## Facts

- Eli Lucas, a member of the Choctaw Nation, was indicted in federal court for murdering Levy (Levi) Kemp in the Choctaw Nation in Indian country.
- The indictment alleged Kemp was “a negro, and not an Indian.”
- At trial, it was shown Lucas was a Choctaw Indian and Kemp was by blood a negro.
- The prosecution relied in part on statements attributed to Kemp during his lifetime that he did not “belong to the Indian country” to support federal jurisdiction.
- Lucas was convicted of murder in the U.S. Circuit Court for the Western District of Arkansas and sentenced to death.
- Lucas sought Supreme Court review, contesting federal jurisdiction and the evidence used to prove the victim’s status.

## Issues

1. Whether the victim’s status (Indian/tribal member versus non-Indian) was a factual question for the jury that the government had to prove to establish federal jurisdiction in Indian country.
2. Whether the victim’s lifetime statements that he did not belong to the Indian country were admissible to prove his non-Indian status for jurisdictional purposes.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded.
- The Court held the victim’s status was a question of fact to be determined from evidence, and the government bore the burden to prove jurisdiction.
- The Court held the victim’s alleged statements that he did not belong to the Indian country were not admissible to prove jurisdictional status.

## Legal Principles

- Federal criminal jurisdiction in Indian country depends on statutory and treaty limits and may turn on the parties’ legal statuses.
- When federal jurisdiction depends on whether the victim is a tribal member or a non-Indian, that jurisdictional predicate is a factual matter for the jury when disputed.
- The prosecution bears the burden of proving facts necessary to establish federal jurisdiction; jurisdiction cannot be assumed from allegations alone.
- Out-of-court statements attributed to the deceased are not competent evidence to prove the deceased’s jurisdictional status for purposes of establishing federal jurisdiction.

## Conclusion

The Court set aside the murder conviction because federal jurisdiction depended on a contested factual predicate—whether the victim was a non-Indian—which the government was required to prove with admissible evidence rather than presumed allegations or the victim’s alleged extrajudicial statements.


Lucas v. United States, 163 U.S. 612 (1896)