Off-duty deputy rolls pickup; suspected of DUI
One of Medical marijuana's least friendly deputy!
So drunk at 8:30 that he rolled his truck!
Ukiah Daily Journal Staff
Article Last Updated: 10/30/2008 12:05:37 AM PDT
The Daily Journal
A Mendocino County Sheriff's Office deputy rolled his personal truck while driving south on Highway 101 near Black Bart Drive south of Willits at 8:30 p.m. Tuesday.
Deputy Tim Goss lost control of his pickup, which overturned; he was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence by the California Highway Patrol, the CHP stated Wednesday.
Goss is now on paid leave, a routine action for such an event, Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman said Wednesday afternoon.
Goss has been a member of the Sheriff's Office for about seven to eight years, Allman said. He was off-duty at the time of the crash.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Big Isle to vote on decriminalized pot
October 31, 2008
Associated Press
Big Island marijuana policing would go up in smoke under a measure on Tuesday's ballot.
Big Island voters will consider ordering authorities to back off marijuana crime enforcement and refuse to spend government money on eradicating the drug. The proposed amendment to county code would make adult personal use of marijuana the lowest priority for police.
"It would save us a lot of money, and it would bring unity between the people and the police," said Adam Lehmann, director of Project Peaceful Sky, which takes its name from the low-flying helicopters used in marijuana raids. "If the people aren't going to tell the police what to do, then who is?"
Police warn that if this measure becomes law, crime rates could increase, and more marijuana would be grown on the island.
"I see homicides related to marijuana possession and use," said Big Island police Capt. Randall Medeiros, commander of the criminal investigations division. "They contend that there's nothing wrong with marijuana. It's not true. ... It affects one's memory and one's ability to converse. It's a quality-of-life and safety issue."
The marijuana question took a circuitous route to get on the ballot.
Project Peaceful Sky gathered nearly 5,000 signatures, but the county found less than half of them to be valid. A total of 4,848 signatures were needed to put the proposal to a vote of the people.
Then the County Council stepped in by voting 5-4 in August to put the measure on the ballot.
If it passes, the Big Island would be the 20th municipality in the country with this kind of marijuana law, Lehmann said. Similar laws are in place in cities and counties of at least eight states.
Under this proposal, the county would not be allowed to accept $500,000 per year it receives from federal and state governments for marijuana eradication, Lehmann said. He estimates that the 1,100 Big Island marijuana arrests in 2007 cost county taxpayers at least $1.1 million.
Community police support groups like the Kona Crime Prevention Committee oppose de-emphasizing marijuana enforcement because it would make police officers' jobs more difficult.
"Police officers can't pick and choose what crimes to protect us from. Indecision kills police officers," said Scott Martin, a board member of the Kona Crime Prevention Committee, a group of citizens that honors policing excellence by treating an officer to lunch every month.
Lehmann argues that police should concentrate on methamphetamine abuse and violent crimes rather than adult marijuana consumption.
"We want safe streets. We love our kids," Lehmann said. "This can be a small message that people here are ready for change."
If the law is approved, legal challenges would likely follow.
The Big Island prosecutor has said he doesn't believe the County Council has the authority to tell its police how to deal with a substance controlled under state and federal laws.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081031/NEWS0101/810310328/-1/RSS02?source=rss_localnews
Associated Press
Big Island marijuana policing would go up in smoke under a measure on Tuesday's ballot.
Big Island voters will consider ordering authorities to back off marijuana crime enforcement and refuse to spend government money on eradicating the drug. The proposed amendment to county code would make adult personal use of marijuana the lowest priority for police.
"It would save us a lot of money, and it would bring unity between the people and the police," said Adam Lehmann, director of Project Peaceful Sky, which takes its name from the low-flying helicopters used in marijuana raids. "If the people aren't going to tell the police what to do, then who is?"
Police warn that if this measure becomes law, crime rates could increase, and more marijuana would be grown on the island.
"I see homicides related to marijuana possession and use," said Big Island police Capt. Randall Medeiros, commander of the criminal investigations division. "They contend that there's nothing wrong with marijuana. It's not true. ... It affects one's memory and one's ability to converse. It's a quality-of-life and safety issue."
The marijuana question took a circuitous route to get on the ballot.
Project Peaceful Sky gathered nearly 5,000 signatures, but the county found less than half of them to be valid. A total of 4,848 signatures were needed to put the proposal to a vote of the people.
Then the County Council stepped in by voting 5-4 in August to put the measure on the ballot.
If it passes, the Big Island would be the 20th municipality in the country with this kind of marijuana law, Lehmann said. Similar laws are in place in cities and counties of at least eight states.
Under this proposal, the county would not be allowed to accept $500,000 per year it receives from federal and state governments for marijuana eradication, Lehmann said. He estimates that the 1,100 Big Island marijuana arrests in 2007 cost county taxpayers at least $1.1 million.
Community police support groups like the Kona Crime Prevention Committee oppose de-emphasizing marijuana enforcement because it would make police officers' jobs more difficult.
"Police officers can't pick and choose what crimes to protect us from. Indecision kills police officers," said Scott Martin, a board member of the Kona Crime Prevention Committee, a group of citizens that honors policing excellence by treating an officer to lunch every month.
Lehmann argues that police should concentrate on methamphetamine abuse and violent crimes rather than adult marijuana consumption.
"We want safe streets. We love our kids," Lehmann said. "This can be a small message that people here are ready for change."
If the law is approved, legal challenges would likely follow.
The Big Island prosecutor has said he doesn't believe the County Council has the authority to tell its police how to deal with a substance controlled under state and federal laws.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081031/NEWS0101/810310328/-1/RSS02?source=rss_localnews
Big Isle to vote on decriminalized pot
October 31, 2008
Associated Press
Big Island marijuana policing would go up in smoke under a measure on Tuesday's ballot.
Big Island voters will consider ordering authorities to back off marijuana crime enforcement and refuse to spend government money on eradicating the drug. The proposed amendment to county code would make adult personal use of marijuana the lowest priority for police.
"It would save us a lot of money, and it would bring unity between the people and the police," said Adam Lehmann, director of Project Peaceful Sky, which takes its name from the low-flying helicopters used in marijuana raids. "If the people aren't going to tell the police what to do, then who is?"
Police warn that if this measure becomes law, crime rates could increase, and more marijuana would be grown on the island.
"I see homicides related to marijuana possession and use," said Big Island police Capt. Randall Medeiros, commander of the criminal investigations division. "They contend that there's nothing wrong with marijuana. It's not true. ... It affects one's memory and one's ability to converse. It's a quality-of-life and safety issue."
The marijuana question took a circuitous route to get on the ballot.
Project Peaceful Sky gathered nearly 5,000 signatures, but the county found less than half of them to be valid. A total of 4,848 signatures were needed to put the proposal to a vote of the people.
Then the County Council stepped in by voting 5-4 in August to put the measure on the ballot.
If it passes, the Big Island would be the 20th municipality in the country with this kind of marijuana law, Lehmann said. Similar laws are in place in cities and counties of at least eight states.
Under this proposal, the county would not be allowed to accept $500,000 per year it receives from federal and state governments for marijuana eradication, Lehmann said. He estimates that the 1,100 Big Island marijuana arrests in 2007 cost county taxpayers at least $1.1 million.
Community police support groups like the Kona Crime Prevention Committee oppose de-emphasizing marijuana enforcement because it would make police officers' jobs more difficult.
"Police officers can't pick and choose what crimes to protect us from. Indecision kills police officers," said Scott Martin, a board member of the Kona Crime Prevention Committee, a group of citizens that honors policing excellence by treating an officer to lunch every month.
Lehmann argues that police should concentrate on methamphetamine abuse and violent crimes rather than adult marijuana consumption.
"We want safe streets. We love our kids," Lehmann said. "This can be a small message that people here are ready for change."
If the law is approved, legal challenges would likely follow.
The Big Island prosecutor has said he doesn't believe the County Council has the authority to tell its police how to deal with a substance controlled under state and federal laws.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081031/NEWS0101/810310328/-1/RSS02?source=rss_localnews
Associated Press
Big Island marijuana policing would go up in smoke under a measure on Tuesday's ballot.
Big Island voters will consider ordering authorities to back off marijuana crime enforcement and refuse to spend government money on eradicating the drug. The proposed amendment to county code would make adult personal use of marijuana the lowest priority for police.
"It would save us a lot of money, and it would bring unity between the people and the police," said Adam Lehmann, director of Project Peaceful Sky, which takes its name from the low-flying helicopters used in marijuana raids. "If the people aren't going to tell the police what to do, then who is?"
Police warn that if this measure becomes law, crime rates could increase, and more marijuana would be grown on the island.
"I see homicides related to marijuana possession and use," said Big Island police Capt. Randall Medeiros, commander of the criminal investigations division. "They contend that there's nothing wrong with marijuana. It's not true. ... It affects one's memory and one's ability to converse. It's a quality-of-life and safety issue."
The marijuana question took a circuitous route to get on the ballot.
Project Peaceful Sky gathered nearly 5,000 signatures, but the county found less than half of them to be valid. A total of 4,848 signatures were needed to put the proposal to a vote of the people.
Then the County Council stepped in by voting 5-4 in August to put the measure on the ballot.
If it passes, the Big Island would be the 20th municipality in the country with this kind of marijuana law, Lehmann said. Similar laws are in place in cities and counties of at least eight states.
Under this proposal, the county would not be allowed to accept $500,000 per year it receives from federal and state governments for marijuana eradication, Lehmann said. He estimates that the 1,100 Big Island marijuana arrests in 2007 cost county taxpayers at least $1.1 million.
Community police support groups like the Kona Crime Prevention Committee oppose de-emphasizing marijuana enforcement because it would make police officers' jobs more difficult.
"Police officers can't pick and choose what crimes to protect us from. Indecision kills police officers," said Scott Martin, a board member of the Kona Crime Prevention Committee, a group of citizens that honors policing excellence by treating an officer to lunch every month.
Lehmann argues that police should concentrate on methamphetamine abuse and violent crimes rather than adult marijuana consumption.
"We want safe streets. We love our kids," Lehmann said. "This can be a small message that people here are ready for change."
If the law is approved, legal challenges would likely follow.
The Big Island prosecutor has said he doesn't believe the County Council has the authority to tell its police how to deal with a substance controlled under state and federal laws.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081031/NEWS0101/810310328/-1/RSS02?source=rss_localnews
Gridley gets inventive against pot gardens
By ROGER H. AYLWORTH - Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/31/2008 12:00:00 AM PDT
GRIDLEY — An innovative city zoning ordinance is using civil penalties to effectively block outdoor pot gardens here.
The ordinance, which was passed in June, declares the pungent odor of growing pot a public nuisance.
That means it's illegal for people covered by Proposition 215 to grow pot outside in Gridley, and even puts rules and limits on how the plants can be cultivated indoors.
Gridley Police Chief Gary D. Keeler said the new rules are meant to protect the rights of medicinal marijuana users, while protecting others from the associated ills.
He said the ordinance, which is administered by the city's code enforcement officers and not his department, was spurred by citizen complaints.
Keeler said local citizens understood that under Proposition 215, people with a doctor's recommendation have a right to grow marijuana.
"Not too many people had issues with that; at least they didn't display that concern. It was the smell and the sight, and the blight, and the nuisance to the neighborhood" that got the public's interest, according to the chief.
The core of the legal issue is the smell of the growing plants.
"Marijuana plants, as they begin to flower and for a period of two months or more during the growing season — August through October for outdoor cultivation — produce an extremely strong odor, offensive to many people and detectable far beyond property boundaries," states a Gridley City Council resolution.
"There is actually one (marijuana variety) called 'skunk weed.' It is particularly odorous. It puts out a very, very foul odor," said the chief.
The ordinance prohibits outside growing on that basis. Even indoor grows have to meet specific rules for the structure and the electrical wiring for lighting and ventilation. Indoor growers are also limited to no more than 12 mature plants.
The chief said there was a single residence with a significant outdoor pot patch that really got the ordinance on the books.
He said his department got numerous complaints about the specific spot, but there was nothing police could do about it.
After the ordinance — which carries the potential of a $500-a-day civil fine for violators — was passed, the problem growers "moved on."
