process to enforce state law governing off-reservation conduct [] I would go right to Montana’s rule that a tribe's civil jurisdiction generally stops short of nonmember defendants.” Hicks, 533 U.S. at 375, 121 S.Ct. at 2318, 150 L.Ed.2d at 418. Justice O'Connor, with whom Justices Stevens and Breyer joined, flatly rejected Justice Scalia’s analysis in this portion of his writing, stating that it was "unmoored from our precedents.” Hicks, 533 U.S. at 387, 121 S.Ct. at 2324, 150 L.Ed.2d at 425. Therefore, as indicated, only two justices concurred with that portion of the language and reasoning of the lead opinion upon which the State relies in this case. ZINTER, Justice (concurring specially). [¶ 21.] The State requests that we overrule State v. Spotted Horse, 462 N.W.2d 463 (S.D.1990) (<HOLDING>). Spotted Horse has two underpinnings. The
holding that the arrest of an indian on indian land was illegal because the state had no jurisdiction over the reservation to enforce its laws  including the execution of a search warrant  unless congress consented to the states jurisdiction holding that based on kansas exercise of criminal jurisdiction over an indian on reservation pursuant to kansas act and ksa  793321 state had jurisdiction in rem to seize contraband cigarettes from his store on reservation holding that the state has no jurisdiction to pursue an indian onto an indian reservation for criminal offenses committed off the reservation holding that state has no jurisdiction over civil suit by nonindian against indian where cause of action arises on indian reservation holding that oklahoma police officer was without jurisdiction to arrest indian inside indian reservation when the state has neither received by express grant nor acted pursuant to congressional authorization to assume criminal jurisdiction over indian country