# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 27 56

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Mar cel li no Pen a

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Bo b Ki nd le r; Gl en Str om ; Fr eeb or n C ou nt y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Marc h 7 , 20 17
Fil ed : J ul y

20 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re WOL LMAN, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __
MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg e.

Mar cel li no Pen a, a fo r mer F reeb or n Co un ty Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r,

ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s ad ve rs e gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t on cl ai m s rel at ed to 1

hi s te rm in at io n. Sp eci fic al ly, he ap pe al s as to a 42 U.S.C. § 19 83 p r o c e d u ral du e

The Hon or ab le Dav id S. Dot y , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct of 1

Mi nn es ot a.pr oc es s clai m an d as to a Mi nn es ot a st at ut or y cl ai m ari si ng un de r th e Peac e Offi cer
Dis ci pl in e Pro ced ur es Act, Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 6 26 .89 (“ PODPA”). 2

R e g a r d le ss of whe th er Pen a he ld a co ns ti tu ti on al ly pr ot ect ed in te res t in hi s

em pl oym en t, we co nc lu de th e pr oc es s su rro un di ng hi s te rm in at io n sa ti sf ie d th e Due

Pro ces s C l a u s e

. Fu rth er, we co nc lu de Pen a was no t en ti tl ed to th e ad di ti on al

pr ot ect io ns of P O D P A gi ve n hi s act ua l du ti es as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r an d
gi ve n th e fact th at Free bo rn Co un ty (th e “ Co un ty”) ne it he r ch arg ed hi m wit h th e
du ti es of ge ne ral la w e n f o r c em en t no r ut il iz ed hi s se rv ic es fo r th os e pu rp os es

. W e

th eref or e aff irm th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

I. Back gr ou nd

Lon g be fo re th e ev en ts gi vi ng r is e to th e pr es en t cas e oc cu rred

, Pen a was

em pl oyed as a sh eri ff’s de pu ty i n ge ne ral la w e nf or cem en t. S i n c e 2 00 8, ho wev er,
he was no t em

pl oyed as a sh eri ff’s de pu ty. Rat he r, he was em pl oyed an d wor ke d fu ll

ti m e as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in i s t r a t o r , a job th at di d no t req ui re a la w-en fo rcem en t

li cen se , arre st in g au th or it y , or a weap on an d th at al so di d no t en t a il ge ne ral la wen fo rcem en t du ti es

. Pen a ne ve rth el es s rem ai ne d li cen se d by a st at e la w-en fo rcem en t

bo ard an d was pe rm it te d to carr y a Co un ty-is su ed fir earm

. He al so rem ai ne d a swo rn
de pu ty, ev en th ou gh he was no t em pl oyed as su ch on ei th er a pe rm an en t or “ on -cal l”

ba si s.

As Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r, Pen a’s du ti es in cl ud ed ov ers ee i ng va rio us

co nt ract se rv ic es su ch as fo od an d hea lt h serv ic es for th e pr is on ers

. W he n ask ed in

hi s d ep os it io n a bo ut hi s jo b d ut ie s as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r, Pen a res po nd ed

,

PODPA pr ov id es en um erat ed pr ot ect io ns su ch as m an da to ry di sc lo su res an d 2

pr oc ed ur al req ui rem en ts fo r he ari ng s rel at ed to th e di sc ip li ne of “ pe ace of fic ers ” an d

“ pa rt- ti m e p eace off

ic ers ,” as de fin ed in Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 6 26 .84 , su bd iv . 1.

-2

-“ To im

pr ov e th e faci li ty, br in g in rev en ue , cu t co st s. Ju st ov eral l im pr ov e th e faci li ty,

wha t I co ul d do .” Acco rd in g to Pen a, he pe rfo rm ed well in th is po si ti on an d ach ie ve d

su bs ta nt ia l co st sa vi ng s fo r th e C o u n t y. Late r, he su gg es te d th e Co un ty be co m e a

se rv ic e pr ov id er to th e Uni te d St at es Dep art m en t of Hom el an d Secu rit y ’s Bu reau of

Im m ig rat io n an d Cu st om s Enfo rcem en t (“ ICE”). The Co un ty fo ll o w e d hi s

su gg es ti on , an d he ev en tu al ly be cam e res po ns ib le fo r m an ag in g a co nt ract wit h ICE

to tra ns po rt a nd ho us e im m ig rat io n d et ai ne es

.