As of the end of October, no one had been cited under the ordinance.
Keeler said there was another issue that made finding a way to curb outdoor gardens necessary — armed garden raids.
In recent weeks local legal pot gardens have been targeted by robbers and in at least a couple of situations those raids have led to gunfire.
The chief said having a garden of mature plants in public view was an attractive invitation to potential pot thieves.
"The best analogy I can give it is if you had a bunch of firearms or valuables and you stuck them up in your window, it's like a neon light. 'Come steal me!'" explained the chief.
Between seeing the plants and being able to find them by smell in the dark, outside gardens create a "clear and present danger to the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety of the community," states the Gridley City Council resolution authorizing the ordinance.
While Gridley is the first jurisdiction in the county to enact such an ordinance, Keeler said both the cities of Biggs and Oroville are considering similar measures.
Staff writer Roger H. Aylworth can be reached at 896-7762, or raylworth@chicoer.com.
Article Launched: 10/31/2008 12:00:00 AM PDT
GRIDLEY — An innovative city zoning ordinance is using civil penalties to effectively block outdoor pot gardens here.
The ordinance, which was passed in June, declares the pungent odor of growing pot a public nuisance.
That means it's illegal for people covered by Proposition 215 to grow pot outside in Gridley, and even puts rules and limits on how the plants can be cultivated indoors.
Gridley Police Chief Gary D. Keeler said the new rules are meant to protect the rights of medicinal marijuana users, while protecting others from the associated ills.
He said the ordinance, which is administered by the city's code enforcement officers and not his department, was spurred by citizen complaints.
Keeler said local citizens understood that under Proposition 215, people with a doctor's recommendation have a right to grow marijuana.
"Not too many people had issues with that; at least they didn't display that concern. It was the smell and the sight, and the blight, and the nuisance to the neighborhood" that got the public's interest, according to the chief.
The core of the legal issue is the smell of the growing plants.
"Marijuana plants, as they begin to flower and for a period of two months or more during the growing season — August through October for outdoor cultivation — produce an extremely strong odor, offensive to many people and detectable far beyond property boundaries," states a Gridley City Council resolution.
"There is actually one (marijuana variety) called 'skunk weed.' It is particularly odorous. It puts out a very, very foul odor," said the chief.
The ordinance prohibits outside growing on that basis. Even indoor grows have to meet specific rules for the structure and the electrical wiring for lighting and ventilation. Indoor growers are also limited to no more than 12 mature plants.
The chief said there was a single residence with a significant outdoor pot patch that really got the ordinance on the books.
He said his department got numerous complaints about the specific spot, but there was nothing police could do about it.
After the ordinance — which carries the potential of a $500-a-day civil fine for violators — was passed, the problem growers "moved on."
As of the end of October, no one had been cited under the ordinance.
Keeler said there was another issue that made finding a way to curb outdoor gardens necessary — armed garden raids.
In recent weeks local legal pot gardens have been targeted by robbers and in at least a couple of situations those raids have led to gunfire.
The chief said having a garden of mature plants in public view was an attractive invitation to potential pot thieves.
"The best analogy I can give it is if you had a bunch of firearms or valuables and you stuck them up in your window, it's like a neon light. 'Come steal me!'" explained the chief.
Between seeing the plants and being able to find them by smell in the dark, outside gardens create a "clear and present danger to the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety of the community," states the Gridley City Council resolution authorizing the ordinance.
While Gridley is the first jurisdiction in the county to enact such an ordinance, Keeler said both the cities of Biggs and Oroville are considering similar measures.
Staff writer Roger H. Aylworth can be reached at 896-7762, or raylworth@chicoer.com.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Gardena bans medical marijuana dispensaries
Article Launched: 10/30/2008 12:25:48 AM PDT
The Gardena City Council this week established a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, approved changes in rent mediation rules, and authorized an entertainment permit for a karaoke restaurant.
The council voted 4-0 on Tuesday to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. A 2006 moratorium on the businesses expires next month.
An entertainment permit to allow karaoke music at Hanabi restaurant, formerly Koreana BBQ, was approved on a 4-0 vote. The restaurant, at 1435 W. Redondo Beach Blvd., has recently been renovated with a sushi bar and individual rooms for private karaoke parties. It will open in November.
Additionally, the council amended the bylaws of the city's Rent Mediation Board, which arbitrates disputes between renters and landlords. The new rules limit mediation service to rent increases greater than 5 percent in one year, require landlords to submit reasons for rent increases prior to a mediation hearing, provide that the other side prevails if a party does not appear for a mediation hearing, and conforms rent increase notification periods to current state law.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_10848755?source=rss
The Gardena City Council this week established a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, approved changes in rent mediation rules, and authorized an entertainment permit for a karaoke restaurant.
The council voted 4-0 on Tuesday to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. A 2006 moratorium on the businesses expires next month.
An entertainment permit to allow karaoke music at Hanabi restaurant, formerly Koreana BBQ, was approved on a 4-0 vote. The restaurant, at 1435 W. Redondo Beach Blvd., has recently been renovated with a sushi bar and individual rooms for private karaoke parties. It will open in November.
Additionally, the council amended the bylaws of the city's Rent Mediation Board, which arbitrates disputes between renters and landlords. The new rules limit mediation service to rent increases greater than 5 percent in one year, require landlords to submit reasons for rent increases prior to a mediation hearing, provide that the other side prevails if a party does not appear for a mediation hearing, and conforms rent increase notification periods to current state law.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_10848755?source=rss
Teen faces prison for pot robbery
Youth allegedly breaks into woman's home, takes her medicinal marijuana at knife-point
By Mark Freeman
Mail Tribune
October 30, 2008 6:00 AM
A Central Point teenager faces more than seven years in prison for allegedly breaking into a Medford home early Sunday and robbing a woman of her medical marijuana at knifepoint, authorities said.
Ethan Taylor Sartin, 16, was scheduled to be arraigned Thursday in Jackson County Circuit Court on charges of first-degree robbery and first-degree burglary, and prosecutors said Wednesday they will try him in court as an adult.
"It's because he's 16 years old and the seriousness of the crime," said Beth Heckert, chief deputy district attorney in Jackson County.
The robbery charge carries, upon conviction, a mandatory minimum sentence of 71/2; years in prison under Oregon's Measure 11 minimum-sentencing law.
Sartin was arrested Tuesday without incident at his Truax Road home and he remained detained today by Jackson County Juvenile Department authorities, police said.
Sartin is accused of wearing a cloth over his face while breaking through a rear sliding-glass door early Sunday and entering a residence on the 700 block of West Second Street in Medford, police said.
Sartin allegedly used a folding knife to threaten the woman, and stole between one ounce and two ounces of marijuana that the 54-year-old woman legally had for medicinal purposes, Medford police Lt. Mike Budreau said today.
The robber, who was described as a young and thin white male, ran off, police said.
Investigators interviewed witnesses who were familiar with the woman and her home, and eventually they were led to Sartin, Budreau said.
The knife believed to be used in the robbery had not been found as of this afternoon, Budreau said.
The victim reported the robbery to police at 1:53 a.m. Sunday, police said.
The same woman called police an hour earlier saying that she noticed a suspicious person in her backyard, but officers were unable to locate that person after the initial call, police said.
Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 776-4470, or e-mail mfreeman@mailtribune.com.
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081030/NEWS/810300338
By Mark Freeman
Mail Tribune
October 30, 2008 6:00 AM
A Central Point teenager faces more than seven years in prison for allegedly breaking into a Medford home early Sunday and robbing a woman of her medical marijuana at knifepoint, authorities said.
Ethan Taylor Sartin, 16, was scheduled to be arraigned Thursday in Jackson County Circuit Court on charges of first-degree robbery and first-degree burglary, and prosecutors said Wednesday they will try him in court as an adult.
"It's because he's 16 years old and the seriousness of the crime," said Beth Heckert, chief deputy district attorney in Jackson County.
The robbery charge carries, upon conviction, a mandatory minimum sentence of 71/2; years in prison under Oregon's Measure 11 minimum-sentencing law.
Sartin was arrested Tuesday without incident at his Truax Road home and he remained detained today by Jackson County Juvenile Department authorities, police said.
Sartin is accused of wearing a cloth over his face while breaking through a rear sliding-glass door early Sunday and entering a residence on the 700 block of West Second Street in Medford, police said.
Sartin allegedly used a folding knife to threaten the woman, and stole between one ounce and two ounces of marijuana that the 54-year-old woman legally had for medicinal purposes, Medford police Lt. Mike Budreau said today.
The robber, who was described as a young and thin white male, ran off, police said.
Investigators interviewed witnesses who were familiar with the woman and her home, and eventually they were led to Sartin, Budreau said.
The knife believed to be used in the robbery had not been found as of this afternoon, Budreau said.
The victim reported the robbery to police at 1:53 a.m. Sunday, police said.
The same woman called police an hour earlier saying that she noticed a suspicious person in her backyard, but officers were unable to locate that person after the initial call, police said.
Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 776-4470, or e-mail mfreeman@mailtribune.com.
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081030/NEWS/810300338
Montana High court upholds medical marijuana law
October 30, 2008
By JOHN S. ADAMS Tribune Capitol Bureau
HELENA — Montana courts cannot bar medical marijuana patients from using the drug as a condition of their probation or parole, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
The decision overturned a lower court's ruling that prohibited a Conrad man from using marijuana while serving a three-year deferred sentence.
"This is a very big and important victory, both for patients and Montana voters," said Tom Daubert, founder and director of Patients and Families United, a support group for patients who use medical marijuana.
Montana voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot initiative in 2004 legalizing the use of medical marijuana in the state.
In Tuesday's 6-1 decision, the Supreme Court found that District Judge Laurie McKinnon overstepped her authority when she barred Timothy Nelson of Conrad from using medical marijuana as a condition of his sentence.
Nelson pleaded no contest to a charge of criminal possession or manufacture of dangerous drugs in 2007, after Pondera County authorities found evidence of a marijuana growing operation in his home.
After being charged, Nelson registered with the state medical marijuana program. He suffers from a degenerative disc disorder and has had four surgeries on his back, according to court records.
At a Feb. 26, 2007, sentencing hearing, Pondera County Attorney Mary Ann Ries told the judge that officials at the Department of Corrections would not allow Nelson to smoke marijuana while under their supervision, but would allow him to use the pill form of marijuana.
McKinnon gave Nelson a three-year deferred sentence subject to 20 conditions. Nelson appealed two of those conditions on the basis that they illegally prevented him from using medical marijuana.
Those two conditions were that Nelson comply with all city, county, state and federal laws and that he not possess or use illegal drugs, or any drugs, unless prescribed by a licensed physician. Since physicians cannot legally prescribe marijuana because of federal licensing restrictions, that condition barred Nelson from using medical marijuana. That same sentencing condition also stated that Nelson may not possess marijuana, except in pill form, and only then by prescription from a licensed physician.
Nelson's attorneys, Justin Lee of Choteau, and Colin Stephens of Missoula, argued that the pill form of marijuana, Marinol, is cost-prohibitive for their client, which contradicts the intent of the Medical Marijuana Act of 2004.
In his appeal, Nelson said McKinnon's sentencing conditions were illegal because it restricted him to using Marinol, and that the court exceeded its authority in requiring him to obey all federal laws.
The Supreme Court agreed.
"The District Court unlawfully denied Nelson the right and privilege to use a lawful medical treatment for relief from a debilitating condition under the Montana Medical Marijuana Act," Justice Patricia Cotter wrote in the majority opinion.
The court also found that "when a qualifying patient uses medical marijuana in accordance with the (Medical Marijuana Act), he is receiving lawful medical treatment. In this context, medical marijuana is most properly viewed as a prescription drug."
The court also disagreed with the state's argument that the prescription pill limitation was reasonable and lawful.
"The District Court ignored the clear intent of the voters of Montana, that a qualifying patient with a valid registry identification card be lawfully entitled to grow and consume marijuana in legal amounts," Cotter wrote.
Daubert said that determination was fundamental to the recognition of the medical marijuana law.
"Montana voters clearly decided that Marinol is not the equivalent of medical marijuana," Daubert said. "The court recognizes in its decision that the so-called pill form of marijuana is not marijuana. It's really a common-sense interpretation of our law."
