title), an assault against an individual who has not attained the age of 16 years, arson, burglary, robbery, and a felony under section 661 of this title within the Indian country, shall be subject to the same law and penalties as all other persons committing any of the above offenses, within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States. (b) Any offense referred to in subsection (a) of this section that is not defined and punished by Federal law in force within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States shall be defined and punished in accordance with the laws of the State in which such offense was committed as are in force at the time of such offense. 4 . The Eighth Circuit has reached a similar conclusion. See United States v. Pemberton, 121 F.3d 1157, 1164 (8th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Stone, 112 F.3d 971, 973
holding that a district court had jurisdiction to impose rule 11 sanctions regardless of the existence of subjectmatter jurisdiction holding that standing is component of subjectmatter jurisdiction and subjectmatter jurisdiction is essential to courts authority to hear case holding that nonstatutory rules of proce dure are not jurisdictional because only congress may determine a federal courts subjectmatter jurisdiction holding that standing is component of subjectmatter jurisdiction holding that crimes of general applicabilitythat is actions that congress has declared illegal regardless of where they occurare not affected by the enactment of  1162 and remain within the subjectmatter jurisdiction of the federal courts