W hi le em pl oyed as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r, Pen a oc cas io na ll y as si st ed in

th e tra ns po rta ti on of ICE de ta in ees

. Acco rd in g to Pen a, th e co nt ract be twee n th e

Co un ty an d ICE req u i r e d li cen se d pe ace of fic ers to ha nd le tra ns po rta ti on of ICE

de ta in ees

. In fact

, th e on ly fu nc ti on Pen a se rv ed th at arg ua bl y req ui red hi m to

po ss es s a la

w -e nf or ce m en t lic ense was th e tra ns po rt of th es e ad m in is tra ti ve de ta in ees

. Pen a, ho wev er , a d m it s he was no t or de red or in st ru ct ed to as si st in ICE de ta in ee

tra ns po rt. Si m il arl y , th e sh eri ff, Defen da nt Bo b Ki n d l e r , de ni ed ha vi ng in st ru ct ed

Pen a to do so

.

Dur in g hi s ti m e as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r, Pen a al le ge dl y ha ras se d m or e

th an on e fem al e em

pl oyee. In ad di ti on , Pen a pu bl ic ly ad vo cat ed fo r a can di da te who

l o s t an el ect io n to Sh eri ff Kin dl er. Co wor ke rs al le ge d th at Pen a ad vo cat ed f o r h i s

pr efer red can di da te whi le in th e wor kp la ce. The Co un ty’ s pa rti ci pa ti on as a se rv ic e

pr ov id er fo r ICE s erv ed as a ke y is su e o f di sa gr eem en t b et ween th e can di da te s.

In Ju ne 20 12 , a su pe rv is or for m al ly repo rte d P en a fo r ha ras sm en t o f a y ou ng

fe mal e em

pl oyee. Sh eri ff Kin dl er be ga n an in ve st ig at io n. Afte r se ve ral di ffer en t

wit ne ss es rep or te d ot he r in st an ces of m is co nd uc t by Pen a, Sh eri ff Kin dl er su sp en de d

Pen a wit h pa y effe ct iv e Ju ly 21

, pe nd in g res ol ut io n of th e in ve st ig at io n. At th at ti m e,
Sh eri ff Kin dl er i nf

or m ed Pen a o f th e g en eral na tu re o f th e co m pl ai nt s. On Ju ly 23,

Pen a m et wit h Sh eri ff Kin dl er, a Co un ty ad m in is tra to r, an d th e Co un ty’ s hu m an

res ou rces di rect or

. Pen a was to ld he w a s be in g in ve st ig at ed fo r se xu al ha ras sm en t

-3

-an d was gi ve n a ge ne ral de sc rip ti on of th e al le ga ti on s ag ai ns t hi m

. The in ve st ig at io n

co nt in ue d, an d on Aug us t 17

, Pen a rece iv ed a le tt er su m m ari zi ng th e al le ga ti on s. The

le tt er as ke d Pen a to gi ve a st at em e n t o n Aug us t 23

, an d in fo rm ed hi m he co ul d

arra ng e to ha ve leg al co un se l p res en t.

In a le tt er da te d Aug us t 22 , P en a as ke d fo r a 14 -d ay de la y to se cu re co un se l;

co m pl ai ne d he di d no t ha ve en ou gh ti m e aft er rece iv in g th e Aug us t 17 le tt er to se cu re

co un se l; de m an de d a cces s t o m at eri al s s uc h a s i nt erv ie ws an d re co rd in gs rel at ed to

th e al le ga ti on s; an d co m pl ai ne d he was un ab le to ad eq ua te ly pr ep are or de fen d

hi m se lf. He d id no t i nv ok e PODPA b y na m e. The C ou nt y

de ni ed hi s re qu es t.

Pen a ap pe ared at t h e Aug us t 23 ap po in tm en t wit ho ut co un se l an d ga ve a

st at em en t, ad m it ti ng m an y of th e al le ga ti on s. In ve st ig at or s co m pl et ed th ei r rep or t.

In a Sep te m

be r 4 le tt er, Sh eri ff Kin dl er to ld P e n a t h e r e was su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to jus ti fy te rm in at io n, an d th e Co un ty Bo a r d of Co m m is si on ers (th e “ Bo ard ”) wou ld

co ns id er hi s te rm in at io n at a Sep te m be r 18 m eet in g. In a f

o l l o w -u p le tt er, Sh eri ff

Kin dl er in fo rm ed Pen a he co ul d ap pe ar an d de fen d hi m se lf at th e m eet in g. Pen a di d

so

. The Bo ard co ns id ered th e m at te r in cl os ed se ss io n, th en ret ur ne d to op en se ss io n

an d v ot ed to ter m in at e Pen a.

Su bs eq ue nt ly, on Octo be r 18

, 20 12

, Pen a fo r th e fir st ti m e arg ue d he w a s a

“ pe ace of fic er” or a “ pa rt- ti m e pe ace of fic er” en ti tl ed t o t h e p r oc ed ur al pr ot ect io ns

se t fo rth in POD P A

. Th e C o un ty de te rm in ed Pen a, em pl oyed as an Ass is ta nt Ja il

Adm in is tra to r r a t h e r th an as a sh eri ff’s de pu ty, was no t en ti tl ed to th e pr oc ed ur al

pr ot ect io ns of P ODPA.

Pen a ap pe al ed hi s te rm in at io n to th e Mi nn es ot a Co ur t of App eal s t h r o u g h a

cer ti or ar i pr oc ed ur e. The Co ur t of App eal s ad dr es se d it s own juri sd ic ti on , no ti ng

sp eci fic al ly it s in ab il it y to reac h is su es no t co nt ai ne d in th e reco rd of te rmi n a t i on

. Pen a v. Free bo rn Ct y ., No. A12 -2 00 7, 20 13 W L 38 68 08 6, at *2 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. Ju ly

-4

-29

, 20 13 ). The Co ur t of App eal s co nc lu de d th e reco rd was in su ffi ci en t to sh ow Pen a

was en ti tl ed to th e pr ot ect io ns of PODPA. Id

. at *4

. The Co ur t of App eal s al so he ld

Pen a d id no t h av e a p ro pe rty int eres t i n c on ti nu ed em pl oym en t. Id

.

P e n a th en br ou gh t th e pr es en t su it as se rti ng a st at e-l aw cl ai m fo r da mag e s

un de r PODPA an d se ve ral fed eral st at ut or y an d co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m s, in cl ud in g a 42

U.S.C. § 19 83 cl ai m al le gi ng a du e pr oc es s vi ol at io n bas ed on a pr op ert y in te res t in

hi s em pl oym en t. The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t fo r th e de fen da nt s on

al l cl ai m s. Pen a li m it s h is ap pe al to th e PODPA an d d ue pro ces s cl ai m s.

II. DISCUSS ION

W e rev ie w a gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo , vi e w i n g t h e r eco rd in th e

li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e n o n

- mo v i n g pa rty. Am

. Fam il y In s. v. Ci ty of

Mi nn eap ol is , 83 6 F .3d 91 8, 9 21 (8t h C ir. 2 01 6)

. 3

A. Due Pro ces s

W e ne ed no t de te rm in e whe th er Pen a p o s s e s s e d a pr op ert y rig ht in hi s

co nt in ue d em

pl oym en t be cau se th e pr oc es s he act ua ll y rece iv ed be fo re an d aft er hi s

te rm in at io n sa ti sf

ie d th e Due Pro ces s Cl au se

. Thi s co nc lu si on is in de pe nd en t of an y
cl ai m ed rig ht to sp eci fic pr oc ed ur al pr ot ect io ns un de r PODPA be cau se

In th e di st ric t co ur t, th e de fen da nt s as se rte d a r e s j ud ic at a arg um en t, 3

ch arac te riz in g t he Mi nn es ot a Co ur t o f App eal s cer ti or ar i pr oc eed in g as p recl ud in g th e pr es en t act io n. The di st ric t co ur t reject ed th e arg um en t, fin di ng th e reco rd an d th e is su es th at co ul d ha ve be en rai se d in th e cer ti or ar i pr oc eed in g to o li m it ed to pr ecl ud e
t h e cu rren t act io n. The de fen da nt s ren ew th is arg um en t on ap pe al

. Giv en o u r

res ol ut io n o f th e p art ie s’ arg um en ts on th e m eri ts

, we do no t ad dr es s t he pre cl us io n
arg um en t. See Tran sc on

. In s. Co

. v. W .G. Sam ue ls Co

., 37 0 F.3 d 75 5, 75 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ) (“ W e m ay affi rm a jud gm en t on an y gr ou nd rai se d in th e di st ric t co ur t

. . . .”).

-5

-c o n s ti tu ti on al ly gu aran te ed pr oc ed ur al pr ot ect io ns are no t co ex te ns iv e wit h st at e

crea te d pr oc ed ur al pr ot ect io ns

. Rat he r, if a st at e crea te s a pr op ert y in te res t, th e

Co ns ti tu ti on alo ne de fin es th e p ro ces s t ha t m us t b e pr ov id ed to pro te ct th at in te res t

pu rs ua nt to th e Due Pro ces s Cl au se

. Cl ev el an d Bd

. of Edu c. v. Lou de rm il l, 47 0 U.S.