Justice Jim Rice was the sole dissenter in the court's decision. In his written opinion, Rice noted that Nelson obtained his medical marijuana registration only after he was arrested on drug charges.
"This conclusion only makes sense: A defendant must be sentenced for the crime he has committed, under the law as it existed, when he committed it," Rice wrote.
Betsy Griffing, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana, disagreed, calling the court's ruling a good decision.
"It very simply upholds the language of the Medical Marijuana Act," Griffing said. "It says that there are a few exceptions to the Medical Marijuana Act, and that this situation doesn't meet those exceptions. The Supreme Court says to the District Court, 'hey, this is a state law, and this is what it requires, and you have to look at it when you sentence people. You can't punish or restrict anybody for using medical marijuana."
Griffing said the court's ruling may have far-reaching effects for how the courts and correction officials handle probationers and parolees in the future. She said that, as a matter of tradition, the courts have imposed rules requiring offenders to follow all federal laws.
In its decision, the high court pointed out that the federal government does not have the authority to compel state agencies to enact and enforce federal regulatory programs.
"The Supreme Court says (the Medical Marijuana Act) is a state law that defines how state courts — and I think, by clear implication, the Department of Corrections — has to treat probationers," Griffing said. "State courts are not responsible for enforcing federal laws. The principle of federalism says that state courts address state law, and state law says medical marijuana is legal."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081030/NEWS01/810300310
__._,_.___
By JOHN S. ADAMS Tribune Capitol Bureau
HELENA — Montana courts cannot bar medical marijuana patients from using the drug as a condition of their probation or parole, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
The decision overturned a lower court's ruling that prohibited a Conrad man from using marijuana while serving a three-year deferred sentence.
"This is a very big and important victory, both for patients and Montana voters," said Tom Daubert, founder and director of Patients and Families United, a support group for patients who use medical marijuana.
Montana voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot initiative in 2004 legalizing the use of medical marijuana in the state.
In Tuesday's 6-1 decision, the Supreme Court found that District Judge Laurie McKinnon overstepped her authority when she barred Timothy Nelson of Conrad from using medical marijuana as a condition of his sentence.
Nelson pleaded no contest to a charge of criminal possession or manufacture of dangerous drugs in 2007, after Pondera County authorities found evidence of a marijuana growing operation in his home.
After being charged, Nelson registered with the state medical marijuana program. He suffers from a degenerative disc disorder and has had four surgeries on his back, according to court records.
At a Feb. 26, 2007, sentencing hearing, Pondera County Attorney Mary Ann Ries told the judge that officials at the Department of Corrections would not allow Nelson to smoke marijuana while under their supervision, but would allow him to use the pill form of marijuana.
McKinnon gave Nelson a three-year deferred sentence subject to 20 conditions. Nelson appealed two of those conditions on the basis that they illegally prevented him from using medical marijuana.
Those two conditions were that Nelson comply with all city, county, state and federal laws and that he not possess or use illegal drugs, or any drugs, unless prescribed by a licensed physician. Since physicians cannot legally prescribe marijuana because of federal licensing restrictions, that condition barred Nelson from using medical marijuana. That same sentencing condition also stated that Nelson may not possess marijuana, except in pill form, and only then by prescription from a licensed physician.
Nelson's attorneys, Justin Lee of Choteau, and Colin Stephens of Missoula, argued that the pill form of marijuana, Marinol, is cost-prohibitive for their client, which contradicts the intent of the Medical Marijuana Act of 2004.
In his appeal, Nelson said McKinnon's sentencing conditions were illegal because it restricted him to using Marinol, and that the court exceeded its authority in requiring him to obey all federal laws.
The Supreme Court agreed.
"The District Court unlawfully denied Nelson the right and privilege to use a lawful medical treatment for relief from a debilitating condition under the Montana Medical Marijuana Act," Justice Patricia Cotter wrote in the majority opinion.
The court also found that "when a qualifying patient uses medical marijuana in accordance with the (Medical Marijuana Act), he is receiving lawful medical treatment. In this context, medical marijuana is most properly viewed as a prescription drug."
The court also disagreed with the state's argument that the prescription pill limitation was reasonable and lawful.
"The District Court ignored the clear intent of the voters of Montana, that a qualifying patient with a valid registry identification card be lawfully entitled to grow and consume marijuana in legal amounts," Cotter wrote.
Daubert said that determination was fundamental to the recognition of the medical marijuana law.
"Montana voters clearly decided that Marinol is not the equivalent of medical marijuana," Daubert said. "The court recognizes in its decision that the so-called pill form of marijuana is not marijuana. It's really a common-sense interpretation of our law."
Justice Jim Rice was the sole dissenter in the court's decision. In his written opinion, Rice noted that Nelson obtained his medical marijuana registration only after he was arrested on drug charges.
"This conclusion only makes sense: A defendant must be sentenced for the crime he has committed, under the law as it existed, when he committed it," Rice wrote.
Betsy Griffing, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana, disagreed, calling the court's ruling a good decision.
"It very simply upholds the language of the Medical Marijuana Act," Griffing said. "It says that there are a few exceptions to the Medical Marijuana Act, and that this situation doesn't meet those exceptions. The Supreme Court says to the District Court, 'hey, this is a state law, and this is what it requires, and you have to look at it when you sentence people. You can't punish or restrict anybody for using medical marijuana."
Griffing said the court's ruling may have far-reaching effects for how the courts and correction officials handle probationers and parolees in the future. She said that, as a matter of tradition, the courts have imposed rules requiring offenders to follow all federal laws.
In its decision, the high court pointed out that the federal government does not have the authority to compel state agencies to enact and enforce federal regulatory programs.
"The Supreme Court says (the Medical Marijuana Act) is a state law that defines how state courts — and I think, by clear implication, the Department of Corrections — has to treat probationers," Griffing said. "State courts are not responsible for enforcing federal laws. The principle of federalism says that state courts address state law, and state law says medical marijuana is legal."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081030/NEWS01/810300310
__._,_.___
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
California officials warn Michigan on dangers of allowing medical marijuana
October 27, 2008
By MEGHA SATYANARAYANA
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
California law enforcement officials warned of increased crime and drug use in teens as they lent their support today to opponents of Michigan's proposed medical marijuana law.
Saying they've watched supposed medical marijuana users leave distribution co-ops and selling marijuana to youngsters, the police chiefs of El Cerrito and Modesto, Calif., said the initiative does little to help the sick, and simply legalizes the drug for people who are healthy.
Proposal 1, on the November ballot, would allow users with certain medical conditions that come with pain and nausea to grow and use marijuana without fear of prosecution by the state. Federal laws against the drug would still apply.
One issue opponents have with the initiative is the medical marijuana defense. The police chiefs said that marijuana growers and users have tried to get out possession and distribution charges by claiming the drug is used for medicinal purposes. The sham defenses bog down the law enforcement system, they said.
Proponents say the proposal is written in such a way that only those carrying or in the process of getting a medical marijuana identification card, which would be mandatory in Michigan, could use the defense. Proponents also say there is no provision allowing for co-ops that distribute marijuana, and users and their caregivers are limited in the number of plants they can grow.
http://www.freep.com/article/20081027/NEWS06/81027088
By MEGHA SATYANARAYANA
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
California law enforcement officials warned of increased crime and drug use in teens as they lent their support today to opponents of Michigan's proposed medical marijuana law.
Saying they've watched supposed medical marijuana users leave distribution co-ops and selling marijuana to youngsters, the police chiefs of El Cerrito and Modesto, Calif., said the initiative does little to help the sick, and simply legalizes the drug for people who are healthy.
Proposal 1, on the November ballot, would allow users with certain medical conditions that come with pain and nausea to grow and use marijuana without fear of prosecution by the state. Federal laws against the drug would still apply.
One issue opponents have with the initiative is the medical marijuana defense. The police chiefs said that marijuana growers and users have tried to get out possession and distribution charges by claiming the drug is used for medicinal purposes. The sham defenses bog down the law enforcement system, they said.
Proponents say the proposal is written in such a way that only those carrying or in the process of getting a medical marijuana identification card, which would be mandatory in Michigan, could use the defense. Proponents also say there is no provision allowing for co-ops that distribute marijuana, and users and their caregivers are limited in the number of plants they can grow.
http://www.freep.com/article/20081027/NEWS06/81027088
Monday, October 27, 2008
S.D. County pursues medicinal marijuana case
County pursues medicinal marijuana case
Board wants to resolve state-federal conflict
By Jeff McDonald
STAFF WRITER
October 27, 2008
Despite batting .000 against a lineup of lawyers and judges across California, San Diego County is pressing its long-shot lawsuit against state medical marijuana laws toward the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Board of Supervisors voted to petition the nation's top court even before the California Supreme Court declined Oct. 16 to hear the county's argument that the state laws should be overturned.
For nearly three years, the supervisors have persisted in their legal fight rather than direct county health officials to issue identification cards to qualified medical marijuana patients as required by state law.
"This case is not about questioning the medicinal value of marijuana," Supervisor Dianne Jacob said. "It's about resolving the conflict between state and federal law."
For patients who rely on marijuana to relieve symptoms of cancer, AIDS and other illnesses, the ongoing resistance feels more like a slap in the face.
"What the county has been doing is straight-up prejudicial," said Rudy Reyes, who was severely burned in the Cedar fire and smokes marijuana to relieve his pain.
"They don't want to see this as a viable medication," said Reyes, who felt so strongly about the issue that he tried to unseat Jacob in the last election.
In 1996, 56 percent of California voters supported an initiative allowing sick and dying patients to grow and use marijuana to ease their symptoms. The law has vexed enforcement officials ever since because the drug remains illegal under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act.
The state sought to clarify its medical-use allowance in 2004 and directed counties to issue identification cards to qualified patients. The cards are designed to help police determine who is using marijuana legally and who is abusing the drug.
On a 3-2 vote in November 2005, county supervisors went against a staff recommendation that cards be issued. Greg Cox and Ron Roberts were in the minority on that vote, but the following week, when the board opted to challenge the state law in court, Cox sided with the majority. Roberts was absent.
"I supported the effort to issue the medical marijuana cards, but clearly in this case we have a conflict with federal law that says it's a controlled substance," Cox said in an interview last week. "I felt the responsible thing to do was get through the courts."
County lawyers filed their case in early 2006. San Bernardino and Merced counties joined as co-plaintiffs. Late that year, San Diego Superior Court Judge William R. Nevitt rejected the counties' legal arguments, ruling in favor of the state and two patient-advocacy groups.
San Diego and San Bernardino counties appealed, but Merced opted out. Instead, supervisors there began issuing the ID cards.
"We felt like we were going to be throwing good money after bad," said Kathleen Crookham, chairwoman of the Merced County Board of Supervisors. "How far can you go? We thought we'd cut our losses and move on."
About 30 Merced County residents have applied for and received the cards, Crookham said. Since then, "it's kind of quietly just moved on."
San Diego County Supervisor Bill Horn remains unconvinced, however. He does not believe there is any medicinal value in marijuana.
"I don't think it's right, to be honest with you," he said. "Issuing the cards is condoning the use of marijuana. That's not a message I personally want to send."
Legal experts tend to agree with the courts that rejected the position staked out by San Diego and San Bernardino counties. Those judges and scholars say the bottom line is that state laws do not prevent federal agents from enforcing the Controlled Substances Act, which classifies marijuana as among the most dangerous known drugs.
"California can do whatever it wants to do and the U.S. government can do whatever it wants to do," said University of San Diego law professor Shaun Martin, who has argued three cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and prevailed once. "The counties' position that there's a conflict on this is a minority – a very minority – view."
Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky said the U.S. Supreme Court generally reviews only those cases that have divided lower courts.
"There's a lot of misunderstanding about federal law and state law and pre-emption," said Chemerinsky, the founding dean of the University of California Irvine law school. "What the state law does is say it's not a state crime to have medical marijuana."
The counties have 90 days from Oct. 16 to file what's known as a petition for a writ of certiorari, which formally requests a review by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the court agrees to consider the case, a ruling could come in 2009 or 2010.
More than 7,500 cases are appealed to the nation's top court each year; only 1 percent to 2 percent of the petitions are granted. Roughly half of those involve criminal cases, so the county's chances of being heard are slim.
