cannabisnews.com: State Won't Arrest for Personal Pot State Won't Arrest for Personal Pot Posted by CN Staff on September 17, 2003 at 11:02:31 PT By Dan White, Staff Writer Source: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner Attorney General Gregg Renkes instructed state law enforcement Tuesday not to arrest or cite adults for personal marijuana possession in their home. Renkes' announcement came in light of a recent Alaska Court of Appeals decision that called a portion of the state's marijuana laws unconstitutional. "I am advising the Alaska State Troopers and directing that the district attorneys advise their local law enforcement not to arrest or cite any adult for a violation of state law under the circumstances protected by the Court of Appeals," Renkes wrote in a memo to the Department of Public Safety and the state's district attorneys. However, Renkes wrote that state law enforcement should still investigate personal marijuana possession in "a manner that would allow for prosecution" by seizing the drug, writing a report and referring the case to state prosecutors. That procedure should be followed, Renkes wrote, because the Attorney General's Office is asking the Court of Appeals to reconsider the decision it rendered on Aug. 29 in the case of Noy v. State and because federal prosecutors could accept a personal-possession marijuana case.Possession of any amount of marijuana is a crime under federal law and state agents could bring a case to the U.S. Attorney's Office for prosecution, said Alaska U.S. Attorney Tim Burgess. "Individuals shouldn't feel that they don't risk federal prosecution following the Noy decision," Burgess said. Renkes' memo instructed state district attorneys to work with a representative in the Attorney General's Office in forwarding personal-possession marijuana cases to federal prosecutors. However, Burgess said federal prosecutors won't accept every personal-possession marijuana case, noting that the U.S. Attorney's Office handles much more than misdemeanor drug cases, including prosecuting major crimes and defending the government against civil lawsuits. Burgess said there's a threshold for an amount of marijuana possession that federal prosecutors use in determining whether to take a case. He would not reveal what the threshold is, explaining that he does not want the public to know the amount. The issue of state prosecutors forwarding the case to the federal level could become moot if the Attorney General's Office is successful in convincing the Court of Appeals to change the decision it made in the Noy case. In the decision, the appeals court threw out a conviction of David Noy, who was arrested for possessing marijuana in his North Pole home in 2001. The court accepted an argument from Noy's lawyer that the state constitution allowed him to possess marijuana in his home as determined by a 1975 state Supreme Court decision rendered in Ravin v. State. The Supreme Court decision held that adults could possess marijuana in their homes for personal use because the state's interest in preventing them from doing so was not great enough to warrant a violation of a citizen's right to privacy. However, the law changed in 1990 when a voter intiative that passed by a 55-45 percent tally criminalized all amounts of marijuana possession. The Court of Appeals ruled in the Noy case that voters did not have the authority to change the constitution and that personal marijuana use is legal in the home. The court ruled that less than 4 ounces of marijuana was an amount allowable for personal use. However, Renkes contends that the appeals court never should have considered the personal-use argument because Noy actually possessed 11 ounces of marijuana. He was convicted of possessing the lesser amount because the jury was incorrectly instructed on how to measure the total weight of marijuana, Renkes said. "The appeals court has gone beyond the scope of the Noy case to provide its opinion about marijuana use," Renkes said in a news release.Renkes also said in the release that the state Supreme Court's decision in the Ravin case left the state with the option to prove that it has a legitimate interest in preventing personal marijuana use in the home. By declaring personal use legal under state law, the Court of Appeals has denied the state an opportunity to argue that the state constitution should not protect personal marijuana possession, he said."The appellate decision short-circuits the judicial process by denying the state the opportunity to present its case regarding the proper governmental interest in imposing restrictions on marijuana use," said Renkes, who went on to argue that marijuana has become increasingly more potent in recent decades and that more state residents are growing the drug. From a practical standpoint, whatever happens in court makes little difference in how local police deal with marijuana cases, said Fairbanks Director of Police Paul Harris.He said that officers rarely encounter a case involving only an adult possessing marijuana in their home. Typically, a marijuana charge will be tacked on to another crime or pot will turn up while police are investigating another matter, he said. Harris said that if Fairbanks police find marijuana in an adult's home, regardless of the amount, they will seize it because it is a controlled substance. "You're not going to get your 4 ounces back," he said. He added that police would also respond to calls about marijuana use in a residence because the department considers them to be a nuisance complaint.Harris added that since the Noy decision the department has yet to deal with a case that fits into the mold of personal marijuana use in the home. "I've been asking the guys and we don't think we have," he said. "Most of the questions that come up involve small amounts in cars or small amounts in public places, and the answer in most cases is pretty simple--issue a citation." The police director also offered some simple advice for marijuana users who want to avoid a run-in with the law. "The trick is if you're inviting the police over, don't leave it out," he said. "Put it up." Source: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner (AK)Author: Dan White, Staff WriterPublished: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 Copyright: 2003 Fairbanks Publishing Company, Inc.Contact: letters newsminer.comWebsite: http://www.news-miner.com/ Related Articles:Alaska Police Told To Keep Probing Pot Usehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17325.shtmlLaw Enforcement Contends With Decision On Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17307.shtmlMarijuana Ruling Puts Police on Hold http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17246.shtmlAlaska Court Ruling Sparks Hope for Advocateshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17221.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #6 posted by FoM on September 17, 2003 at 20:34:26 PT Off Topic: Virgil Virgil if you check in I just wanted to say I hope you do ok with the hurricane. Good luck to you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by gloovins on September 17, 2003 at 18:01:10 PT lets see if Alaska will.. amend their consitution for petty amounts of an herb...in 2003...they be scared i thinksy...this crazy new inturnet thing really lets people thunk good, & g it was %55-45 fer the unconsitutional law passed in Niney...nope not 1990 no more...mmm i don't know...its just a plant...mnmm im confuzed now, cause I werk fer the govbernment [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by motavation on September 17, 2003 at 13:29:36 PT: Unlawful What laws protect us from unlawful siezure? Also don't they have to follow procedures and ticket you for all items taken? How about destruction of property without permission?Who will help, anyone anystate! We want to offer help and support for all patients nationwide! This is not right daily some old patients or young ones are ticket and targeted due to the choice of meds!:( [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Petard on September 17, 2003 at 12:37:43 PT Alaskans should also know It IS entirely legal and permissable to resist by force the illegal arrest or confiscation of person or property under common law and Constitutional law. It is the Right of The People to be secure in their homes and persons from unwarranted search, seizure, or arrest. Defend your rights or lose them!! (Like Chong, sentenced for his Free Speech) [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by VitaminT on September 17, 2003 at 11:47:08 PT State Prosecutors work for the people of the STATE NOT the Feds!The constitution says that the right to privacy exists and that the Legislature was responsible for protecting it. This should include a law preventing STATE prosecutors from conspiring with the Feds to violate the constitution they are sworn to uphold. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by WolfgangWylde on September 17, 2003 at 11:04:54 PT Civil suits... ...against cops for violating the State Constitution will end this. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment