skip to content
Back to top



Last updated February 16, 2010

General Rules of Indian Country Criminal Jurisdiction Apply, No State Jurisdiction

In 1973, Arizona attempted to assume jurisdiction under Public Law 280 over air and water pollution only. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 36-1801, 36-1856 (1973 Supp.). Subsequently, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976) made it clear that Public Law 280 did not encompass state regulatory jurisdiction of the type that Arizona had attempted to exercise. Arizona has since repealed its laws assuming jurisdiction over air and water pollution. Ariz. Laws 1986, § 19, Subsec. B (1987) (water pollution); Ariz. Laws 2003, § 4 (2003) (air pollution).


Ariz. Const., art. 20, ¶ 4

No current Public Law 280 or similar legislation

Case Law

State v. Zaman, 194 Ariz. 442 (1999)


State v. Lupe, 889 P.2d 4 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994)


Tohono O’odham Nation v. Schwartz, 837 F. Supp. 1024 (D. Ariz. 1993)


Dixon v. Picopa Constr. Co., 160 Ariz. 251 (1989)


State v. Flint, 157 Ariz. 227 (1989)


Val/Del, Inc. v. Superior Court, 145 Ariz. 558, 703 P.2d 502 (Ariz. App. 1985)


United States v. Superior Court In and For Maricopa County, 144 Ariz. 265 (1985)


Arizona v. San Carlos Apache Tribe of Arizona, 463 U.S. 545 (1983)


Francisco v. State, 113 Ariz. 427 (1976)


McClanahan v. Ariz. State Tax Comm’n, 411 U.S. 164 (1973)


Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217 (1959) 


In re Denteclaw, 83 Ariz. 299 (1958)

This site contains links to other web sites that may be of interest to you. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) / Children's Bureau (CB) does not endorse the views expressed or the facts presented on these sites. Their contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not represent the official views or policies of the Children's Bureau. Access to this information does not in any way constitute an endorsement by the Department of Health and Human Services. Furthermore, ACF/CB does not endorse any commercial products.