No one in county government would estimate how much time and money has been spent working to overturn California medical marijuana laws.
Senior Deputy County Counsel Thomas Bunton, who is supervising the legal strategy, noted that his office has not retained any outside lawyers. But he declined to detail the public resources dedicated to the lawsuit.
"This hasn't cost the county any additional money," Bunton said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sidebar:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA
The San Diego Union-Tribune contacted each San Diego County supervisor about the board's decision to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its challenge of state medical marijuana laws. Here are their responses:
Greg Cox: "When you get into a conflict between state and federal law, the only alternative is to go to court."
Bill Horn: "Whether or not (federal agents) can enforce their law, that's their choice. My problem is I have something that's in black and white which my attorneys tell me is in conflict."
Dianne Jacob: "Handing out ID cards at the same time the federal government considers marijuana illegal is not fair to those who think the cards would protect them."
Ron Roberts: Did not respond.
Pam Slater-Price: "I do not consider I would be doing my duty if I accepted the idea that we were to issue these licenses for so-called medical marijuana. The way the law is set up practically anything qualifies, including having a bad hair day."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff McDonald: (619) 542-4585; jeff.mcdonald@uniontrib.com
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081027/news_1m27potsuit.html
Board wants to resolve state-federal conflict
By Jeff McDonald
STAFF WRITER
October 27, 2008
Despite batting .000 against a lineup of lawyers and judges across California, San Diego County is pressing its long-shot lawsuit against state medical marijuana laws toward the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Board of Supervisors voted to petition the nation's top court even before the California Supreme Court declined Oct. 16 to hear the county's argument that the state laws should be overturned.
For nearly three years, the supervisors have persisted in their legal fight rather than direct county health officials to issue identification cards to qualified medical marijuana patients as required by state law.
"This case is not about questioning the medicinal value of marijuana," Supervisor Dianne Jacob said. "It's about resolving the conflict between state and federal law."
For patients who rely on marijuana to relieve symptoms of cancer, AIDS and other illnesses, the ongoing resistance feels more like a slap in the face.
"What the county has been doing is straight-up prejudicial," said Rudy Reyes, who was severely burned in the Cedar fire and smokes marijuana to relieve his pain.
"They don't want to see this as a viable medication," said Reyes, who felt so strongly about the issue that he tried to unseat Jacob in the last election.
In 1996, 56 percent of California voters supported an initiative allowing sick and dying patients to grow and use marijuana to ease their symptoms. The law has vexed enforcement officials ever since because the drug remains illegal under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act.
The state sought to clarify its medical-use allowance in 2004 and directed counties to issue identification cards to qualified patients. The cards are designed to help police determine who is using marijuana legally and who is abusing the drug.
On a 3-2 vote in November 2005, county supervisors went against a staff recommendation that cards be issued. Greg Cox and Ron Roberts were in the minority on that vote, but the following week, when the board opted to challenge the state law in court, Cox sided with the majority. Roberts was absent.
"I supported the effort to issue the medical marijuana cards, but clearly in this case we have a conflict with federal law that says it's a controlled substance," Cox said in an interview last week. "I felt the responsible thing to do was get through the courts."
County lawyers filed their case in early 2006. San Bernardino and Merced counties joined as co-plaintiffs. Late that year, San Diego Superior Court Judge William R. Nevitt rejected the counties' legal arguments, ruling in favor of the state and two patient-advocacy groups.
San Diego and San Bernardino counties appealed, but Merced opted out. Instead, supervisors there began issuing the ID cards.
"We felt like we were going to be throwing good money after bad," said Kathleen Crookham, chairwoman of the Merced County Board of Supervisors. "How far can you go? We thought we'd cut our losses and move on."
About 30 Merced County residents have applied for and received the cards, Crookham said. Since then, "it's kind of quietly just moved on."
San Diego County Supervisor Bill Horn remains unconvinced, however. He does not believe there is any medicinal value in marijuana.
"I don't think it's right, to be honest with you," he said. "Issuing the cards is condoning the use of marijuana. That's not a message I personally want to send."
Legal experts tend to agree with the courts that rejected the position staked out by San Diego and San Bernardino counties. Those judges and scholars say the bottom line is that state laws do not prevent federal agents from enforcing the Controlled Substances Act, which classifies marijuana as among the most dangerous known drugs.
"California can do whatever it wants to do and the U.S. government can do whatever it wants to do," said University of San Diego law professor Shaun Martin, who has argued three cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and prevailed once. "The counties' position that there's a conflict on this is a minority – a very minority – view."
Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky said the U.S. Supreme Court generally reviews only those cases that have divided lower courts.
"There's a lot of misunderstanding about federal law and state law and pre-emption," said Chemerinsky, the founding dean of the University of California Irvine law school. "What the state law does is say it's not a state crime to have medical marijuana."
The counties have 90 days from Oct. 16 to file what's known as a petition for a writ of certiorari, which formally requests a review by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the court agrees to consider the case, a ruling could come in 2009 or 2010.
More than 7,500 cases are appealed to the nation's top court each year; only 1 percent to 2 percent of the petitions are granted. Roughly half of those involve criminal cases, so the county's chances of being heard are slim.
No one in county government would estimate how much time and money has been spent working to overturn California medical marijuana laws.
Senior Deputy County Counsel Thomas Bunton, who is supervising the legal strategy, noted that his office has not retained any outside lawyers. But he declined to detail the public resources dedicated to the lawsuit.
"This hasn't cost the county any additional money," Bunton said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sidebar:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA
The San Diego Union-Tribune contacted each San Diego County supervisor about the board's decision to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its challenge of state medical marijuana laws. Here are their responses:
Greg Cox: "When you get into a conflict between state and federal law, the only alternative is to go to court."
Bill Horn: "Whether or not (federal agents) can enforce their law, that's their choice. My problem is I have something that's in black and white which my attorneys tell me is in conflict."
Dianne Jacob: "Handing out ID cards at the same time the federal government considers marijuana illegal is not fair to those who think the cards would protect them."
Ron Roberts: Did not respond.
Pam Slater-Price: "I do not consider I would be doing my duty if I accepted the idea that we were to issue these licenses for so-called medical marijuana. The way the law is set up practically anything qualifies, including having a bad hair day."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff McDonald: (619) 542-4585; jeff.mcdonald@uniontrib.com
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081027/news_1m27potsuit.html
Mexican Drug Lord Is Arrested
October 27, 2008
By REUTERS
TIJUANA, Mexico (Reuters) — Mexican security forces have arrested the drug cartel leader Eduardo Arellano Fรฉlix, one of the international traffickers most sought by the United States, after a shootout in this border city, the government said Sunday.
Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix, nicknamed the Doctor, is a senior member of a family cartel embroiled in a violent struggle for control of the lucrative drug trade in which more than 3,700 people have been killed in Mexico this year, including 450 in Tijuana.
He is accused of running the cartel along with his sister Enedina, the only main suspect from the family who remains at large after several brothers have been arrested or killed.
The police arrested Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix on Saturday after they chased his car to a three-story home in an upscale neighborhood, according to federal police officials in Tijuana. A three-hour gun battle with more than 100 police officers and soldiers ensued, leaving the home riddled with bullet holes.
The United States indicted Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix in 2003 on drug-smuggling and money-laundering charges and had offered a reward of up to $5 million for his capture.
President Felipe Calderรณn has sent tens of thousands of troops and federal police officers across the country to fight escalating drug violence since late 2006, but there have been few arrests of major cartel leaders.
The Arellano Fรฉlix family dominated the smuggling of cocaine and marijuana into California in the 1990s and was feared for its ruthless elimination of enemies.
Francisco Arellano Fรฉlix, Eduardo's youngest brother, was sentenced to life in prison in the United States last November after being captured while deep-sea fishing off Mexico. Mexican authorities agreed in June to extradite another brother, Benjamรญn, to the United States to face smuggling charges.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/27/world/americas/27mexico.html?ref=world
By REUTERS
TIJUANA, Mexico (Reuters) — Mexican security forces have arrested the drug cartel leader Eduardo Arellano Fรฉlix, one of the international traffickers most sought by the United States, after a shootout in this border city, the government said Sunday.
Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix, nicknamed the Doctor, is a senior member of a family cartel embroiled in a violent struggle for control of the lucrative drug trade in which more than 3,700 people have been killed in Mexico this year, including 450 in Tijuana.
He is accused of running the cartel along with his sister Enedina, the only main suspect from the family who remains at large after several brothers have been arrested or killed.
The police arrested Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix on Saturday after they chased his car to a three-story home in an upscale neighborhood, according to federal police officials in Tijuana. A three-hour gun battle with more than 100 police officers and soldiers ensued, leaving the home riddled with bullet holes.
The United States indicted Mr. Arellano Fรฉlix in 2003 on drug-smuggling and money-laundering charges and had offered a reward of up to $5 million for his capture.
President Felipe Calderรณn has sent tens of thousands of troops and federal police officers across the country to fight escalating drug violence since late 2006, but there have been few arrests of major cartel leaders.
The Arellano Fรฉlix family dominated the smuggling of cocaine and marijuana into California in the 1990s and was feared for its ruthless elimination of enemies.
Francisco Arellano Fรฉlix, Eduardo's youngest brother, was sentenced to life in prison in the United States last November after being captured while deep-sea fishing off Mexico. Mexican authorities agreed in June to extradite another brother, Benjamรญn, to the United States to face smuggling charges.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/27/world/americas/27mexico.html?ref=world
Friday, October 24, 2008
HORROR 'ABUSE' BY COPS SUBWAY 'SODOMY'
By MURRAY WEISS, REUVEN FENTON and ALEX GINSBERG
Posted: 4:29 am
October 24, 2008
A gang of rogue cops clobbered a Brooklyn man they saw smoking a joint, then sodomized him with a walkie-talkie antenna during a broad-daylight attack in a subway station, law-enforcement sources and the victim's lawyer said yesterday.
The alleged attack, reminiscent of the 1997 police assault on Abner Louima, put Michael Mineo, 24, in Brookdale Hospital for four days.
"This is one of the most horrendous and grievous cases I've ever seen," said Mineo's lawyer, Stephen Jackson, who will file a notice of claim against the city next week.
In the Louima case, the victim was black, the attackers white. In this case, Mineo is white and the officers are black, Hispanic and white.
Law-enforcement sources said the investigation was focusing on five cops - four patrol officers from the 71st Precinct and a transit officer - all of whom were characterized as relatively inexperienced.
The officer who allegedly committed the sodomy is believed to be in his 20s, with 2½ years on the job.
NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said the department's initial investigation turned up little to support Mineo's story.
"Police officers grappled with an individual who they observed smoking marijuana after he had fled and resisted being handcuffed," said Browne. "His assertion that he was sodomized is not supported by independent civilian witnesses."
But law-enforcement sources told a different story to The Post - specifically noting that at least one witness reported seeing Mineo's exposed buttocks as cops held him down. A co-worker at the Jiggaman tattoo parlor on Jay Street in Downtown Brooklyn said Mineo had been released from the hospital, but was in pain and did not appear to be improving.
"He's getting pale," said Keasha Brown, 25. "He's looking sick. Those people are dangerous. It makes me sick."
Mineo was walking from his home to the Prospect Park subway station on Empire Boulevard at Flatbush Avenue at about 2 p.m. on Oct. 15 when two uniformed officers spotted him allegedly smoking a joint.
They chased him into the station, and at some point, Mineo allegedly swallowed the marijuana. Five cops tackled him near a token booth, where they beat him and stood on his neck, said Jackson and the law-enforcement sources.
One officer then allegedly pulled Mineo's pants down and shoved a police radio's antenna into his rectum.
The cops then hauled a bleeding Mineo into a police car and issued him a desk-appearance ticket before cutting him loose, Jackson said.
They also warned him not to report the incident or they would upgrade his charge to a felony, according to the attorney.
Jackson said his client heard one of the officers yell, "No! Don't do it!" as his pants were being pulled down. His roommate and co-worker, Jason Amolsch, found him yelling that the "cops violated him."
Sources said the officers are still on active duty.
"It's alarming that you have police officers out there who, for all intents and purposes, are guilty of gang rape," said Jackson.
Mineo has a pending assault case in Brooklyn.