53 2, 5 41 (19 85 ). As t he Su pr em e Co ur t s ta te d:

I f a cl eare r ho ld in g is ne ed ed

, we pr ov id e it to da y

. The po in t i s
st rai gh tfo rward : th e Due Pro c e s s Cl au se pr ov id es th at cert ai n

su bs ta nt iv e rig ht s— li fe, li be rty, an d pr op ert y —ca n n o t be de pr iv ed

ex cep t pu rs ua nt to co ns ti tu ti on al ly ad eq ua te pr oc ed ur es

. The cat eg or ie s of su bs ta nc e an d pr oc ed ur e are di s ti nc t. W ere th e ru le ot he rwis e, th e Cl au se wou ld be red uc e d t o a m ere ta ut ol og y

. “ Pro pe rty” can no t be
de fin ed by th e pr oc ed ur es pr ov id ed fo r it s de pr iv at io n an y m or e th an can l i f e o r li be rty.

. . . In sh or t, on ce it is de te rm in ed th at th e Due Pr o c e s s Cl au se ap pl ie s, “ th e qu es ti on rem ai ns wha t pr oc es s is du e.” The an swe r
to th at qu es ti on is no t t o b e fo un d i n t he [st at e] sta tu te

.

Id . (qu ot in g M or ris se y

v. Br ewer, 4 08 U.S. 47 1, 4 81 (19 72 )).

Here, Pen a rece iv ed no ti ce of th e ge ne ral na tu re of th e gr ie va nc es ag ai ns t hi m

on Ju ly 21 or 23

. He th en rece iv ed a de ta il ed le tt er on Aug us t 17

. At th at ti m e,

ne arl y a m on th ha d al read y pa ss ed du rin g whi ch h e co ul d ha ve se cu red le ga l

rep res en ta ti on

. The Aug us t 17 le tt er pr ov id ed no ti ce an d req ue st ed th at he ap pe ar to

m ak e a st at em en t on Aug us t 23

. On Aug us t 22

, he so ug ht an d was de ni ed a de la y an d

acce ss to m at eri al s su ch as reco rd in gs an d st at em en ts

. He ne ve rth el es s ap pe ared on Aug us t 23 an d ga ve a st at em en t. He th en at te nd ed th e Bo ard ’s m eet in g ne arl y a

m on th lat er wh ere h e ag ai n h ad th e o pp or tu ni ty to ad dr es s t he cla im s ag ai ns t h im

.

To d e t e rm in e whe th er th e pr oc es s affo rd ed to pr ot ect a pr op ert y rig ht i s

c o n s t i t u ti on al ly su ffi ci en t, it is ne ces sa ry to as se ss whe th er th e pr oc es s is

co m m en su rat e in sc op e wit h th e rig ht an d th e ci rcu m st an ces su rro un di ng el im in at io n

o f t h e r i g ht

. See, e.g ., Su tt on v. Bai le y , 70 2 F.3 d 44 4, 44 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ). I n t h e

-6

-em

pl oym en t co nt ex t, th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it ha s ha d am pl e op po rtu ni ty to de ve lo p a m od e

of an al y si s, res ul ti ng in a le ga l la nd sc ap e th at cal ls fo r so m e type of pr e-t erm in at io n

h eari ng

. See id

. Tha t pr e-t erm in at io n he ari ng , ho wev er, m ay in vo lv e le ss r i g o r i f

th ere a ls o e xi st s an op po rtu ni ty for a p os t-t erm in at io n h eari ng :

[T]he Due Pro ces s Cl au se req ui res a pr e-t erm in at io n he ari ng in so m e f o r m, bu t if a po st -te rm in at io n he ari ng is al so av ai la bl e, t h e
pr e-t erm in at io n pr oc eed in gs “ ne ed no t be el ab or at e.

. . . The te nu red

pu bl ic em

pl oyee is e n t i t l e d to or al or writ te n no ti ce of th e ch arg es
ag ai ns t hi m , an ex pl an at io n of th e emp l o ye r ’s ev id en ce, an d an
op po rtu ni ty t o pr es en t hi s si de of th e st or y .” [Lou de r mi l l

, 4 7 0 U.S. a t
54 5– 46 ]. The pr im ary p ur po se of th is type o f p r e-t erm in at io n he ari ng is no t to “ de fin i t i ve ly res ol ve th e pr op rie ty of th e di sc ha rg e,” bu t to

se rv e as “an i n i t i a l ch eck ag ai ns t m is ta ke n de ci si on s.

