§
Subdivision 1.Definition.
As used in this section, "band" means the federally recognized Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians.
§
Subd. 2.Law enforcement agency.
(a) The band has the powers of a law enforcement agency, as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, paragraph (f), if all of the requirements of clauses (1) to (4) are met:
(1) the band agrees to be subject to liability for its torts and those of its officers, employees, and agents acting within the scope of their employment or duties arising out of a law enforcement agency function conferred by this section, to the same extent as a municipality under chapter 466, and the band further agrees, notwithstanding section 16C.05, subdivision 7, to waive its sovereign immunity for purposes of claims of this liability;
(2) the band files with the Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training a bond or certificate of insurance for liability coverage with the maximum single occurrence amounts set forth in section 466.04 and an annual cap for all occurrences within a year of three times the single occurrence amount;
(3) the band files with the Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training a certificate of insurance for liability of its law enforcement officers, employees, and agents for lawsuits under the United States Constitution; and
(4) the band agrees to be subject to section 13.82 and any other laws of the state relating to data practices of law enforcement agencies.
(b) The band may enter into mutual aid/cooperative agreements with the Mille Lacs County sheriff under section 471.59 to define and regulate the provision of law enforcement services under this section.
(c) Only if the requirements of paragraph (a) are met, the band shall have concurrent jurisdictional authority under this section with the Mille Lacs County Sheriff's Department over all persons in the geographical boundaries of the Treaty of February 22, 1855, 10 Stat. 1165, in Mille Lacs County, Minnesota.
§
Subd. 3.Peace officers.
If the band complies with the requirements set forth in subdivision 2, the band is authorized to appoint peace officers, as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, paragraph (c), who have the same powers as peace officers employed by local units of government.
§
Subd. 4.County jail.
The sheriff of the county in which the violation occurred is responsible for receiving persons arrested by peace officers appointed under subdivision 3 and acting under the authority conferred by this section.
§
Subd. 5.Prosecuting authority.
The Mille Lacs County attorney is responsible to prosecute or initiate petitions for any person arrested, investigated, or detained by peace officers appointed under subdivision 3 and acting under the authority conferred by this section.
§
Subd. 6.Effect on federal law.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict the band's authority under federal law.
§
Subd. 7.Construction.
This section is limited to law enforcement authority only, and nothing in this section shall affect any other jurisdictional relationships or disputes involving the band or current reservation boundaries or entitle the band as a municipality or subdivision of government to any fine or penalty revenue allocation under section 484.90.
Notes of Decisions
Armstrong v. Mille Lacs Cnty. Sheriffs Dept., 112 F. Supp. 2d 840 (D. Minnesota 2000).
· cites it 28× “In contrast, the Plaintiffs contend that, by virtue of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 626.90, 3 the Mille *843 Lacs Defendants were exercising State authority, for which they had expressly waived their otherwise available sovereign immunity, thereby rendering them…”
Nevada v. Hicks, 533 U.S. 353 (2001).
· cites it 2× “(West 1996) (cooperative agreements for solid waste management); Minn. Stat. § 626.90 et seq. (Supp. 2001) (authorizing cooperative agreements between state law enforcement and tribal peace officers); Nev.”
State v. Davis, 773 N.W.2d 66 (Minn. 2009).
· cites it 8× “" Minn. Stat. § 626.90 , subd. 3 (2008). "The Mille Lacs County attorney is responsible to prosecute or initiate petitions for any person arrested by" tribal officers acting under this authority.”
Armstrong v. Mille Lacs Cnty. Sheriffs Dep't, 228 F. Supp. 2d 972 (D. Minnesota 2002).
· cites it 14× “We initially note that, for purposes of the Tribal Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, we are treating the Tribal Defendants as we would a municipality, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 626.90, Subdivision 2, which provides express preconditions for the Mille…”
Hester v. Redwood Cnty., 885 F. Supp. 2d 934 (D. Minnesota 2012).
· cites it 5× “The Armstrong court based its decision that Mille Lacs was amenable to suit under § 1983 on Minn. Stat. § 626.90 , a Minnesota statute very similar to § 626.”
State v. Thompson, 929 N.W.2d 21 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “But there is no such statute for the Red Lake Band. Another nearby statute defines the law-enforcement authority of other Indian tribes and bands.”
State v. Manypenny, 682 N.W.2d 143 (Minn. 2004).
“, * * * Minn.Stat. 626.90 et seq. (Supp. 2001) (authorizing cooperative agreements between state law enforcement and tribal peace officers) * * *.”
Davis v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, 26 F. Supp. 2d 1175 (D. Minnesota 1998).
· cites it 2× “Davis concedes that she failed to exhaust tribal remedies but opposes the Band and Genia’s motion for dismissal by arguing that her failure to exhaust was excused because the tribal court was biased against her and exhaustion was futile, the Band had expressly waived its…”
Olson v. N.D. Dep't of Transp., 909 N.W.2d 676 (N.D. 2018).
“; Minn. Stat. § 626.90 , subd. 3 (2017). The officer arrested the defendant on a warrant unrelated to the immediate traffic violations.”
Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe v. Cnty. of Mille Lacs, Minnesota (D. Minnesota 2020).
· cites it 4× “) The 2008 Agreement allowed Band officers to exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the Mille Lacs County Sheriff’s Department to enforce Minnesota state law, as provided in Minn. Stat. § 626.90 . (Id.) On July 18, 2016, County Attorney Walsh issued the “Mille Lacs County…”
— Minn. Stat. § 626.90(2) — 1 case
Armstrong v. Mille Lacs Cnty. Sheriffs Dept., 112 F. Supp. 2d 840 (D. Minnesota 2000).
“In contrast, the Plaintiffs contend that, by virtue of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 626.90, 3 the Mille *843 Lacs Defendants were exercising State authority, for which they had expressly waived their otherwise available sovereign immunity, thereby rendering them…”
— Minn. Stat. § 626.90(2)(b) — 1 case
Armstrong v. Mille Lacs Cnty. Sheriffs Dept., 112 F. Supp. 2d 840 (D. Minnesota 2000).
“In contrast, the Plaintiffs contend that, by virtue of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 626.90, 3 the Mille *843 Lacs Defendants were exercising State authority, for which they had expressly waived their otherwise available sovereign immunity, thereby rendering them…”
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.