Canava v. Department of Homeland Security
817 F.3d 1348
| Fed. Cir. | 2016Background
- Angel Canava, a U.S. Border Patrol Agent, pled guilty in Arizona to “Unlawful Imprisonment by Strangulation, Domestic Violence,” characterized in the judgment as an "undesignated offense" (class six range) and was sentenced to probation.
- DHS invoked 5 U.S.C. § 7371 and removed Canava from federal law enforcement because § 7371 mandates removal of any law enforcement officer "convicted of a felony."
- Canava challenged the removal in arbitration, arguing his plea was to an "undesignated offense," not an actual felony, and thus § 7371 did not apply; the Arbitrator sustained the removal.
- The Federal Circuit reviews arbitrator decisions under the same standard as Merit Systems Protection Board decisions and will affirm unless arbitrary, procedurally defective, or unsupported by substantial evidence.
- The court examined Arizona law (A.R.S. § 13-604(A) and related provisions) and concluded that a class six offense left "undesignated" under § 13-604(A) is treated as a felony for all purposes until a court affirmatively designates it a misdemeanor.
- The court affirmed: Canava’s plea and sentence matched class six felony statutory ranges and were entered under § 13-604(A) procedures, so the conviction qualified as a felony for § 7371 purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Canava was "convicted of a felony" under 5 U.S.C. § 7371 | Canava: he pleaded to an "undesignated offense," not a felony; § 7371 thus does not apply until a court designates felony status | DHS: under Arizona law an undesignated class 6 offense under A.R.S. § 13-604(A) is treated as a felony until affirmatively designated a misdemeanor; thus § 7371 applies | Held: conviction qualified as a class six felony for § 7371 because plea/sentence matched felony ranges and § 13-604(A) treats undesignated offenses as felonies until designation |
| Whether the plea agreement invoked A.R.S. § 13-604(A) procedures | Canava: plea did not specifically cite § 13-604(A) and therefore should not be treated under that statute | DHS: plea duplicated § 13-604(A) sentencing options (felony, misdemeanor, or probation with deferred designation) and thus falls within § 13-604(A) framework | Held: plea reflected § 13-604(A) procedures; judge had discretion to defer designation, so the offense is treated as a felony until redesignation |
| Whether applying § 7371 to an "undesignated" offense violates Supremacy Clause | Canava: federal statute should not apply to state-created "undesignated" offenses treated as felonies under state law | DHS: no conflict; federal mandate applies where the offense qualifies as a felony under state or federal definitions | Held: no Supremacy Clause problem; offense qualifies as a felony under both Arizona law and federal definitions, so § 7371 applies |
| Standard of review and sufficiency of evidence | Canava: Arbitrator erred in factual/legal conclusion that the conviction was a felony | DHS: Arbitrator’s conclusion was supported by law and the plea's terms | Held: Arbitrator’s decision was supported by law and substantial evidence; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Appleberry v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 793 F.3d 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (standard of review for arbitrator decisions follows MSPB review)
- Johnson v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 625 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (same review standard authority)
- Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 560 U.S. 563 (2010) (definition of "felony" in federal context)
- State v. Arana, 173 Ariz. 370 (1992) (Arizona Supreme Court: undesignated felony remains subject to felony sanctions until redesignation)
- State v. Diaz, 173 Ariz. 270 (1992) (interpretation regarding predecessor statute to A.R.S. § 13-604)
- State v. Corno, 179 Ariz. 151 (App. 1994) (trial court not bound by plea sentencing provisions it finds inappropriate)