. . .” Id

. at 54 5.
Fo ll owi ng Lou de rm il l, we ha ve co ns is te nt ly he ld th at

, whe r e po st

te rm in at io n pr oc eed in gs are av ai la bl e, “ in fo rm al m eet i n g s wit h

su pe rv is or s” m ay be su ffi ci e n t pr e-t erm in at io n he ari ng s. Sch le ck v. Ram se y Cn ty., 93 9 F.2 d 63 8, 64 1 (8 th Ci r.19 91 ), qu ot in g Ri gg in s[ v. Bd
of Reg en ts of th e Uni v. of Neb .]

, 79 0 F.2 d [7 07 ,] 71 1 [(8 th Ci r. 19 86 )];

acco rd Kren tz v. Ro be rts on Fi re Pro t. Dis t., 22 8 F.3 d 89 7, 90 2– 03 (8 th
Ci r. 20 00 ).

Su tt on , 70 2 F .3d at 4 47

.

Im po rt a n t l y, th e pr oc es s pr ov id ed ne ed no t be ak in to a co ur t tri al wit h th e

va rio us pr ot ect io ns an d acce ss to ev id en ce th at su ch a fo ru m e n t ai ls

. Fo r ex am pl e,

in Su tt on , we he ld or al no ti c e of an of fen di ng so ci al m ed ia po st co up le d wit h “ an

op po rtu ni ty to pr es en t hi s si de of th e st or y ” sa ti sf ie d th e Due Pro ces s Clau se

. Id

. at

44 8. Als o, al th ou gh no ti ce is req ui red

, th ere ne ed no t “ be a de la y be twee n th e no ti ce

an d th e op po rtu ni ty to res po nd acco rd ed to a pu bl ic em p lo y ee.” Id

. W e th eref

or e

co nc lu de th at th e m on th s- lo ng pr e-t erm in at io n no ti ce, th e rep eat ed op po rtu ni ti es fo r

Pen a to te ll hi s si d e o f th e st or y , th e av ai la bi li ty of th e st at e’s po st -te rm in at io n

-7

-cer tiorar i -b as ed re vie w pr oc ed ur e, an d Pe na ’ s ac tua l ut il iz at io n of th es e op po rtu ni ti es

eas il y pa ss co ns ti tu ti on al m

us te r.

B. App li cab il it y

of P ODPA

PODPA ex te nd s pr oc ed ur al pr ot ect io ns to “ li cen se d pe ace of fic ers ” an d “ pa rtti m e pe ace of

fic ers ” as th os e te rm s are sp eci fic al ly de fin ed by st at ut e. See Mi nn

. St at

. § 62 6.8 9, su bd iv

. 1( c) (“ ‘O ffi cer’ m ean s a l ic en se d p eace off ic er o r pa rt- ti m e pe ace

of fic er, as de fin ed in se ct io n 62 6.8 4, su bd iv is io n 1, pa rag rap hs (c) an d ( d )

, who is

em pl oyed by a un it of go ve rn m en t.”) ; se e al so id

. § 62 6.8 9, s ub di vs

. 3– 17 (li st in g

pr ot ect io ns , crea ti ng a cau se of act io n fo r da m ag es ag ai ns t th e go ve rn m en ta l ent it y ,

an d p ro vi di ng for civ il ia n re vi ew of di sc ip li na ry

act io ns ). 4

Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 6 26 .84 , su bd iv . 1, p ro vi de s: 4

(c) “ Peac e o ffi cer” m ean s:

(1 ) [A] an em

pl oyee or an el ect ed or ap po in te d of fic ia l of a
po li ti cal su bd iv is io n or la w en fo rcem en t ag en cy [B] who is li cen se d by
th e bo ard , [ C] ch arg ed wit h t h e p r e ve nt io n an d de te ct io n of cri m e an d
th e en fo rcem en t of th e ge n e ral cri m in al la ws of th e st at e an d [D] who
ha s t he ful l p owe r of

arre st , and sh al l al so in cl ud e th e Mi nn es ot a St at e Pat ro l, ag en ts of th e Div is io n of Alc o h o l an d Gam bl in g Enfo rcem en t,

st at e co ns erv at io n of

fic ers , Met ro po li ta n Tran si t po l ic e of fic ers , Dep art m en t of Co rrec ti on s Fu gi ti ve App reh en si on Uni t of fi cers , an d Dep art m en t of Co m

m erce Frau d Bu reau Uni t of fic ers , an d th e st at ewid e

co or di na to r of

th e Vio le nt Cri m e Co or di na ti ng Co un ci l; an d

. . . (d ) “ Part -ti m e pe ace of fic er” m ean s [A] an in di vi du al li cen se d by th e bo ard [B] wh os e se rv ic es are ut il iz e d b y l a w e nf or cem en t ag en ci es no

m or e th an an av erag e of 20 ho ur s pe r week

, no t in cl ud in g ti m e sp en t on cal l whe n no c al l to act iv e du ty is rece iv ed

, cal cu la te d on an an nu al
ba si s, who ha s ei th er [C1 ] fu ll po wers of arre st or [C2 ] au th or iz at io n to

carr y a fir earm whi le on act iv e du ty. The te rm sh al l ap pl y ev en th ou gh

-8

-Pen a arg ue s he is a pe ace of fic er or , at th e le as t, a pa rt- ti me p e a ce of fic er.

