cannabisnews.com: Medical-Marijuana Fight Returns To Court





Medical-Marijuana Fight Returns To Court
Posted by CN Staff on April 01, 2004 at 20:03:31 PT
By Brian Seals, Sentinel Staff Writer
Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel 
Santa Cruz — Members of an area medical-marijuana cooperative return to federal court today seeking an end to drug raids like the one that decimated their pot garden in September 2002. Joining the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana as plaintiffs in the suit are the city and county of Santa Cruz.They will, once more, ask U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel to outlaw future raids. "We have a lot of reason for optimism," said Mike Corral, who along with his wife, Valerie, is a co-founder of the collective.
Fogel rejected WAMM’s arguments last August, but held the ruling in abeyance until a separate suit brought by the cooperative seeking return of property was decided, said Gerald Uelmen, one of WAMM’s attorneys.Meanwhile, a ruling last December in an unrelated case, Raich v. Ashcroft, gave medical-marijuana advocates new hope. A U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled that a congressional act outlawing marijuana may not apply to sick people with a doctor’s recommendation in states that have approved medical-marijuana laws.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that prosecuting such medical-marijuana users under a 1970 federal law is unconstitutional if the marijuana isn’t sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes. While that ruling applied to individuals and WAMM is a collective, Uelmen said that decision gives the area group some added legal firepower this time around.Today, the group will seek a preliminary injunction from future raids and argue for the constitutional right of chronically ill people to use medical marijuana. "We think ... the Raich case solves the issue in our favor," Uelmen said Tuesday. "We’re simply asking Judge Fogel to revisit his prior ruling in light of the Raich decision."Like the individuals in the Raich case, WAMM does not exchange money for pot; they are all ill and grow it for each other, and there is no interstate commerce. Groups around the state and even the country are keeping an eye on the case, said Bill Piper of the Drug Policy Alliance. A victory for WAMM could force elected officials to take notice, he said."It would bring home to Congress and others there is a serious conflict between states and the federal bureaucracy," Piper said. "Eventually, Congress will have to act."Attempts Tuesday to contact the U.S. Office of Drug Control Policy, known as the Drug Czar, were unsuccessful. Earlier this year, a spokesman for that agency declined comment on the specifics of the suit, but told the Sentinel that federal drug laws would continue to be enforced until they are changed or the Federal Drug Administration approves use of medical marijuana, regardless of what voters in individual states say.California voters approved Proposition 215 in 1996, which made medical-marijuana use legal with a doctor’s recommendation under state law.The suit to be debated in court today stems from a September 2002 raid at WAMM’s Davenport garden in which federal agents uprooted about 167 plants. Valerie and Mike Corral, who co-founded the group in the early 1990s, were briefly jailed but have yet to be charged.A separate suit seeking return of property from the raid is pending before the U.S. 9th Circuit. WAMM continues to operate on a scaled-back level, Mike Corral said. Some 22 members have died since the raid."We’re still operating a little leaner," Corral said. "We only admit new members when another member passes away."Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel (CA)Author: Brian Seals, Sentinel Staff WriterPublished: March 31, 2004 Copyright: 2004 Santa Cruz SentinelContact: editorial santa-cruz.comWebsite: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:WAMMhttp://www.wamm.org/Raich vs Ashcroft Ruling in PDFhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/ruling.pdfPictures From WAMM Protesthttp://freedomtoexhale.com/eventpics.htmWAMM Set for Appeal To Return Seized Pot http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17300.shtmlJudge Refuses To Block Raids of Marijuana Farm http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17175.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #5 posted by BigDawg on April 05, 2004 at 05:42:41 PT
Thanks Max
That is exactly the kind of info I was looking for.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Max Flowers on April 02, 2004 at 17:15:36 PT
Sebastopol
I just remembered that the city council of the city of Sebastopol (Sonoma county) voted in a resolution a year or so ago stating that they will refuse to cooperate with DEA operations in and around their city. That's the town you want to live in, right? I lived in Sebastopol myself for a while, and may again. It's a nice place. Pretty quiet, about 5,000 people I think.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Max Flowers on April 02, 2004 at 17:10:33 PT
BigDawg
There are actually many counties to avoid unfortunately. L.A. County are none too cooperative, and all counties south (Orange, San Diego, etc) refuse to fully honor CA law as well. I don't think Riverside is any friend to the cannabis user either.Come to think of it, moving north San Luis Obispo is REALLY Naziesque, their narc squads are killing unarmed people, definitely don't give them a penny.You want San Francisco or Sonoma or Marin or maybe Oakland/Alameda (but they have super small plant limits). Maybe Humboldt but they also have really small plant guidelines. In Sonoma County you can have 99 or less plants in 10 by 10 foot max canopy. Most people stay well shy of that number since that's also where feds start to get interested (100 plants). You can do great things with 40 or 50 plants, believe me.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by BigDawg on April 02, 2004 at 09:37:32 PT
Help please
There is one particular county in California that has a DA who sides with the Feds. I guess it would be considered the one county in Cali to avoid. Can anyone here remind me which county it is?Considering a move to Cali and want to be sure to avoid the hot spot.Thanks
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on April 01, 2004 at 20:23:47 PT
Judge Hears Argumentson Medical Marijuana 
Coast Lines - San JoseApril 1, 2004 Attorneys for an area medical marijuana cooperative on Wednesday tried to persuade a federal judge to prohibit any future raids on its garden.The Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana is challenging the federal government’s authority to conduct the raids and is seeking a temporary injunction against raids until the case is resolved.U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel listened to arguments during a half-hour hearing in San Jose."We’re optimistic he’ll provide some relief to the plaintiffs," said Judy Appel of the Drug Policy Alliance.WAMM attorneys are asking Fogel to reconsider an August dismissal of the case. In December, a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled that federal laws regarding marijuana may not apply to sick people with a doctor’s recommendation in states with medical marijuana laws, where no money is exchanged and where no interstate commerce occurs.The city and county of Santa Cruz joined as plaintiffs in the suit, which was filed in April 2003, in response to a September 2002 raid on WAMM’s Davenport garden.http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2004/April/01/local/stories/09local.htm
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment