United States v. Douglas Crooked Arm
788 F.3d 1065
9th Cir.2015Background
- In 2008–2009 undercover FWS agents purchased a fan made with golden eagle feathers from defendants Crooked Arm and Shane and arranged further purchases; agents observed conduct suggesting the defendants attracted and captured raptors (e.g., placing carcasses).
- A grand jury indicted defendants on four counts: Count I (conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371 to kill, transport, offer for sale, and sell migratory birds, invoking MBTA § 707(b)) and Counts II–IV (trafficking/offers to sell specific migratory bird parts/fans).
- Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing the sale of feathers/products is at most a misdemeanor under the MBTA and therefore Counts charged as felonies were improper; the district court denied the motion.
- Defendants entered conditional guilty pleas to Counts I and II, reserving the right to appeal the denial of the motion to dismiss; the district court sentenced them to probation and entered judgment.
- On appeal the Ninth Circuit reviewed statutory interpretation de novo and addressed whether § 707(b)’s felony provision covers (a) taking/selling whole migratory birds and (b) selling migratory bird parts/products (fans).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Count I (conspiracy to kill/transport/sell migratory birds) properly charged a felony | Government: §707(b) felony applies to conspiracy to take and sell migratory birds, including eagles | Defendants: their conduct was sale of parts/products (feathers), which is only a misdemeanor under §707(a) | Held: Count I charges a felony (conspiracy to take/sell whole migratory birds was alleged via overt acts like baiting to capture eagles) |
| Whether Count II (sale of a fan with eagle feathers) is a felony under §707(b) | Government: “migratory bird” in §707(b) includes parts and products, so sale is felony | Defendants: “migratory bird” in §707(b) refers to the whole bird; sale of parts/products is misdemeanor under §707(a) | Held: Sale of a fan containing migratory bird feathers is a misdemeanor, not a felony |
| Proper interpretation of “migratory bird” in §707(b): parts/products included? | Government: statutory purpose and agency definition support treating parts/products as within §707(b) | Defendants: statute’s text separates “migratory birds” from “parts, nests, or eggs” (disjunctive), so §707(b) excludes parts/products | Held: Text and structure show Congress distinguished birds from parts/products; felony §707(b) does not encompass sale of parts/products; rule of lenity supports this result if ambiguous |
| Remedy and consequences of reclassification of Count II | Government: maintain felony convictions and sentences | Defendants: seek dismissal or reclassification to misdemeanor, and resentencing | Held: Affirmed as to Count I (felony), reversed as to Count II (misdemeanor); vacated sentences and convictions on Count II; remanded for resentencing and option to withdraw plea on Count II |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Olander, 572 F.3d 764 (9th Cir. 2009) (de novo review of dismissal based on statutory interpretation)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (agency deference when statute ambiguous)
- Shabani v. United States, 513 U.S. 10 (1994) (general conspiracy statute under §371 and treatment of conspiracies)
- Loughrin v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 2384 (2014) (interpretation of disjunctive “or” and related canons)
- United States v. Mackie, 681 F.2d 1121 (9th Cir. 1982) (MBTA/BGEPA prohibit offering to sell eagles or parts—background authority)
- United States v. Wulff, 758 F.2d 1121 (6th Cir. 1985) (addressed MBTA sale of bird parts in due-process context)
- United States v. Engler, 806 F.2d 425 (3d Cir. 1986) (discussed misdemeanor vs. felony distinctions in MBTA enforcement)
- Corley v. United States, 556 U.S. 303 (2009) (statutory interpretation canon: give effect to all provisions)