a post-conviction application (Aug. 17, 2020) arguing McGirt v. Oklahoma deprived the State of subject-matter jurisdiction because his crime occurred within the Choctaw Reservation.
- Associate District Judge Jana Wallace granted relief, finding Parish was an Indian, the crime occurred in Indian Country, and the State lacked jurisdiction under the Major Crimes Act; she vacated the conviction.
- The State sought a stay and petitioned the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals for a writ of prohibition to prevent enforcement of Judge Wallace’s order.
- The Court considered whether McGirt (and related reservation rulings) announce a new rule and whether that rule must be applied retroactively to void final state convictions, analyzing Teague principles and the Tenth Circuit’s decision in United States v. Cuch.
- The Court held McGirt announced a new procedural rule that is not retroactive on state collateral review to void final convictions, granted prohibition, and reversed the order vacating Parish’s conviction (and overruled prior contrary post-McGirt post-conviction rulings).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Parish) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McGirt applies retroactively on state post-conviction review to void convictions final before McGirt | McGirt is jurisdictional and non-waivable; subject-matter defects void convictions at any time, so McGirt must void final convictions | McGirt recognized existing Indian Country jurisdiction; jurisdictional defects are non-waivable and therefore McGirt should void final convictions | McGirt is a new procedural rule and shall not be applied retroactively on state collateral review to void final convictions |
| Whether prohibition is appropriate to prevent enforcement of the post-conviction order vacating Parish’s conviction | The State has no adequate remedy by appeal because the appeal period lapsed; Judge Wallace exceeded authority by vacating a final conviction under a non-retroactive rule | Parish contends subject-matter defect renders conviction void and a remedy is available via post-conviction relief | Writ of prohibition granted: Judge Wallace’s order was unauthorized under state law and reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020) (recognized continued existence of tribal reservation jurisdiction over major crimes)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (framework for retroactivity of new rules in collateral review)
- United States v. Cuch, 79 F.3d 987 (10th Cir. 1996) (Hagen jurisdictional ruling held non-retroactive to collateral attacks; persuasive on retroactivity of jurisdictional decisions)
- Ferrell v. State, 902 P.2d 1113 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995) (Oklahoma adoption of Teague-style non-retroactivity for state post-conviction review)
- Edwards v. Vannoy, 141 S. Ct. 1547 (2021) (Supreme Court eliminated the Teague "watershed" exception to retroactivity)
- Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348 (2004) (distinguishes substantive from procedural rules for retroactivity analysis)
- Gosa v. Mayden, 413 U.S. 665 (1973) (example of non-retroactivity for jurisdictional limitation in military-court cases)