Fo cu si ng fir st up on th e d e f i n it io n of “ pe ace of

fic er,” we co nc lu de Pen a m eet s al l

req ui rem en ts of su bd iv is io n (c)( 1) ot he r th an th e req ui rem en t we ha ve la be le d [C],

i.e. , t ha t th e pe rs on be “ ch arg ed wit h th e pr ev en ti on an d d e t e ct io n of cri m e an d th e

en fo rcem en t of th e ge ne ral cri m in al la ws of th e st at e.” Pen a was [A] em pl oyed by th e

Co un t y a n d [ B ] li cen se d by th e Bo ard

. Fu rth er, th e Co un ty do es no t m ean in gf ul ly

co nt es t th e as se rti on th at Pen a [D] p os se ss ed th e fu ll po wer o f arre st

. The fact th at

Pen a was a swo rn de pu ty ap pe ars t o s p eak to th is po wer an d m ay in di cat e hi s

av ai la bi li ty to be hi red fo r pu rp os es of ge ne ral cri m in al la w en fo rcem en t. His st at us

as a swo rn de pu ty, ho wev er, do es no t sp eak to hi s act ua l em pl oym en t st at us , no r do es

it sp eak to th e d ut ie s o r th e sp eci fic tas ks wit h wh ic h h e act ua ll y was “ ch arg ed .”

Pen a as se rts th at he pe rs on al ly ass is te d i n t he tra ns po rt of ICE de ta in ees

. He

arg ue s th is fu nc ti on de m on st rat es th at he sa ti sf ie s req ui rem en t [C]. In m ak in g th is

arg um en t, he cl ai m s th at th e ICE co nt r a c t r e q u i r ed a li cen se d pe ace of fic er to

tra ns po rt det ai ne es

. By

hi s re as on in g, i f th e ICE co nt ract req ui red a li cen se d p eace

of fic er to tra ns po rt de ta in ees , a nd if he , i n fact , t ran sp or te d de ta in ees , t he n he m us t

ha ve be en a li cen se d p eace off ic er. 5

th e in di vi du al rece iv es no co m pe ns at io n fo r ti m e sp en t o n a ct iv e d ut y ,
an d sh al l ap pl y irr es pe ct iv e of th e ti tl e co nf erre d up on th e in di vi du al by

an y law en fo rcem en t ag en cy

.

Th r ou gh ou t hi s br ie f an d de po si ti on te st im on y , Pen a us es va ry in g te rm s t o 5

refe r to la w-en fo rcem en t pe rs on ne l wit ho ut in di cat in g whe th er he is refe rri ng to th e
sp eci fic st at ut or y de fin it io ns at is su e in th is cas e. Not su rp ris in gl y , th e d efen da nt s’
de po si ti on res po ns es refl ect a si m il ar lo os en es s wit h co m m on ly us ed ev eryday wor ds
th at ha pp en al so to be at th e he art of th e st at ut or y in te rp ret at io n qu es ti on in th is cas e: of fic er, pe ace of

fic er, li cen se d pe ace of

fic er, au th or iz ed

, swo rn , et c. Thi s lo os en es s wit h la ng ua ge gi ve s ris e to th ree arg um en ts th at we m us t reject

. Fi rs t, Pen a refe rs to th e ICE co nt ract as req ui rin g “ li cen se d pe ace of fic ers ” to tra ns po rt de ta in ees , bu t we

se e no ev id en ce te nd in g to su gg es t th e ICE co nt ract in co rp or at ed th e st at ut or y te rm s
at is su e in th is cas e. Seco nd

, Pen a se em s to as se rt th at hi s st at e-b oa rd li cen su re

-9

-W e se e no th in g to su gg es t th e ICE co nt ract in co rp or a t e s M i n n es ot a St at ut es

§ 62 6.8 4. Mo reo ve r, th ere is no reas on to co nc lu de th at th e si m pl e act of tra ns po rti ng
fed eral im m ig rat io n de ta in ees pu rs ua nt to a co nt ract be twee n th e Co un ty an d a fed eral

ad m in is tra ti ve ag en cy so m eh ow qu al ifi es as “ pr ev en ti [n g] an d de te ct i[n g]

. . . cri m e

an d

. . . en fo rc[i ng ]

. . . th e ge ne ra l cr imi na l la ws of th e st at e .” Id

. § 62 6.8 4, su bd iv

. 1( c)(1 ) (em

ph as is ad de d) . There is , aft er all

, no reas on to pr es um e th e im m ig rat io n
de ta in ees were s us pe ct ed or h ad be en accu se d o f co m m it ti ng Mi nn es ot a o ffen se s.

