cannabisnews.com: Seized Pot a Hot Potato for Police 





Seized Pot a Hot Potato for Police 
Posted by CN Staff on May 05, 2002 at 08:29:39 PT
By Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Source: San Francisco Chronicle 
The conflict between state and federal law over medicinal marijuana is forcing the courts to sort out an unexpected problem for police -- whether officers could be prosecuted if they return pot seized from users who beat criminal charges. Proposition 215, approved by state voters in 1996, legalized growing and using marijuana for medical purposes, with a doctor's recommendation. But under federal law, marijuana used for any purpose is illegal. 
In at least three cases in Northern California, police have balked at returning marijuana to people who successfully pleaded that they shouldn't be prosecuted because their pot use is covered under Proposition 215. Giving back the pot, police argue, could leave them liable to prosecution under federal law against distributing illegal drugs. "There is no legal answer to this conundrum," said Rory Little, a professor at the University of California's Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco and a former federal prosecutor. "It's all about strategy, not law." CATCH-22 IN SHERIFF'S EYES In Yuba County, Sheriff Virginia Black defied an order by a judge last week to return 37 medicinal marijuana plants to Doyle and Belinda Satterfield, who were arrested in August but later had marijuana charges against them dismissed. "If I deliver marijuana to the Satterfields, technically I place myself in violation of federal law, and I'm not inclined to do that," Black said. "So I find myself in a Catch-22." Jesse Choper, a constitutional law professor at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law, agreed with the sheriff. "I think it's pretty clear to me that they could be charged under federal law," Choper said. "It's unlikely, but technically it's possible." That leaves the Satterfields wondering whether they'll get their marijuana back. Doyle Satterfield, 52, said he uses marijuana for insomnia and arthritis, and his wife has used it for chemotherapy treatments for breast cancer. Belinda Satterfield, 51, said of the sheriff, "I think she's thinking she's got more power than anybody else, that she's beyond the judge." Doyle Satterfield's attorney, Justin Scott of Yuba City, said, "I think part of the issue is that this hasn't come up around here before. I think the sheriff is dead wrong." Under state law, controlled substances are usually destroyed after trial, or if charges are dismissed, unless they were found to be "lawfully possessed" by the defendant. That supports the return of medicinal marijuana. And in fact, onetime defendants in Ventura, Placer, San Bernardino, Sonoma, Mendocino and San Joaquin counties have all gotten their pot back, Scott said. POLICE PROTECTED BY LAW Defense attorneys say police are protected from prosecution by a section under federal law. It says state and federal law-enforcement officials are exempt from any civil or criminal liability if they are "lawfully engaged in the enforcement of any law or municipal ordinance relating to controlled substances." Attorney Gerald Uelmen, a Santa Clara University law professor who is defending local medical-marijuana clubs, said that under that section, law enforcement has "complete immunity." Uelmen said of police fears, "Absolute bull--." Hollister attorney Gregory LaForge agreed, saying, "I don't think that law enforcement has anything to be scared of. They're using the fact that they can be prosecuted as an excuse." On April 22, San Benito County Sheriff Curtis Hill returned 11 grams of medicinal marijuana to LaForge's client Jack Campo, just hours before a possible contempt ruling by a judge. "Based on current state and federal law, police fears are unfounded," LaForge said. "If the court makes an order, everybody -- including you and me and law enforcement -- has to abide by that court order." One thing is clear, though, about the seized marijuana, Little said. "Cops don't want this stuff. They just don't want to give it back without protection. It's 'better safe than sorry.' " So what constitutes protection? Choper said, "I don't think a judge can immunize an unlawful act under federal law." JUDGES COULD PLAY ROLE Little said one solution could be for the police to hand over the seized pot to a judge and let the court decide whether to release it to onetime criminal defendants. But leaving it up to the judge can also lead to plenty of legal hand- wringing. Last week, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Wallace Douglass agreed with police that officers would be forced to violate federal law if authorities returned marijuana and hash oil to a man from whom it had been seized in a December traffic stop. Douglass reversed his own ruling in making the decision. When the attorney for the drugs' owner, Babu Lal, argued that police were unlikely to be prosecuted, the judge asked, "It's all right for me to order the Police Department to violate the law as long as they are immune from prosecution?" Note: Officers fear federal prosecution if they return marijuana state deemed medical.Complete Title: Medicinal Marijuana: Seized Pot a Hot Potato for Police Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)Author: Author: Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff WriterPublished: Sunday, May 5, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Hearst Communications Inc. - Page A - 4 Contact: letters sfchronicle.comWebsite: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmSheriff Gives Marijuana To The Courthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12726.shtmlSF Judge Fuels Yuba Pot Fighthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12714.shtmlSeized Medicinal Pot Isn't Easy To Get Back http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12705.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #1 posted by JHarshaw on May 05, 2002 at 13:14:14 PT
Lawyer Jokes
" the judge asked, "It's all right for me to order the Police Department to violate the
    law as long as they are immune from prosecution?" ""Defense attorneys say police are protected from prosecution by a section under federal law. It says state and federal
    law-enforcement officials are exempt from any civil or criminal liability if they are "lawfully engaged in the enforcement of
    any law or municipal ordinance relating to controlled substances." "The provision was made to protect narcs who sold drugs undercover but it still will cover the a$$e$ of any officer of the law who is ordered to obey State laws.Therefore: What do you call a really stupid Lawyer?Your Honour!
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment