Parsons v. Arizona Department of Health Services
395 P.3d 709
Ariz. Ct. App.2017Background
- In 2006 Parsons pled guilty to possession of narcotics for sale (class 2 felony), was placed on probation, and was discharged in 2008 after completing probation.
- In 2012 the superior court set aside the judgment under A.R.S. § 13-907, ordering dismissal and release from "all applicable penalties and disabilities" (except firearm rights) and restoring most civil rights.
- In 2014 Parsons applied for a medical-marijuana designated caregiver registration under the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA); he attested he had no "excluded felony" and submitted fingerprints.
- DHS issued a card before receiving Parsons’s criminal-history report (statute requires decision within 15 days); the later report showed the 2006 felony and the 2012 set-aside order.
- DHS concluded a § 13-907 set-aside does not eliminate the fact of conviction and revoked Parsons’s caregiver card as an excluded felony under the AMMA; the administrative decision and the superior court both upheld revocation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a conviction set aside under A.R.S. § 13-907 can be treated as an "excluded felony" under the AMMA for caregiver eligibility | Parsons: § 13-907 releases him from "penalties and disabilities," so ineligibility for a caregiver card is released and he need not disclose the conviction | DHS: § 13-907 does not erase the fact of conviction; ineligibility under the AMMA is a collateral public-protection measure and may be considered | Court: Affirmed DHS — a § 13-907 set-aside does not remove AMMA ineligibility; DHS may use the conviction as grounds to deny/revoke a caregiver card |
Key Cases Cited
- Webb v. State ex rel. Ariz. Bd. of Med. Exam’rs, 202 Ariz. 555 (administrative-review standard and independent appellate review)
- JHass Grp. L.L.C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Fin. Insts., 238 Ariz. 377 (deference to agency factfinding; independent legal review)
- State v. Hall, 234 Ariz. 374 (§ 13-907 is a statutory benefit subject to limits; set-aside does not eliminate all consequences)
- Russell v. Royal Maccabees Life Ins. Co., 193 Ariz. 464 (set-aside does not erase fact of conviction; must still disclose conviction)
- In re Couser, 122 Ariz. 500 (setting aside relieves punishment but not the fact of commission for disciplinary proceedings)
- Reed-Kaliher v. Hoggatt, 235 Ariz. 361 (apply voter-enacted statutory text as written when interpreting AMMA)