Additional reporting by Tom Liddy & Sean Gardiner
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10242008/news/regionalnews/horror_abuse_by_cops_135071.htm
and from The New York Times-
October 24, 2008
N.Y. Police Investigate Allegation of Brutality
By AL BAKER
Brooklyn prosecutors and police internal affairs officers are investigating allegations that uniformed New York City police officers beat and sodomized a man in a Brooklyn subway station, officials and lawyers for the man said on Thursday.
The lawyers identified the man as Michael Mineo, 24, of Brooklyn, an employee at a Brooklyn tattoo parlor. He was issued a summons for disorderly conduct on Oct. 15, they said, after three officers pinned him to the ground and another repeatedly shoved an object — possibly a police radio or a baton — into his rectum.
On Thursday evening, Paul J. Browne, the Police Department's chief spokesman, acknowledged that the department's Internal Affairs Bureau was investigating the claims but said that the facts did not support the accusation.
"Police officers grappled with an individual, who they observed smoking marijuana, after he had fled and resisted being handcuffed," Mr. Browne said in an e-mail message. "His assertion that he was sodomized is not supported by independent civilian witnesses on the scene. The complaint is being investigated by I.A.B. and the district attorney's office."
Jerry Schmetterer, a spokesman for the district attorney's office, said, "We don't comment on investigations."
Mr. Browne said that there were five officers in all at the location with Mr. Mineo, four of them assigned to the 71st Precinct and one a Transit Bureau officer. None have had their duty status changed.
The allegations recalled the case of Abner Louima, a Haitian immigrant who was tortured with a broken broomstick in 1997. One police officer was sentenced to 30 years in prison in that attack, and a second served five years for perjury.
The lawyers for Mr. Mineo, Stephen C. Jackson and Kevin L. Mosley, contended that unlike the Louima case, in which Mr. Louima was taken to a room in a police station house, their client was assaulted about 12:30 p.m. in a place busy with travelers and with a clerk in a nearby subway booth.
Mr. Jackson said his client is white and the officers were white, black and Hispanic.
"He sustained serious injuries to the rectal area and internally," said Mr. Jackson, who said he planned to hold a news conference on Monday to make Mr. Mineo's medical records public. "The wounds are very serious and very nasty and are going to require extensive rehab and treatment, as well as psychological treatment."
Mr. Jackson said that the attack occurred at the Prospect Park station of the B and Q lines and that afterward Mr. Mineo used his cellphone to call his boss, who drove to the station and then drove Mr. Mineo to Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center. He said a hospital administrator notified the Brooklyn district attorney's office.
Andrew Rubin, a hospital spokesman, said Mr. Mineo arrived there as a patient on Oct. 15. He declined to say when he was discharged. Mr. Mosley said that Mr. Mineo spent five days in the hospital.
Mr. Rubin said, "The only thing we can say is that the patient was physically in the hospital, yes. We can't tell you why, we can't tell you how he was treated."
Asked if the hospital notified prosecutors about the case, Mr. Rubin said he had no knowledge of that, adding, "That is not the administrator of the hospital's position to do that."
Mr. Browne, when asked about injuries to Mr. Mineo, said, "We have no record of his injuries." He said police officials were "waiting for the hospital to release them to us."
A woman at Jiggaman Tattoos in Downtown Brooklyn, where Mr. Mineo works, and who identified herself as Mr. Mineo's sister said "he's not actually doing O.K." when asked about him on Thursday night. The woman, who did not give her name, said a lawyer had told her and Mr. Mineo's friends not to talk about what had happened.
In interviews on Thursday, Mr. Jackson gave an account he said his client provided. He said Mr. Mineo, who had left his house to go to work, was "accosted" by officers as he approached the subway station. The officers pursued him, and Mr. Mineo "hurriedly walked down the stairs" of the station, Mr. Jackson said. The clerk's booth is at the foot of the stairs at one of the station's two entrances.
He said that the officers pushed Mr. Mineo to the ground before he reached the turnstiles, and that one officer placed his knee on Mr. Mineo's neck as others punched and kicked him.
"At least three held him down," Mr. Jackson said. At one point, an officer pulled his client's baggy pants down and Mr. Mineo screamed. Mr. Mineo saw that officer reach for his radio on his gun belt, Mr. Jackson said. He said one officers yelled, "Don't do it! Don't do it! No, no, no, no." But his client was being assaulted. He said the entire episode lasted about two minutes.
Afterward, Mr. Mosley said, the officers took Mr. Mineo to a police car, gave him a summons for disorderly conduct and let him go.
Mr. Jackson promised to make a copy of that summons public on Monday. He said that it indicated the name of one of the officers, but that he did not know the names of the others. He said there were several witnesses, but he did not provide their names. He added that he was seeking videotape evidence.
Jason Amolsch, the owner of Jiggaman Tattoos, said on Thursday that he lives with Mr. Mineo and that both of them were headed to the shop on Oct. 15. He said Mr. Mineo left home a few minutes earlier.
By the time Mr. Amolsch reached the station, he found Mr. Mineo outside, bloodied and screaming that the officers had "shoved their walkie-talkie" into his rectum. Mr. Mineo then told him, "I've got to go to the hospital." A few days later, after he was released from the hospital, Mr. Mineo came to the shop. "He tried to work, but he couldn't," Mr. Amolsch said. "He kept crying."
Mr. Browne said that officers interviewed two civilian witnesses, whom he declined to identify, who gave accounts that contradicted the allegation.
Mr. Browne said one of the witnesses told of hearing Mr. Mineo yelling, "Stop Tasering me!"
But Mr. Browne said that the same witness said the officers did not have Tasers. None of the officers present were equipped with them, Mr. Browne said.
"Witnesses said they heard him say two things, that he was being sodomized and Tasered, and they saw neither," Mr. Browne said.
A senior police official, speaking on background because the case is under investigation, said that two witnesses, one an adult and the other a 12-year-old, both saw the arrest.
The official said that the police were continuing to investigate to ensure that the officers had not done anything wrong, but were satisfied at this point that there had not been any sodomy.
A person briefed on the inquiry said investigators had determined that Mr. Mineo had suffered some kind of rectal injury and had blood in his underwear, but have not found any evidence that the injury had been sustained in an altercation with the police.
As part of the inquiry, however, one investigator said police officials had removed an item, which he would not identify, from one of the officer's lockers and sent it for testing.
The testing has not been completed.
Deirdre Parker, a spokeswoman for New York City Transit, said she could not say who was working in the booth on the afternoon of Oct. 15 or if that person saw anything.
"We have no comment except to say that we are cooperating with the N.Y.P.D.," said Ms. Parker.
Mr. Mineo was arrested on April 18 at the tattoo parlor on charges that he and four others kicked and punched a man, gashing his head and knocking out a tooth, according to a criminal complaint. Another victim in the confrontation said Mr. Mineo struck him with a wooden stool, the complaint said. A child was in the store at the time, an official said, and Mr. Mineo was charged with gang assault and endangering the welfare of a child, among other charges. The case is still open.
Mr. Mosley said "there was no gang assault," but he said he was not representing Mr. Mineo in that case.
Two decades ago, Mr. Jackson was the lawyer for C. Vernon Mason, one of three principal advisers to Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old black girl from Wappingers Falls, N.Y., whose claims of being abducted and raped by a group of white men were found to be a hoax. Mr. Mason, along with the Rev. Al Sharpton and Alton H. Maddox Jr., was sued for defamation by a prosecutor, Steven A. Pagones, whom they had accused of being one of the rapists.
At one point during court proceedings, Mr. Jackson was briefly jailed for contempt of court. A jury awarded Mr. Pagones $345,000 from the three men.
Ann Farmer, William K. Rashbaum and Nate Schweber contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/nyregion/24police.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
Posted: 4:29 am
October 24, 2008
A gang of rogue cops clobbered a Brooklyn man they saw smoking a joint, then sodomized him with a walkie-talkie antenna during a broad-daylight attack in a subway station, law-enforcement sources and the victim's lawyer said yesterday.
The alleged attack, reminiscent of the 1997 police assault on Abner Louima, put Michael Mineo, 24, in Brookdale Hospital for four days.
"This is one of the most horrendous and grievous cases I've ever seen," said Mineo's lawyer, Stephen Jackson, who will file a notice of claim against the city next week.
In the Louima case, the victim was black, the attackers white. In this case, Mineo is white and the officers are black, Hispanic and white.
Law-enforcement sources said the investigation was focusing on five cops - four patrol officers from the 71st Precinct and a transit officer - all of whom were characterized as relatively inexperienced.
The officer who allegedly committed the sodomy is believed to be in his 20s, with 2½ years on the job.
NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said the department's initial investigation turned up little to support Mineo's story.
"Police officers grappled with an individual who they observed smoking marijuana after he had fled and resisted being handcuffed," said Browne. "His assertion that he was sodomized is not supported by independent civilian witnesses."
But law-enforcement sources told a different story to The Post - specifically noting that at least one witness reported seeing Mineo's exposed buttocks as cops held him down. A co-worker at the Jiggaman tattoo parlor on Jay Street in Downtown Brooklyn said Mineo had been released from the hospital, but was in pain and did not appear to be improving.
"He's getting pale," said Keasha Brown, 25. "He's looking sick. Those people are dangerous. It makes me sick."
Mineo was walking from his home to the Prospect Park subway station on Empire Boulevard at Flatbush Avenue at about 2 p.m. on Oct. 15 when two uniformed officers spotted him allegedly smoking a joint.
They chased him into the station, and at some point, Mineo allegedly swallowed the marijuana. Five cops tackled him near a token booth, where they beat him and stood on his neck, said Jackson and the law-enforcement sources.
One officer then allegedly pulled Mineo's pants down and shoved a police radio's antenna into his rectum.
The cops then hauled a bleeding Mineo into a police car and issued him a desk-appearance ticket before cutting him loose, Jackson said.
They also warned him not to report the incident or they would upgrade his charge to a felony, according to the attorney.
Jackson said his client heard one of the officers yell, "No! Don't do it!" as his pants were being pulled down. His roommate and co-worker, Jason Amolsch, found him yelling that the "cops violated him."
Sources said the officers are still on active duty.
"It's alarming that you have police officers out there who, for all intents and purposes, are guilty of gang rape," said Jackson.
Mineo has a pending assault case in Brooklyn.
Additional reporting by Tom Liddy & Sean Gardiner
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10242008/news/regionalnews/horror_abuse_by_cops_135071.htm
and from The New York Times-
October 24, 2008
N.Y. Police Investigate Allegation of Brutality
By AL BAKER
Brooklyn prosecutors and police internal affairs officers are investigating allegations that uniformed New York City police officers beat and sodomized a man in a Brooklyn subway station, officials and lawyers for the man said on Thursday.
The lawyers identified the man as Michael Mineo, 24, of Brooklyn, an employee at a Brooklyn tattoo parlor. He was issued a summons for disorderly conduct on Oct. 15, they said, after three officers pinned him to the ground and another repeatedly shoved an object — possibly a police radio or a baton — into his rectum.
On Thursday evening, Paul J. Browne, the Police Department's chief spokesman, acknowledged that the department's Internal Affairs Bureau was investigating the claims but said that the facts did not support the accusation.
"Police officers grappled with an individual, who they observed smoking marijuana, after he had fled and resisted being handcuffed," Mr. Browne said in an e-mail message. "His assertion that he was sodomized is not supported by independent civilian witnesses on the scene. The complaint is being investigated by I.A.B. and the district attorney's office."
Jerry Schmetterer, a spokesman for the district attorney's office, said, "We don't comment on investigations."
Mr. Browne said that there were five officers in all at the location with Mr. Mineo, four of them assigned to the 71st Precinct and one a Transit Bureau officer. None have had their duty status changed.
The allegations recalled the case of Abner Louima, a Haitian immigrant who was tortured with a broken broomstick in 1997. One police officer was sentenced to 30 years in prison in that attack, and a second served five years for perjury.
The lawyers for Mr. Mineo, Stephen C. Jackson and Kevin L. Mosley, contended that unlike the Louima case, in which Mr. Louima was taken to a room in a police station house, their client was assaulted about 12:30 p.m. in a place busy with travelers and with a clerk in a nearby subway booth.
