cannabisnews.com: Supreme Court Sends Victory To Marijuana Patients Supreme Court Sends Victory To Marijuana Patients Posted by CN Staff on July 23, 2002 at 07:59:59 PT By William Ferchland, Tahoe Daily Tribune Source: Tahoe Daily Tribune A recent unanimous decision by the California Supreme Court will cut the number of medical marijuana cases sent to trial and lower the degree of proof for defenders, attorneys say.The ruling allows users of medical marijuana who are arrested on drug charges to file pretrial motions that could lead to dismissal of their cases. Prosecutors and defense attorneys read the 31-page decision and came to their own conclusions. "If we can resolve these closer cases in a court, it will not only be quicker but it will also be a much cheaper way to go as far as taxpayers are concerned," said Gary Lacy, district attorney for El Dorado County. "It will also relieve prosecutors and defenders the rigors of going to a jury trial."In referring to "closer cases," Lacy meant medical marijuana users and caregivers who are prosecuted for growing numerous plants deemed medically necessary or appropriate. He did not mean people who grow hundreds of plants and say it's for pain relief.Lacy said he supported the decision and called it reasonable.The decision comes from "People vs. Myron Mower." Mower, an ill diabetic using marijuana for relief of his symptoms, was convicted for possessing and cultivating the drug despite having a medical use certificate.Erik Schlueter, facing a run-off election in November against Lacy for the El Dorado County district attorney position, reviewed the 31-page decision Friday and said it will affect how a jury looks at evidence."What it comes down to is I don't think it's going to change how much evidence the defense is going to present," Schlueter said. "I think what it's going to change is how stringently the jury is going to look at the evidence."Schlueter agreed with Lacy in that the decision was reasonable but wished it had gone further."I think a lot of people are going to wish (the court) touched on more but it didn't," he said. "They had the opportunity to touch on plants count. They did what the Supreme Court always does -- is stay very limited on their decision."Simon Harvey, deputy public defender for El Dorado County, said the ruling will help clarify the 1996 Compassionate Use Act."In short, the Mower decision helps to ensure that the will of the people is implemented by making it much easier, and quicker, for legitimate medical users to show their innocence and by making it much harder for stubborn prosecutors to prove their guilt," he said in a statement.Matt Macosko described the decision as "tremendous." Macosko describes himself as a caregiver of medicinal marijuana to the sick but prosecutors say he's a drug dealer. His case, furnishing marijuana to minors, was pushed back in part for the Mower decision to conclude."It's about time people start taking notice of the law," he said. "Now I feel police should have a message and not go out and arrest people."It just seems like people are trying to break this law up and make this work," he added.Complete Title: Supreme Court Sends Victory To Medical Marijuana PatientsSource: Tahoe Daily Tribune (CA)Author: William Ferchland, Tahoe Daily Tribune Published: July 22, 2002Copyright: 2002 Tahoe Daily TribuneContact: editor tahoedailytribune.comWebsite: http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmCalif. Court: No Prosecution for Medical Pot Users http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13497.shtmlMedical Pot Users May Be Immune To Prosecution http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13485.shtmlCourt: Medicinal Marijuana is Legalhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13469.shtmlState's Top Court Rules on Medical Pot Law http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13465.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #1 posted by PAUL PETERSON on July 23, 2002 at 16:40:59 PT: THE REAL TEETH IN THE SUPREME COURT DECISION? You guys out in California know this better than I-Does the California Supreme Court oversee the state's bar ethical group? In most states this is the setup-What does this mean? If so, since 1999 (I think), when the federal "McDade" law came along, which decreed that all federal prosecuting attorneys were beholden to state bar ethical standards, they all came directly under the purview of the California Supreme Court, you recall, the same one that UNANIMOUSLY DECREED that there is a valid MEDICAL MARIJUANA AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE UNDER STATE LAW. So now, if a federal prosecutor tries to like, PROSECUTE A MM PATIENT, I'm thinking that that prosecutor might have to consider really seriously whether he wants to GET THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT so mad at him that the CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT takes his LAW LICENSE AWAY FOR VIOLATING STATE LAW BY PROSECUTING A SICK MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT!I am hoping for something like that to happen soon-WILL YOU MAKE IT HAPPEN, PLEASE? I would like to see that happen in your state. And thanks for listening. (Last year the Oregon Supreme Court decreed that any federal prosecutor that is involved in a covert operation might just be breaking an ethical rule prohibiting lieing or being deceitful. I read where they just decided that they didn't want to be involved in any vovert operations ever, ever again. It worked fine there, I think, so California people, get your phone books out and get the forms for filng charges against federal prosecutors that break ethical rules. Hopefully that will CHILL THEIR SPEECH for a while, just like they have CHILLED OUR SPEECH for about the last 30 years-DIG?). I'm done now, and thanks for listening, really. PAUL PETERSON 312-558-9999 http://ILLINOIS-MMI.org [ Post Comment ] Post Comment