cannabisnews.com: Levin May Get Seized Cash Soon





Levin May Get Seized Cash Soon
Posted by FoM on January 28, 2000 at 11:12:17 PT
By Maline Hazle, Record Searchlight
Source: Record Searchlight
He and attorney say the delay in its return is retaliation.Richard Levin didn't get his medicinal marijuana back, but within a few days he may finally recover the $450 detectives seized when they searched his Redding home in 1998 and took his pot.The check is almost in the mail, Shasta County Sheriff's Capt. Ron Richardson said Thursday. It should be written and mailed some time today, he said.
Levin, 49, of Redding contends that the delay in returning the money is ''retaliation'' by authorities who are miffed over his Dec. 15 acquittal on a charge of growing marijuana for sale and a subsequent court edict that ordered the sheriff's office to return his 22 ounces of marijuana and 41 dead pot plants.Richardson, meanwhile, gave new details Thursday about the federal seizure of that marijuana.He said that after Shasta County Superior Court Judge Bradley Boeckman's second order to return the pot at a hearing Jan. 14, a Friday, Levin's attorney, Eric Berg, called the sheriff's office and arranged to pick up the drug the following Friday, Jan. 21.In the interim, Richardson said, some sheriff's narcotics officers mentioned the controversy at a conference also attended by federal agents. Those agents said they were going to ask their supervisors to try to block the return, Richardson said.During the week of Jan. 16 there were ''a few phone calls from the federal agents asking questions and Thursday we finally got word that there was a federal seizure order'' for Levin's marijuana, Richardson said.''If he had come in Thursday morning before we got the seizure order, we would have given it back,'' Richardson said. ''As it was, the two DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) agents were going out the back door with it (the pot) as Mr. Levin and Mr. Berg were coming in the front.''Berg, a Redding attorney, remains angry about the seizure. And the money should have been returned early last year, he said Thursday.That was when Laura Sheehy, the Shasta County deputy district attorney who prosecuted Levin, asked the court to dismiss the civil forfeiture action that would have allowed the county to keep the money.Berg said the money wasn't returned because Sheehy wanted his client to sign off on a court document proposed by Berg that would have prevented Levin from later suing the sheriff and district attorney for taking the money in the first place. if i understand it right, the judge didn't step in and order the money returned until this year, so all this was going on last year without any order from him... A May 27 letter from Sheehy to Berg's office asked that a paragraph be added to the document ''indicating that there was probable cause for the seizure of the funds and that you are holding harmless the Shasta County Sheriff's Office and the Shasta County District Attorney's Office from further claims as a result of the stipulation.''''He had no reason to give up his right to sue them for stealing his money,'' Berg said. ''They had no right to keep it (the money) and they kept it anyway.''Sheehy said Thursday afternoon that Berg was wrong — that she authorized the Sheriff's Department to release the money ''probably in March or April'' after an informal conversation with Berg and that she did not recall having written the letter.She also said she was calling from home and could not check her case files.However, after a portion of the letter was read to her, she said that the proposed addition to the document is ''a standard clause in asset forfeiture cases'' and that she has ''never had anybody refuse'' to sign it.She refused to comment when asked if signing a document saying that authorities had ''probable cause'' to take the money might jeopardize a defendant's court case.Sheehy said she remembers that she sent ''a memo to the sheriff's office saying give the money back,'' but not when that memo was sent.Capt. Richardson, who returned a call made to Sheriff Jim Pope, said that either the district attorney's office or the sheriff's office had sent a standard release letter to Levin several weeks ago, but it was never returned.If that was a separate document, Berg said, neither he nor his client received that release letter.Richardson said the sheriff's office believes that the money was ordered returned in early January yep when Superior Court Judge Bradley Boeckman ordered the return of property seized during the May 1998 raid on Levin's house.Other property included Levin's pistols, a marijuana grower's guide, two scales and an insurance policy. Those items were returned to Levin on Jan. 21, the same day federal agents seized the marijuana Boeckman also had ordered returned.Money takes longer to return because the sheriff's office doesn't keep the cash, but deposits it in a special account, Richardson said. When Levin asked about the money last week deputies had to send a claim to the county auditor before a check could be cut, he said.Levin is livid about what he says is a sheriff who tried to find a way to skirt Proposition 215, the California Compassionate Users Act approved by voters in 1996.''This goes way beyond the medical use of marijuana,'' Levin said. ''Which other laws does he (Pope) not like? It's an outrage against civil rights.''Berg said he believes the delay in returning the money also may break the law because Prop. 215 says there will be no sanctions for a patient getting a doctor's recommendation and using marijuana.''If taking that $450 and forcing him to hire an attorney and pay thousands of dollars to defend himself and get it back isn't sanctions, I don't know what is,'' Berg said.He said he is still considering whether to ask Boeckman for a contempt of court ruling against Pope and that he may also seek restitution for the value of the marijuana taken by federal agents.''During my trial they tried to say that my seeds were worth $30 each and that marijuana is worth $4,000 to $5,000 a pound,'' Levin said. ''I think that's what they should pay me.''Berg and Levin also have contacted state Sen. Maurice Johannessen's office in an attempt to talk to him about legislation he promises to propose designed to clear up ambiguities in Prop. 215, they said. Johannessen has not called them back, they said.Johannessen, R-Redding, said Wednesday that he hopes to have that legislation drafted within about two weeks.''I'm getting hammered from both sides,'' Johannessen said. ''Either people think I'm trying to take away their rights or they think I'm supporting marijuana.''Reporter Maline Hazle can be reached at 225-8266 or at mhazle redding.com.Published: January 28, 2000© 2000 Record Searchlight - The E.W. Scripps Co. Related Articles:It's About Time The State Clarifies Med. Pot Rules-1/26/2000http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4492.shtmlLevin's Victory Goes To Pot - 1/22/2000http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4434.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: