--- Am. Tribal Law ----, 2026 WL 2137997 (Fort Peck C.A.)
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.
Fort Peck Court of Appeals.
Annie Cantrell, Appellant,
v.
Fort Peck Tribes, Appellee.
CAUSE NO. AP # 903
|
February 28, 2026
|
March 03, 2026
Appeal from the Fort Peck Tribal Court, Lonnie Headdress, Presiding Judge.
ORDER AFFIRMING TRIBAL COURT DECISION
BACKGROUND
¶ 1 This matter comes before the Fort Peck Court of Appeals (FPCOA) on an appeal filed by Appellant Annie Cantrell from the Tribal Court’s Order issued on September 16, 2025. A jury found Appellant guilty of: Unlawful Possession of Dangerous Drugs, a Felony in violation of 7 CCOJ 413-A, Unlawful Possession of Dangerous Drugs wit Intent to Sell, a Felony in violation of 7 CCOJ 413-B, Possession of Firearm in Drug Related Crimes, a Felony in violation of 7 CCOJ 415-B, Illegal to Sell, Trade, or Bargain in Drug Paraphernalia, a Class A Misdemeanor in violation of 7 CCOJ 417, and three counts of Felony Abuse of a Child, in violation of 7 CCOJ 240-A. After her conviction, the Tribal Court sentenced Appellant to five years and 90 days in jail, $25,500 in fines, and lifetime exclusion from the Fort Peck Indian Reservation.
¶ 2 Appellant submits that the Tribes failed to prove she is an Indian person subject to the jurisdiction of the Fort Peck Tribal Court. Appellant further argues there was a discrepancy in the search warrant inventory and the DEA report regarding the amount of drugs recovered. Lastly, Appellant submits that law enforcement body camera footage was used in the trial but never provided to her during the discovery process.
¶ 3 This Court accepted the appeal for review based on a defendant’s appeal as of right from a judgment of conviction pursuant to 2 CCOJ 205(a) and issued a briefing schedule on November 3, 2025. Neither Appellant nor Appellee filed supplemental briefs in this matter.
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
¶ 4 The Fort Peck Appellate Court may review final orders from the Fort Peck Tribal Court. 2 CCOJ § 202. The Judgment of Conviction is a final order for appeal purposes.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶ 5 This Court reviews de novo all determinations of the lower court on matters of law but shall not set aside any factual determinations of the Tribal Court if such determinations are supported by substantial evidence.
DISCUSSION
¶ 6 The Appellant submits that the Tribes tailed to prove her Indian status at trial. However, the record does not reflect that Appellant over moved for a directed verdict on that basis at the trial court level. Without further briefing from Appellant regarding this issue, this Court is unable to determine whether this issue was preserved for appeal and whether the Tribal Court erred in determining the Tribe failed to prove her Iridian status beyond a reasonable doubt. This Court held in Grant v. Fort Peck Tribes, App# 871 that a Defendant must preserve this issue for appeal by raising it in a motion for directed verdict for this Court to be able to assess what evidence of his Indian status was produced in the Tribes’ case in chief and it does not appear that the Appellant in this case did that.
¶ 7 The Appellant also alleges that there is a discrepancy in the amount of drugs seized from her home and the amount reported by the Drug Enforcement Agency. Appellant is required to present this discrepancy to the jury during trial to assign weight and determine its effect on her case. This court has no information from the Tribal Court record or the parties to determine if this issue was raised at the lower court level or considered by the jury.
¶ 8 Lastly, Appellant claims that law enforcement body camera footage was withheld from her in discovery. The criminal complaint in this matter does list the body camera footage as evidence the Tribes intended to introduce at trial. Additionally, the Discovery log provided in the lower record indicates that on June 6, 2025, Appellant came to the Prosecutor’s Office but declined to watch the body camera footage. Again, without further information this Court is unable to determine whether the body camera footage was unlawfully withheld during discovery.
¶ 9 Because of Appellant’s failure to further pursue this appeal by providing a brief and evidence in support of her allegations of reversible error during her trial, we are unable to determine if these issues were properly raised at the lower court level and therefore preserved for appellate review and whether the issues actually constituted plain error or a violation of Appellant’s constitutional rights.
CONCLUSION
Due to Appellant’s failure to file a brief and further pursue this appeal, This Court dismisses this matter and affirms the Tribal Court decision.
SO ORDERED the 28th day of February 2026.
FORT PECK COURT OF APPEALS
Erin Shanley, Chief Justice
B.J. Jones, Associate Justice
James Grijalva, Associate Justice
All Citations
--- Am. Tribal Law ----, 2026 WL 2137997