Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 67-5101 (2026)
State jurisdiction for civil and criminal enforcement concerning certain matters arising in Indian country.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
State jurisdiction for civil and criminal enforcement concerning certain matters arising in Indian country.
The state of Idaho, in accordance with the provisions of 67 Statutes at Large, page 589 (Public Law 280) hereby assumes and accepts jurisdiction for the civil and criminal enforcement of state laws and regulations concerning the following matters and purposes arising in Indian country located within this state, as Indian country is defined by title 18, United States Code 1151, and obligates and binds this state to the assumption thereof:
A. Compulsory school attendance
B. Juvenile delinquency and youth rehabilitation
C. Dependent, neglected and abused children
D. Insanities and mental illness
E. Public assistance
F. Domestic relations
G. Operation and management of motor vehicles upon highways and roads maintained by the county or state, or political subdivisions thereof.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35
cases, 1968–2019 · leading case: State v. McCormack, 793 P.2d 682 (Idaho 1990).
State v. McCormack, 793 P.2d 682 (Idaho 1990). “Pursuant to Public Law 280, the Idaho legislature enacted Chapter 51, Jurisdiction in Indian Country, I.C. § 67-5101, wherein the state assumed jurisdiction for civil and criminal enforcement over certain matters, including operation of motor vehicles, arising in Indian Country.”
State v. Ambro, 123 P.3d 710 (Idaho Ct. App. 2005). “To establish state jurisdiction concerning a crime arising in Indian country, the prosecution has the burden to show that the criminal laws, which the state is seeking to enforce, fall within those matters described in Section 67-5101.”
State v. Marek, 736 P.2d 1314 (Idaho 1987). “Marek next argues that the State can only assert jurisdiction in the instant case pursuant to I.C. § 67-5101, which was *1320 enacted by our state legislature in response to the congressional act, Public Law 880, 676 Stat.”
Sheppard v. Sheppard, 655 P.2d 895 (Idaho 1982). “Idaho Code § 67-5101 (F). But, this broad assumption of jurisdiction over domestic matters is expressly limited by the provisions of Public Law 280 as quoted above and by I.”
Termination of Parental Rights of John Doe (2014-25), 349 P.3d 1205 (Idaho 2015). “The issues presented in this appeal concern whether: (1) judicial estoppel precludes Doe from challenging jurisdiction; (2) the State and the Tribes have an agreement to exercise concurrent jurisdiction under ICWA; (3) the State has concurrent jurisdiction under Idaho Code…”
State v. Barros, 957 P.2d 1095 (Idaho 1998). “However, we read the purpose of the "upon" language as a designation of where the crime, in the words of § 67-5101, must "aris[e] in Indian country" to confer enforcement power on state officials.”
State v. Michael, 729 P.2d 405 (Idaho 1986). “Pursuant to Public Law 280, the state of Idaho enacted I.C. § 67-5101 and assumed jurisdiction over Indian affairs in the following areas: § 67-5101.”
State v. Mathews, 986 P.2d 323 (Idaho 1999). “In 1963, Pursuant to Public Law 280, the State of Idaho enacted I.C. § 67-5101 which states: The state of Idaho, in accordance with the provisions of .”
State v. Snyder, 807 P.2d 55 (Idaho 1991). “Secondly, Snyder cites I.C. § 67-5101, and argues that although the State has assumed jurisdiction over motor vehicles operated on roads within Indian reservations that are maintained by the State of Idaho or a political subdivision, it does not have jurisdiction over motor…”
State v. Major, 725 P.2d 115 (Idaho 1986). “In I.C. § 67-5102, the state assumed additional jurisdiction with the consent of the concerned tribe's governing body: 67-5102.”
Knox v. State Ex Rel. Otter, 223 P.3d 266 (Idaho 2009). “To the remaining States it gave an option to assume jurisdiction over criminal offenses and civil causes of action in Indian country “at such time and in such manner as the people of the State shall, by affirmative legislative action, obligate and bind the State to assumption…”
State v. Smith, 862 P.2d 1093 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “In order to establish jurisdiction of the State of Idaho concerning a crime arising in Indian country, the prosecution had the burden to show that the criminal laws which the state was seeking to enforce fell within those matters described in I.”
— Idaho Code § 67-5101(C) — 1 case
Termination of Parental Rights of John Doe (2014-25), 349 P.3d 1205 (Idaho 2015). “The issues presented in this appeal concern whether: (1) judicial estoppel precludes Doe from challenging jurisdiction; (2) the State and the Tribes have an agreement to exercise concurrent jurisdiction under ICWA; (3) the State has concurrent jurisdiction under Idaho Code…”
— Idaho Code § 67-5101(G) — 9 cases
State v. Ambro, 123 P.3d 710 (Idaho Ct. App. 2005). “To establish state jurisdiction concerning a crime arising in Indian country, the prosecution has the burden to show that the criminal laws, which the state is seeking to enforce, fall within those matters described in Section 67-5101.”
State v. Barros, 957 P.2d 1095 (Idaho 1998). “However, we read the purpose of the "upon" language as a designation of where the crime, in the words of § 67-5101, must "aris[e] in Indian country" to confer enforcement power on state officials.”
State v. Michael, 729 P.2d 405 (Idaho 1986). “Pursuant to Public Law 280, the state of Idaho enacted I.C. § 67-5101 and assumed jurisdiction over Indian affairs in the following areas: § 67-5101.”
State v. Smith, 862 P.2d 1093 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “In order to establish jurisdiction of the State of Idaho concerning a crime arising in Indian country, the prosecution had the burden to show that the criminal laws which the state was seeking to enforce fell within those matters described in I.”
State v. Smith, 906 P.2d 141 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.