A Native American arrested by Duncan police on charges of drunken driving and possession of a firearm while intoxicated has challenged the officer and the City of Duncan in federal court.
Shawn Walden, of Duncan, alleges he was “unlawfully” arrested by DPD Officer Christian Archer on Dec. 30, 2022.
The Duncan P.D. received a call that “a suspicious man” was inside a Chisholm Corner Store that day “and dropped his firearm twice.” The store is in Duncan, within the jurisdiction of the Chickasaw Nation, and the tribe and the police department had an agreement that allowed cross-commissioned DPD officers to enforce tribal law in the Chickasaw Nation.
The officer arrested Walden on charges of being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and carrying a firearm while under the influence, both of which are violations of state law.
While booking Walden, Archer discovered that he is a member of the Choctaw Nation. Because Walden is a Native American and the alleged crimes were committed in “Indian Country,” Oklahoma courts lacked criminal jurisdiction.
In a 2015 opinion written for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals by Neil Gorsuch – who was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Donald Trump two years later – ruled that “generally ‘states possess no authority to prosecute Indians for offenses in Indian Country.’” Archer filled out a Chickasaw Nation Probable Cause affidavit accusing Walden of violations of Chickasaw Nation Tribal Code. The tribal prosecutor filed charges against Walden but the tribe later dismissed them.
Walden sued Archer and the City of Duncan in Oklahoma City’s Western District Federal Court on Nov. 27, 2023, alleging he was arrested “based on a false contention” that he was drunk. In oral argument, Walden’s attorney, Oklahoma City lawyer Mark Hammons, described Walden’s claim as challenging “only … the initial arrest and whether or not there was probable cause” for Archer to arrest Walden.
Walden raised a federal claim against Archer for false arrest, and state law claims against the municipality for false arrest and unlawful detention.
Western Oklahoma U.S. District Judge Patrick Wyrick granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the City of Duncan on Sept. 22, 2025. Wyrick did not delve into “the underlying merits of whether there was a false arrest,” 10th Circuit judges found.
Instead, Wyrick held that Walden failed to overcome a “jurisdictional bar” because
Archer acted under color of tribal law rather than state law. And for the same reason, the federal trial court decreed that the state law claims failed because Archer’s actions were “outside the reach of the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act.”
The 10th Circuit overruled Wyrick. The ruling of the district court was “based on a misconception of the applicable law,” the appellate court ruled. “As a state officer, Archer could detain a suspect before conclusively determining whether the suspect was an Indian.”
In a “run-of-the-mill case, state action is easy to spot,” the circuit court wrote. “But this case adds a wrinkle.”
Archer was cross-commissioned by a municipality and by an Indian tribe. The district court granted summary judgment “on the ground that he was not a state actor at the time of the alleged constitutional violation because he was acting as a tribal officer.
The 10th Circuit previously ruled in a 2015 appeal that state officers can “lawfully” stop a suspect on a highway that runs through tribal land before determining the suspect’s tribal membership. “Thus, we must reject the ruling by the district court … that Archer did not have state authority in detaining and searching” Walden.
They also stated that the “appearance and function” of an officer’s activity are relevant.
In this case, Archer drove to the scene in a Duncan Police Department cruiser and was wearing a Duncan P.D. uniform to which were attached his DPD badge and a DPD body camera.
“He performed field sobriety tests that he was trained by Oklahoma to perform. He read Oklahoma’s Implied Consent Test Request,” which gave Walden a choice between agreeing to “the State’s test” and submitting to a blood test “by approved medical personnel under Oklahoma law,” or refusing the state’s test and having his driving privileges revoked.
After Walden did not agree, “Archer filled out a state form seeking the revocation” of Walden’s driver’s license “under state law.” And finally, Archer took Walden to the Stephens County Jail, where he was booked on “state-law charges.”
Throughout the process, Archer “never identified himself as a tribal officer or displayed any indicia of tribal authority,” the appellate court noted.
A majority declared that in view of the court record, “[W]e would have to conclude Archer was acting under color of Oklahoma law when he detained and briefly investigated Walden.”
Whether Walden ultimately prevails on the color-of-law element of his claims “is a matter for the district court” to decide, “perhaps after further factual development.”
The 10th Circuit reversed the trial court summary judgment and remanded the case back to the OKC federal trial court “for further proceedings.”