Fu rth er, ev en if pe rfo rm an ce un de r th e co nt ract to tra ns po rt an d ho us e fed eral

ad m in is tra ti ve de ta in ees co ul d be ch arac te riz ed as “ pr ev en ti [n g] an d de te ct i[n g]

. . . cri m e an d

. . . en fo rc[i ng ]

. . . th e ge ne ral cri m in al la ws of th e st at e,” Pen a ad m it s hi s

su pe rio rs di d no t in st ru ct hi m t o pe rfo rm th is fu nc ti on

. Rat he r, Sh eri ff Kin dl er

te st ifi ed wit ho ut reb ut ta l th at he di d no t in st ru ct Pen a to pe rfo rm th is fu nc ti on

. The

on ly reas on ab le in fere nc e su pp or te d by th e cu rren t reco rd

, th en , is th at Pen a

un il at eral ly too k u po n h im se lf th e ta sk of tra ns po rti ng th e ad m in is tra ti ve de ta in ees

. Giv e n t h i s ne ces sa ry in fere nc e, it do es no t fo ll ow th at Pen a was “ ch arg ed wit h”

tra ns po rti ng th e co nt ract de ta in ees , m uc h le ss “ ch arg ed wit h pr ev en ti [n g] an d

de te ct i[n g]

. . . cri m e an d .

. . en fo rc[i ng ]

. . . th e ge ne ral cri m in al la ws o f th e st at e.”

Id

. In reac hi ng th is co nc lu si on , we vi ew th e te rm “ ch arg ed ” as un am bi gu ou s an d as

m ean in g “ hi red to ,” or , at a m in im um , “ in st ru ct ed by su pe rio rs to ,” as co nt ras te d wit h

an em pl oyee’s pe rs on al ele ct io n t o t ak e o n u na ss ig ne d d ut ie s.

sh ou ld be de em ed co nc lu si ve as to th e ap pl ic ab il it y of PODPA. It is no t. And th ird

, Pen a po in ts to va rio us st at em en ts by Sh eri ff Kin dl er an d Defen da nt St ro m as

“ ad m is si on s” th at PODPA ap pl ie s. No reas on ab le juro r co ul d vi ew th e de fen da nt s’

st at em en ts as in te nde d to ad dr es s co nclu si ve ly th e st at ut or y pr ov is io ns at is su e he rei n. Mo re im po rta nt ly, ho wev er, in te rp ret at io n of st at ut or y la ng ua ge is a qu es ti on of la w fo r th e co ur t

. S e e Wi l b ur v. St at e Farm Aut o. Mu t. In s. Co ., 8 92 N.W .2d 52 1, 52 3 (Mi nn

. 20 17 ). To th e ex te nt th at we us e th e te rm “ li cen se d pe ace of fic er” to de sc rib e Pen a’s ch arac te riz at io n of th e ICE co nt ract

, th en , we are m erel y de sc rib in g Pen a’s

as se rti on s.

-1 0-To th e ex te nt th e t e rm “ ch arg ed ” m ig ht be de em ed am bi gu ou s, ho wev er,

can on s of st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n co m pe l th e sa m e co nc lu si on

. See St at e v. Ri ck

, 83 5

N.W .2d 47 8, 48 2 (Mi nn

. 20 13 ) (“ [I]f a st at ut e is su sc ep ti bl e to m or e th an on e

reas on ab le in te rp ret at io n, th en th e st at ut e is am bi gu ou s an d we may c o ns id er th e

can on s of st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n to as cert ai n it s m ean in g.” ). Th e s e p arat el y li st ed

req ui rem en ts of se ct io n 62 6.8 4, su bd i v

. 1 ( c )(1 ) m us t al l be m et

. “ Ch arg ed ,”

th eref or e, can no t refe r si m

pl y to a pe rs on ’s st at us as be in g el ig ib le to ta ke an act io n by vi rtu e of a li cen se

. An y s u c h in te rp ret at io n wou ld ren de r th e te rm “ ch arg ed ”

s u rp lu sa ge an d red un da nt wit h th e ex pr es s req ui rem en ts of [B] li cen su re a n d [ D ]

p o w e r o f a rres t. See In re Rei ch m an n Lan d & Cat tl e, LLP, 86 7 N.W .2d 50 2, 50 9
(Mi nn

. 20 15 ) (“ [W] e c o n s tru e wor ds an d ph ras es acco rd in g to th ei r pl ai n an d

or di na ry m ean in g, an d we gi ve effe ct t o a l l of [th e st at ut e’s] pr ov is io ns ; no wor d,

p h r a s e , or se nt en ce sh ou ld be de em ed su pe rfl uo us , vo id

, or in si gn ifi can t.” (s eco nd

al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (ci ta ti on s om it te d) ). W ere we to in te rp ret “ ch arg ed ” as arg ue d
by Pen a, su ch th at it en co m pa ss es vo lu nt ary or un il a t e r a l a c t s ap art fro m du ti es or

ta sk s im po se d by a su pe rio r, th e te rm wou ld effe ct iv el y b e r e a d o u t o f th e st at ut e. Q u i te si m

pl y , th e de fin it io n do es no t refe r to wha t a pe rs on , in fact

, do es o r i s

li cen se d t o d o. It refe rs to what th e p ers on is in st ru ct ed or r eq ui red to do

.

Pen a al so arg ue s he was , at th e le as t, a “ pa rt- ti m e pe ace of fic er.” The

de fin it io n fo r “ pa rt- ti m e po li ce o f f i cer” do es no t us e th e te rm “ ch arg ed wit h” or

refe ren ce an y pa rti cu la r cat eg or y of du ti es

. Rat he r, it us es th e te rm “ ut il iz ed by la w

en fo rcem en t ag en c i es ” an d pl aces a cap on th e nu m be r of ho ur s pe r week a pe rs on

can be “ ut il iz ed ” an d st il l be co ns id ered a pa rt- ti m e pe ace o f fic er. Mi nn

. St at

. § 62 6.8 4, su bd iv

. 1( d) (“ pa rt- ti m e pe ace of fic er” req ui res th at th e pe rs on ’s “ se rv ic es

are ut il iz ed by la w en fo rcem en t ag en ci es no m or e th an an av erag e o f 20 ho ur s pe r
week

, no t in cl ud in g ti m e sp en t on cal l whe n no cal l to act iv e du ty i s r e c e i v e d,

cal cu la te d o n a n a nn ua l b as is ”).

-1 1-To th e ex te nt th e te rm “ ut il iz ed ” can be in te rp ret ed as co ns is te nt wit h th e te rm

“ ch arg ed ” in se ct io n 62 6.8 4, su bd iv

. 1( c)(1 ), Pen a’s arg um en ts fai l fo r t h e reas on s jus t sta te d. To th e ex te nt th e te rm ut il iz ed do es no t requ ire du ti es to be as si gn ed by

a su pe rio r or rel at e to th e de te ct io n, pr ev en ti on , or en fo rcem e n t of th e ge ne ral

cri m in al la ws of th e st at e, Pen a’s arg um en ts fai l fo r a di ffer en t reas on

. W it ho ut su ch

a li m it at io n, al l se rv ic e m us t be co ns id ered

, an d it is un di sp ut ed th at he wor ke d on a

fu ll -ti m e ba si s as Ass is ta nt Ja il Adm in is tra to r. The refo re, if th e s o u r ce of Pen a’s

du ti es an d th e na tu re of hi s se rv ic es as “uti li zed ” by t he Co un ty are im m at eri al , h is

wor k in ex ces s of 20 ho ur s pe r week ex cl ud es hi m fro m th e de fin it io n of a pa rt- ti m e

pe ace o ffi cer.

III. Co nc lu si on

Bec au se Pen a rece iv ed co ns ti tu ti on al ly su ffi ci en t pr oc es s an d is no t en ti tl ed to

th e ad di t i o n a l p ro ced ur al pr ot ect io ns of PODPA, we affi rm th e jud gm en t of th e
di st ric t co ur t. 6

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

Pen a fil ed a m ot io n to su pp le m en t th e reco rd wit h an at to rn ey affi da vi t an d a 6

de po si ti on ex hi bi t sh owi ng he was a swo rn de pu ty. Bec au se th e fact he was a swo rn de pu ty is un di sp ut ed an d be cau se we ack no wl e d g e th is fact ab ov e, we de ny th e

m ot io n a s m oo t.

-1 2-