Mr. Jackson said his client is white and the officers were white, black and Hispanic.
"He sustained serious injuries to the rectal area and internally," said Mr. Jackson, who said he planned to hold a news conference on Monday to make Mr. Mineo's medical records public. "The wounds are very serious and very nasty and are going to require extensive rehab and treatment, as well as psychological treatment."
Mr. Jackson said that the attack occurred at the Prospect Park station of the B and Q lines and that afterward Mr. Mineo used his cellphone to call his boss, who drove to the station and then drove Mr. Mineo to Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center. He said a hospital administrator notified the Brooklyn district attorney's office.
Andrew Rubin, a hospital spokesman, said Mr. Mineo arrived there as a patient on Oct. 15. He declined to say when he was discharged. Mr. Mosley said that Mr. Mineo spent five days in the hospital.
Mr. Rubin said, "The only thing we can say is that the patient was physically in the hospital, yes. We can't tell you why, we can't tell you how he was treated."
Asked if the hospital notified prosecutors about the case, Mr. Rubin said he had no knowledge of that, adding, "That is not the administrator of the hospital's position to do that."
Mr. Browne, when asked about injuries to Mr. Mineo, said, "We have no record of his injuries." He said police officials were "waiting for the hospital to release them to us."
A woman at Jiggaman Tattoos in Downtown Brooklyn, where Mr. Mineo works, and who identified herself as Mr. Mineo's sister said "he's not actually doing O.K." when asked about him on Thursday night. The woman, who did not give her name, said a lawyer had told her and Mr. Mineo's friends not to talk about what had happened.
In interviews on Thursday, Mr. Jackson gave an account he said his client provided. He said Mr. Mineo, who had left his house to go to work, was "accosted" by officers as he approached the subway station. The officers pursued him, and Mr. Mineo "hurriedly walked down the stairs" of the station, Mr. Jackson said. The clerk's booth is at the foot of the stairs at one of the station's two entrances.
He said that the officers pushed Mr. Mineo to the ground before he reached the turnstiles, and that one officer placed his knee on Mr. Mineo's neck as others punched and kicked him.
"At least three held him down," Mr. Jackson said. At one point, an officer pulled his client's baggy pants down and Mr. Mineo screamed. Mr. Mineo saw that officer reach for his radio on his gun belt, Mr. Jackson said. He said one officers yelled, "Don't do it! Don't do it! No, no, no, no." But his client was being assaulted. He said the entire episode lasted about two minutes.
Afterward, Mr. Mosley said, the officers took Mr. Mineo to a police car, gave him a summons for disorderly conduct and let him go.
Mr. Jackson promised to make a copy of that summons public on Monday. He said that it indicated the name of one of the officers, but that he did not know the names of the others. He said there were several witnesses, but he did not provide their names. He added that he was seeking videotape evidence.
Jason Amolsch, the owner of Jiggaman Tattoos, said on Thursday that he lives with Mr. Mineo and that both of them were headed to the shop on Oct. 15. He said Mr. Mineo left home a few minutes earlier.
By the time Mr. Amolsch reached the station, he found Mr. Mineo outside, bloodied and screaming that the officers had "shoved their walkie-talkie" into his rectum. Mr. Mineo then told him, "I've got to go to the hospital." A few days later, after he was released from the hospital, Mr. Mineo came to the shop. "He tried to work, but he couldn't," Mr. Amolsch said. "He kept crying."
Mr. Browne said that officers interviewed two civilian witnesses, whom he declined to identify, who gave accounts that contradicted the allegation.
Mr. Browne said one of the witnesses told of hearing Mr. Mineo yelling, "Stop Tasering me!"
But Mr. Browne said that the same witness said the officers did not have Tasers. None of the officers present were equipped with them, Mr. Browne said.
"Witnesses said they heard him say two things, that he was being sodomized and Tasered, and they saw neither," Mr. Browne said.
A senior police official, speaking on background because the case is under investigation, said that two witnesses, one an adult and the other a 12-year-old, both saw the arrest.
The official said that the police were continuing to investigate to ensure that the officers had not done anything wrong, but were satisfied at this point that there had not been any sodomy.
A person briefed on the inquiry said investigators had determined that Mr. Mineo had suffered some kind of rectal injury and had blood in his underwear, but have not found any evidence that the injury had been sustained in an altercation with the police.
As part of the inquiry, however, one investigator said police officials had removed an item, which he would not identify, from one of the officer's lockers and sent it for testing.
The testing has not been completed.
Deirdre Parker, a spokeswoman for New York City Transit, said she could not say who was working in the booth on the afternoon of Oct. 15 or if that person saw anything.
"We have no comment except to say that we are cooperating with the N.Y.P.D.," said Ms. Parker.
Mr. Mineo was arrested on April 18 at the tattoo parlor on charges that he and four others kicked and punched a man, gashing his head and knocking out a tooth, according to a criminal complaint. Another victim in the confrontation said Mr. Mineo struck him with a wooden stool, the complaint said. A child was in the store at the time, an official said, and Mr. Mineo was charged with gang assault and endangering the welfare of a child, among other charges. The case is still open.
Mr. Mosley said "there was no gang assault," but he said he was not representing Mr. Mineo in that case.
Two decades ago, Mr. Jackson was the lawyer for C. Vernon Mason, one of three principal advisers to Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old black girl from Wappingers Falls, N.Y., whose claims of being abducted and raped by a group of white men were found to be a hoax. Mr. Mason, along with the Rev. Al Sharpton and Alton H. Maddox Jr., was sued for defamation by a prosecutor, Steven A. Pagones, whom they had accused of being one of the rapists.
At one point during court proceedings, Mr. Jackson was briefly jailed for contempt of court. A jury awarded Mr. Pagones $345,000 from the three men.
Ann Farmer, William K. Rashbaum and Nate Schweber contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/nyregion/24police.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
Two arrested, two at large, in ridge armed pot robbery
By GREG WELTER - Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/24/2008 12:00:00 AM PDT
PARADISE — A Nunneley Road resident was sprayed with mace early Thursday morning when he tried to stop armed men allegedly stealing plants from his medical marijuana grow.
Police discovered the robbery about 12:30 a.m. when they attempted to stop a maroon Chevrolet Trailblazer in the 1200 block of Nunneley.
The driver abruptly pulled into a private driveway and ran from the vehicle.
A passenger, identified as Travis Winfield Quigley, 27, of Sacramento, was detained and found to be holding several freshly cut marijuana plants.
While police were questioning Allen, residents at the address were reportedly chasing two other men, allegedly carrying marijuana plants cut from the garden.
They caught one of the men, identified as Michael Jason Allen, 29, also of Sacramento.
Two victims said they were inside a small tent on the property when four men confronted them.
At least one pointed a handgun at them and allegedly threatened them with physical harm, while another sprayed one of the victims with mace.
Police said the suspects had removed eight of nine mature plants, which were being grown legally.
Quigley and Allen were arrested on suspicion of armed robbery and conspiracy and booked into the Butte County Jail in Oroville.
Bail on each was set at $70,000.
Two of the suspects got away. Police said the vehicle they drove to the robbery was stolen in the Sacramento area.
By tracing the paths of the two captured men, officers found a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun discarded at the base of a fence.
It was loaded and had a round in the chamber, police said.
An investigation into the robbery is continuing.
Anyone with information about the alleged crime is asked to call Paradise police at 872-6241. Callers may remain anonymous.
Article Launched: 10/24/2008 12:00:00 AM PDT
PARADISE — A Nunneley Road resident was sprayed with mace early Thursday morning when he tried to stop armed men allegedly stealing plants from his medical marijuana grow.
Police discovered the robbery about 12:30 a.m. when they attempted to stop a maroon Chevrolet Trailblazer in the 1200 block of Nunneley.
The driver abruptly pulled into a private driveway and ran from the vehicle.
A passenger, identified as Travis Winfield Quigley, 27, of Sacramento, was detained and found to be holding several freshly cut marijuana plants.
While police were questioning Allen, residents at the address were reportedly chasing two other men, allegedly carrying marijuana plants cut from the garden.
They caught one of the men, identified as Michael Jason Allen, 29, also of Sacramento.
Two victims said they were inside a small tent on the property when four men confronted them.
At least one pointed a handgun at them and allegedly threatened them with physical harm, while another sprayed one of the victims with mace.
Police said the suspects had removed eight of nine mature plants, which were being grown legally.
Quigley and Allen were arrested on suspicion of armed robbery and conspiracy and booked into the Butte County Jail in Oroville.
Bail on each was set at $70,000.
Two of the suspects got away. Police said the vehicle they drove to the robbery was stolen in the Sacramento area.
By tracing the paths of the two captured men, officers found a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun discarded at the base of a fence.
It was loaded and had a round in the chamber, police said.
An investigation into the robbery is continuing.
Anyone with information about the alleged crime is asked to call Paradise police at 872-6241. Callers may remain anonymous.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Editorial: What is San Diego smoking?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Editorial: What is San Diego smoking?
The county should drop its legal attack on medical-marijuana ID law
An Orange County Register editorial
Comments 1 | Recommend 0
The California Supreme Court has declined to review a landmark law that requires counties to implement a medical marijuana patient identification program. The court's decision also makes it clear that the federal prohibition on marijuana does not preempt the medical marijuana law California voters approved in 1996.
The 1996 law carved out exceptions to California's anti-marijuana laws for patients with a valid recommendation from a licensed physician. In 2005 the Legislature passed Senate Bill 420, which, among other things, required counties to screen patients for a voluntary state ID card system for patients to help police identify bona fide patients.
San Diego County, along with Merced and San Bernardino counties, sued the state in 2006, arguing not only that it should not be required to screen patients applying for identifications cards, but that federal law preempts state law and that California's medical marijuana law should be declared invalid.
A San Diego Superior Court judge rejected that argument in December 2006, after which Merced County opted out of the litigation and moved to set up a patient ID card system. The Fourth District Court of Appeal also rejected it in July of this year. The decision by the state Supreme Court not to review it means counties must set up an ID card program and, perhaps most importantly, as Joe Elford, chief council of Americans for Safe Access, noted, makes it clear "that federal law does not preempt state law relating to medical marijuana."
San Diego County has vowed to take the issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is likely to have a steep hill to climb. The high court has had several medical marijuana cases before it and has opted not to invoke federal supremacy to invalidate the medical marijuana laws of California and the 11 other states. In addition, there is no disagreement among federal circuits that would require resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court.
San Diego County would be better off not to spend taxpayers' money pursuing this inversion of the federalist principle that is so central to the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution gives only certain enumerated powers to the national government and reserves all other rights and powers to the states and the people.
It has been 12 years since the people voted to allow sick people to use marijuana, and all subsequent polls suggest there is no chance they would reverse their decision. For San Diego County to try to do so through judicial fiat by bolstering the power of the central government and reducing the flexibility allowed to the states by the U.S. Constitution is repugnant.
Editorial: What is San Diego smoking?
The county should drop its legal attack on medical-marijuana ID law
An Orange County Register editorial
Comments 1 | Recommend 0
The California Supreme Court has declined to review a landmark law that requires counties to implement a medical marijuana patient identification program. The court's decision also makes it clear that the federal prohibition on marijuana does not preempt the medical marijuana law California voters approved in 1996.
The 1996 law carved out exceptions to California's anti-marijuana laws for patients with a valid recommendation from a licensed physician. In 2005 the Legislature passed Senate Bill 420, which, among other things, required counties to screen patients for a voluntary state ID card system for patients to help police identify bona fide patients.
San Diego County, along with Merced and San Bernardino counties, sued the state in 2006, arguing not only that it should not be required to screen patients applying for identifications cards, but that federal law preempts state law and that California's medical marijuana law should be declared invalid.
A San Diego Superior Court judge rejected that argument in December 2006, after which Merced County opted out of the litigation and moved to set up a patient ID card system. The Fourth District Court of Appeal also rejected it in July of this year. The decision by the state Supreme Court not to review it means counties must set up an ID card program and, perhaps most importantly, as Joe Elford, chief council of Americans for Safe Access, noted, makes it clear "that federal law does not preempt state law relating to medical marijuana."
San Diego County has vowed to take the issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is likely to have a steep hill to climb. The high court has had several medical marijuana cases before it and has opted not to invoke federal supremacy to invalidate the medical marijuana laws of California and the 11 other states. In addition, there is no disagreement among federal circuits that would require resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court.
San Diego County would be better off not to spend taxpayers' money pursuing this inversion of the federalist principle that is so central to the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution gives only certain enumerated powers to the national government and reserves all other rights and powers to the states and the people.
It has been 12 years since the people voted to allow sick people to use marijuana, and all subsequent polls suggest there is no chance they would reverse their decision. For San Diego County to try to do so through judicial fiat by bolstering the power of the central government and reducing the flexibility allowed to the states by the U.S. Constitution is repugnant.
Threat of violence grows as area marijuana gardens bloom
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
By Dave Moller
Senior Staff Writer
A growing number of violent or potentially violent incidents involving marijuana gardens are occurring in Nevada County and northeastern California.
In the latest incident, probable marijuana thieves posing as federal drug agents and heavily armed were scared off from a North San Juan residence Monday, according to the Sheriff's Office.
"They talked the cop lingo and had radios," said Sheriff Keith Royal. "They have tactical equipment, are heavily armed and they had the dress down to polished boots. They could be ex-military, ex-law enforcement or a paramilitary organization.
The fake DEA agents are a sign of an ever-increasing threat of a violent harvest for marijuana growers in the county.
The four men are most likely the same people that have hit a reported 10 marijuana gardens now in northeastern California this harvest season, said Royal.
Last week, Nevada County Sheriff's officers learned of the group at a meeting in Butte County, Royal said. They found out the men with the same mode of operation had already hit three gardens in Butte County, one in Chico, two in Sierra County, two more in Plumas County, and one in Yuba County.
With drawn weapons, the fake agents entered a property on Purdon Road near Murphy Road with a medical marijuana grow about 8:20 a.m. Monday, Royal said. They forced a resident on the ground and as they were zip-tying his hands, another resident ran inside the home and closed the door.
The thieves then took the tied-up man's wallet and fled, he said.
"We think they got spooked," he said, adding that the victims did not draw any weapons. The thieves left in a silver SUV with a wrap-around chrome guard on the front.
"If folks see something like this, back off and call us at 265-7880," Royal said.
On Oct. 1 this year, two men posing as FBI agents burst into a home on Banner Mountain just outside of Nevada City and stole about two to three and one-half pounds of marijuana from two men who had just trimmed plants and bagged it.
On Sept. 5, two people off Dog Bar Road were pistol-whipped by three people who suspected they had stolen their marijuana.
On Oct. 14, 2007, five people entered a home in the same area and beat eight people while demanding money and marijuana. A van at the scene had freshly cut marijuana in it when officers arrived.
Several days later, two burst into a Cedar Ridge home and beat two men with a crude mace made out of a baseball bat. They fled without any marijuana after one of the victims said he had a gun.
To contact Senior Staff Writer Dave Moller, contact dmoller@theunion.com or call 477-4237.
http://www.theunion.com/article/20081022/NEWS/110229975/1054&title=Threat%20of%20violence%20grows%20as%20area%20marijuana%20gardens%20bloom
By Dave Moller
Senior Staff Writer
A growing number of violent or potentially violent incidents involving marijuana gardens are occurring in Nevada County and northeastern California.
In the latest incident, probable marijuana thieves posing as federal drug agents and heavily armed were scared off from a North San Juan residence Monday, according to the Sheriff's Office.
"They talked the cop lingo and had radios," said Sheriff Keith Royal. "They have tactical equipment, are heavily armed and they had the dress down to polished boots. They could be ex-military, ex-law enforcement or a paramilitary organization.
The fake DEA agents are a sign of an ever-increasing threat of a violent harvest for marijuana growers in the county.
The four men are most likely the same people that have hit a reported 10 marijuana gardens now in northeastern California this harvest season, said Royal.
Last week, Nevada County Sheriff's officers learned of the group at a meeting in Butte County, Royal said. They found out the men with the same mode of operation had already hit three gardens in Butte County, one in Chico, two in Sierra County, two more in Plumas County, and one in Yuba County.
With drawn weapons, the fake agents entered a property on Purdon Road near Murphy Road with a medical marijuana grow about 8:20 a.m. Monday, Royal said. They forced a resident on the ground and as they were zip-tying his hands, another resident ran inside the home and closed the door.
The thieves then took the tied-up man's wallet and fled, he said.
"We think they got spooked," he said, adding that the victims did not draw any weapons. The thieves left in a silver SUV with a wrap-around chrome guard on the front.
"If folks see something like this, back off and call us at 265-7880," Royal said.
On Oct. 1 this year, two men posing as FBI agents burst into a home on Banner Mountain just outside of Nevada City and stole about two to three and one-half pounds of marijuana from two men who had just trimmed plants and bagged it.
On Sept. 5, two people off Dog Bar Road were pistol-whipped by three people who suspected they had stolen their marijuana.
On Oct. 14, 2007, five people entered a home in the same area and beat eight people while demanding money and marijuana. A van at the scene had freshly cut marijuana in it when officers arrived.
Several days later, two burst into a Cedar Ridge home and beat two men with a crude mace made out of a baseball bat. They fled without any marijuana after one of the victims said he had a gun.
To contact Senior Staff Writer Dave Moller, contact dmoller@theunion.com or call 477-4237.
http://www.theunion.com/article/20081022/NEWS/110229975/1054&title=Threat%20of%20violence%20grows%20as%20area%20marijuana%20gardens%20bloom
Medicinal marijuana crimes on the rise
Sheriff tests law on keeping site locations confidential
By Stover E. Harger III
The Forest Grove News-Times, Oct 21, 2008
Crimes in Washington County associated with medical marijuana grow sites are on the rise — including armed robberies and assaults — but if you're like most people, you didn't have any way of knowing this.
Until now.
That's because the Washington County Sheriff's Office recently decided it would change its interpretation of the state's 10-year-old medical marijuana law and release information, previously deemed to be confidential, about participants in the medical marijuana program who break the law.
The move has raised eyebrows from some medical marijuana advocates who say the county law enforcement officials are overstepping their bounds and possibly breaking the law themselves.
The Oregon Medical Marijuana Program keeps a confidential list of people who are sanctioned to grow a limited number of marijuana plants for medicinal purposes. Oregon law (ORS 475.331) states:
"Authorized employees of state or local law enforcement agencies that obtain identifying information from the list as authorized under this section may not release or use the information for any purpose other than verification that a person is a lawful possessor of a registry identification card or the designated primary caregiver of a lawful possessor of a registry identification card or that a location is an authorized medical marijuana grow site."
The sheriff's office concedes that its new policy may violate that law. Sgt. David Thompson, sheriff's spokesman said the office is taking the possibly contentious step in order inform the public about an increasing number of illegal marijuana grows associated with the program and to bring to light the possible dangers involved with having a medical marijuana grower in your neighborhood.
"We haven'anged the way we are operating or doing business in terms of the way we are prosecuting or dealing with Oregon Medical Marijuana Program growers," Thompson said. "What we are changing is the information that we are releasing to the public. We feel the public has a right to know when people are committing crime."
Last month over 2.5 pounds of marijuana and growing equipment were seized by the Westside Interagency Narcotics Team at the Aloha home of an OMMP participant. While detectives were searching the house, the sheriff's office reports, numerous people showed up to the home looking to buy marijuana, which is illegal under the OMMA. Five arrests were made and a shotgun was seized from the home.
It didn't stop there.
While the WIN Team was leaving the home they were called to another Aloha OMMP participant residence that was reported to have a large marijuana grow. The WIN Team found 39 more marijuana plants than is allowed under OMMA law as well as six pounds of dried marijuana, much more than the 1.5 pounds of dried marijuana that is allowed.
Another recent OMMP related area crime involved a group of masked suspects, two of whom were carrying guns, who burst into the home, demanding money and marijuana. The occupants of the house were then assaulted by the assailants.
Thompson said in most cases the home invasions or robberies at OMMP grower homes were committed by acquaintances and many of the properties were themselves operating outside the growing guidelines of the act.
Specific statistics on OMMP related crimes are not available, Thompson said, but a map (viewable at www.co.washington.or.us/sheriff/media/photos/medmj5.jpg) posted on the sheriff's office website shows the general locations of 26 homes in Washington County where OMMP patients, caregivers or growers where drug arrests or warrants were made in the last year.
As of July Oregon has 19,646 medical marijuana patients. The OMMP, which administers the medical marijuana act, does not have a tally of growers. Nor does it police its participants or provide oversight of marijuana grows after they initially approve them.
The sheriff's office has received support from other law enforcement agencies for their decision, according to Thompson, but not everyone is applauding.
Leland Berger, an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who helped draft the medical marijuana act, said that if the sheriff's office was honestly concerned about violence associated with the medical marijuana program they should teach OMMP participants how to protect themselves from burglary and other crimes.
Berger thinks releasing names and addresses of medical marijuana users and growers, even if they are arrested, is against the law and can't understand why the sheriff's office would do so.
"There isn't any public safety reason to do that and they know it," he said.
Berger said there is a perceived bias against medical marijuana coming from the sheriff's office. Earlier this year Berger represented three men who were denied concealed weapons permits by Sheriff Rob Gordon. The sheriff argued that federal law prohibits drug users from possessing firearms.
In May, a judge disagreed with that logic and ordered Gordon to approve the permits for the men. That ruling was appealed in June by the Washington County Board of Commissioners.
Berger said those actions have created a hostile environment for medical marijuana participants living in the county. "Rob Gordon, and whoever else is making policy decisions, decided that for reasons which escape me that somehow it's a blight on the community," he said. "That somehow things were better when patients were prosecuted."
Thompson, however, said the sheriff's office is not against medical marijuana.
"There are people that this act helps," he said. "What we are talking about here are the people that are abusing the system."
"We haven't changed the way we are operating or doing business in terms of the way we are prosecuting or dealing with Oregon Medical Marijuana Program growers," Thompson said. "What we are changing is the information that we are releasing to the public. We feel the public has a right to know when people are committing crime."
Last month over 2.5 pounds of marijuana and growing equipment were seized by the Westside Interagency Narcotics Team at the Aloha home of an OMMP participant.
While detectives were searching the house, the sheriff's office reports, numerous people showed up to the home looking to buy marijuana, which is illegal under the OMMA. Five arrests were made and a shotgun was seized from the home.
It didn't stop there.
While the WIN Team was leaving the home they were called to another Aloha OMMP participant residence that was reported to have a large marijuana grow. The WIN Team found 39 more marijuana plants than is allowed under OMMA law as well as six pounds of dried marijuana, much more than the 1.5 pounds of dried marijuana that is allowed.
Another recent OMMP related area crime involved a group of masked suspects, two of whom were carrying guns, who burst into the home, demanding money and marijuana. The occupants of the house were then assaulted by the assailants.
Thompson said in most cases the home invasions or robberies at OMMP grower homes were committed by acquaintances and many of the properties were themselves operating outside the growing guidelines of the act.
Specific statistics on OMMP related crimes are not available, Thompson said.
However, a map (viewable at www.co.washington.or.us/sheriff/media/photos/medmj5.jpg) posted on the sheriff's office web site shows the general locations of 26 homes in Washington County where OMMP patients, caregivers or growers where drug arrests or warrants were made in the last year.
The map refers to two sites in the rural Gaston area and three sites outside of Banks. The highest concentration of sites is in Aloha, an unincorporated urbanized area between Hillsboro and Beaverton.
As of July Oregon has 19,646 medical marijuana patients. The OMMP, which administers the medical marijuana act, does not have a tally of growers. Nor does it police its participants or provide oversight of marijuana grows after they initially approve them.
The sheriff's office has received support from other law enforcement agencies for their decision, according to Thompson, but not everyone is applauding.
Leland Berger, an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who helped draft the medical marijuana act, said that if the sheriff's office was honestly concerned about violence associated with the medical marijuana program they should teach OMMP participants how to protect themselves from burglary and other crimes.
Berger thinks releasing names and addresses of medical marijuana users and growers, even if they are arrested, is against the law and can't understand why the sheriff's office would do so.
"There isn't any public safety reason to do that and they know it," he said.
Berger said there is a perceived bias against medical marijuana coming from the sheriff's office.
Earlier this year Berger represented three men who were denied concealed weapons permits by Sheriff Rob Gordon. The sheriff argued that federal law prohibits drug users from possessing firearms.
In May, a judge disagreed with that logic and ordered Gordon to approve the permits for the men. That ruling was appealed in June by the Washington County Board of Commissioners.
Berger said those actions have created a hostile environment for medical marijuana participants living in the county.
"Rob Gordon, and whoever else is making policy decisions, decided that for reasons which escape me that somehow it's a blight on the community," he said. "That somehow things were better when patients were prosecuted."
Thompson, however, said the sheriff's office is not against medical marijuana.
"There are people that this act helps," he said. "What we are talking about here are the people that are abusing the system."
http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/story.php?story_id=122464754791775600
By Stover E. Harger III
The Forest Grove News-Times, Oct 21, 2008
Crimes in Washington County associated with medical marijuana grow sites are on the rise — including armed robberies and assaults — but if you're like most people, you didn't have any way of knowing this.
Until now.
That's because the Washington County Sheriff's Office recently decided it would change its interpretation of the state's 10-year-old medical marijuana law and release information, previously deemed to be confidential, about participants in the medical marijuana program who break the law.
The move has raised eyebrows from some medical marijuana advocates who say the county law enforcement officials are overstepping their bounds and possibly breaking the law themselves.
The Oregon Medical Marijuana Program keeps a confidential list of people who are sanctioned to grow a limited number of marijuana plants for medicinal purposes. Oregon law (ORS 475.331) states:
"Authorized employees of state or local law enforcement agencies that obtain identifying information from the list as authorized under this section may not release or use the information for any purpose other than verification that a person is a lawful possessor of a registry identification card or the designated primary caregiver of a lawful possessor of a registry identification card or that a location is an authorized medical marijuana grow site."
The sheriff's office concedes that its new policy may violate that law. Sgt. David Thompson, sheriff's spokesman said the office is taking the possibly contentious step in order inform the public about an increasing number of illegal marijuana grows associated with the program and to bring to light the possible dangers involved with having a medical marijuana grower in your neighborhood.
"We haven'anged the way we are operating or doing business in terms of the way we are prosecuting or dealing with Oregon Medical Marijuana Program growers," Thompson said. "What we are changing is the information that we are releasing to the public. We feel the public has a right to know when people are committing crime."
Last month over 2.5 pounds of marijuana and growing equipment were seized by the Westside Interagency Narcotics Team at the Aloha home of an OMMP participant. While detectives were searching the house, the sheriff's office reports, numerous people showed up to the home looking to buy marijuana, which is illegal under the OMMA. Five arrests were made and a shotgun was seized from the home.
It didn't stop there.
While the WIN Team was leaving the home they were called to another Aloha OMMP participant residence that was reported to have a large marijuana grow. The WIN Team found 39 more marijuana plants than is allowed under OMMA law as well as six pounds of dried marijuana, much more than the 1.5 pounds of dried marijuana that is allowed.
Another recent OMMP related area crime involved a group of masked suspects, two of whom were carrying guns, who burst into the home, demanding money and marijuana. The occupants of the house were then assaulted by the assailants.
Thompson said in most cases the home invasions or robberies at OMMP grower homes were committed by acquaintances and many of the properties were themselves operating outside the growing guidelines of the act.
Specific statistics on OMMP related crimes are not available, Thompson said, but a map (viewable at www.co.washington.or.us/sheriff/media/photos/medmj5.jpg) posted on the sheriff's office website shows the general locations of 26 homes in Washington County where OMMP patients, caregivers or growers where drug arrests or warrants were made in the last year.
As of July Oregon has 19,646 medical marijuana patients. The OMMP, which administers the medical marijuana act, does not have a tally of growers. Nor does it police its participants or provide oversight of marijuana grows after they initially approve them.
The sheriff's office has received support from other law enforcement agencies for their decision, according to Thompson, but not everyone is applauding.
Leland Berger, an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who helped draft the medical marijuana act, said that if the sheriff's office was honestly concerned about violence associated with the medical marijuana program they should teach OMMP participants how to protect themselves from burglary and other crimes.
Berger thinks releasing names and addresses of medical marijuana users and growers, even if they are arrested, is against the law and can't understand why the sheriff's office would do so.
"There isn't any public safety reason to do that and they know it," he said.
Berger said there is a perceived bias against medical marijuana coming from the sheriff's office. Earlier this year Berger represented three men who were denied concealed weapons permits by Sheriff Rob Gordon. The sheriff argued that federal law prohibits drug users from possessing firearms.
In May, a judge disagreed with that logic and ordered Gordon to approve the permits for the men. That ruling was appealed in June by the Washington County Board of Commissioners.
Berger said those actions have created a hostile environment for medical marijuana participants living in the county. "Rob Gordon, and whoever else is making policy decisions, decided that for reasons which escape me that somehow it's a blight on the community," he said. "That somehow things were better when patients were prosecuted."
Thompson, however, said the sheriff's office is not against medical marijuana.
"There are people that this act helps," he said. "What we are talking about here are the people that are abusing the system."
"We haven't changed the way we are operating or doing business in terms of the way we are prosecuting or dealing with Oregon Medical Marijuana Program growers," Thompson said. "What we are changing is the information that we are releasing to the public. We feel the public has a right to know when people are committing crime."
Last month over 2.5 pounds of marijuana and growing equipment were seized by the Westside Interagency Narcotics Team at the Aloha home of an OMMP participant.
While detectives were searching the house, the sheriff's office reports, numerous people showed up to the home looking to buy marijuana, which is illegal under the OMMA. Five arrests were made and a shotgun was seized from the home.
It didn't stop there.
While the WIN Team was leaving the home they were called to another Aloha OMMP participant residence that was reported to have a large marijuana grow. The WIN Team found 39 more marijuana plants than is allowed under OMMA law as well as six pounds of dried marijuana, much more than the 1.5 pounds of dried marijuana that is allowed.
Another recent OMMP related area crime involved a group of masked suspects, two of whom were carrying guns, who burst into the home, demanding money and marijuana. The occupants of the house were then assaulted by the assailants.
Thompson said in most cases the home invasions or robberies at OMMP grower homes were committed by acquaintances and many of the properties were themselves operating outside the growing guidelines of the act.
Specific statistics on OMMP related crimes are not available, Thompson said.
However, a map (viewable at www.co.washington.or.us/sheriff/media/photos/medmj5.jpg) posted on the sheriff's office web site shows the general locations of 26 homes in Washington County where OMMP patients, caregivers or growers where drug arrests or warrants were made in the last year.
The map refers to two sites in the rural Gaston area and three sites outside of Banks. The highest concentration of sites is in Aloha, an unincorporated urbanized area between Hillsboro and Beaverton.
As of July Oregon has 19,646 medical marijuana patients. The OMMP, which administers the medical marijuana act, does not have a tally of growers. Nor does it police its participants or provide oversight of marijuana grows after they initially approve them.
The sheriff's office has received support from other law enforcement agencies for their decision, according to Thompson, but not everyone is applauding.
Leland Berger, an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who helped draft the medical marijuana act, said that if the sheriff's office was honestly concerned about violence associated with the medical marijuana program they should teach OMMP participants how to protect themselves from burglary and other crimes.
Berger thinks releasing names and addresses of medical marijuana users and growers, even if they are arrested, is against the law and can't understand why the sheriff's office would do so.
"There isn't any public safety reason to do that and they know it," he said.
Berger said there is a perceived bias against medical marijuana coming from the sheriff's office.
Earlier this year Berger represented three men who were denied concealed weapons permits by Sheriff Rob Gordon. The sheriff argued that federal law prohibits drug users from possessing firearms.
In May, a judge disagreed with that logic and ordered Gordon to approve the permits for the men. That ruling was appealed in June by the Washington County Board of Commissioners.
Berger said those actions have created a hostile environment for medical marijuana participants living in the county.
"Rob Gordon, and whoever else is making policy decisions, decided that for reasons which escape me that somehow it's a blight on the community," he said. "That somehow things were better when patients were prosecuted."
Thompson, however, said the sheriff's office is not against medical marijuana.
"There are people that this act helps," he said. "What we are talking about here are the people that are abusing the system."
http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/story.php?story_id=122464754791775600
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Council ready to light up pot law
Tuesday October 21, 2008
By Dana Yates
San Mateo should move fast in implementing a new medical marijuana law so patients and caregivers have a clear understanding on what's allowed, the City Council said at a special study session last night.
The council discussed a draft ordinance to require medical marijuana collectives to register through the Police Department and meet certain security and business regulations. The council directed city staff to pursue such an ordinance after the Police Department and federal agents shut down three medical marijuana dispensaries approximately one year ago. The city ordinance is expected to bridge the gap between the vague 1996 state law allowing medical marijuana.
"Overall, I support this and want to move forward as fast as possible so people know what they can and what they can't do," said Deputy Mayor Brandt Grotte.
Approximately seven members of the public — collective owners and patients — attended the meeting to urge the city to adopt the ordinance. Patients said the ordinance would allow collectives to reopen in the city and prevent them from turning to the streets to purchase marijuana.
"People need their medicine. Give us an opportunity to do it and do it right," said Ruben Muniz.
Patients also asked the council to consider the needs of sick patients who do not have the ability to travel far for medication.
"My father was a cancer patient. He was thrilled to be able to find his medication in town," said a tearful Charloa Burker. "He was thrilled and he was treated so well at the Second Avenue dispensary."
Burker's father died last year.
For the most part, the proposed ordinance would regulate the "collective" cultivation of medical marijuana. Collectives are places where people pool their money and time to grow marijuana in one central location. Dispensaries simply distribute and are already prohibited by law.
While state law allows collectives, it places few limits on the activity and some cities, like San Mateo, are taking steps to fill the void.
The ordinance would require collectives to register with the Police Department to prevent law enforcement mistakes by informing officers where lawful cultivation of marijuana is taking place.
It would also require collective growers to obtain a license, so the city could adequately address neighborhood impact. People who grow marijuana on their own property for personal use will not be subject to the new requirements, according to the report.
The ordinance will establish conditions to address safety and security. The ordinance will prohibit advertising of the activity, smoking marijuana on site and sale of marijuana at the collective. It will require security lighting, alarms and that the marijuana be grown indoors, according to the report.
The ordinance will prohibit collectives from being anywhere in the city except manufacturing and service commercial areas, according to the report.
City officials were asked to address medical marijuana collectives last year after three were shut down in raids that occurred Aug. 29, 2007. Two owners attended last night's meeting and told the council the Drug Enforcement Agency raided their businesses but never charged them with a single crime.
California voters passed Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act, in 1996, allowing sick patients to either grow their own marijuana or have a primary caregiver grow it for them. In 2003, the state legislature passed the Medical Marijuana Program Act to clarify vague portions of Proposition 215.
Cities remain stuck between the vague state law that allows medical marijuana and federal law that prohibits it.
Following last year's raids, law enforcement officials claimed the clubs were not acting as collectives. Owners and directors of the clubs argued they are collectives because members are pooling their money for marijuana, providing a safe place to buy it and access to resources about using it.
The council will revisit the ordinance later this year.
Dana Yates can be reached by e-mail: dana@smdailyjournal.com or by phone: (650) 344-5200 ext. 106.
By Dana Yates
San Mateo should move fast in implementing a new medical marijuana law so patients and caregivers have a clear understanding on what's allowed, the City Council said at a special study session last night.
The council discussed a draft ordinance to require medical marijuana collectives to register through the Police Department and meet certain security and business regulations. The council directed city staff to pursue such an ordinance after the Police Department and federal agents shut down three medical marijuana dispensaries approximately one year ago. The city ordinance is expected to bridge the gap between the vague 1996 state law allowing medical marijuana.
"Overall, I support this and want to move forward as fast as possible so people know what they can and what they can't do," said Deputy Mayor Brandt Grotte.
Approximately seven members of the public — collective owners and patients — attended the meeting to urge the city to adopt the ordinance. Patients said the ordinance would allow collectives to reopen in the city and prevent them from turning to the streets to purchase marijuana.
"People need their medicine. Give us an opportunity to do it and do it right," said Ruben Muniz.
Patients also asked the council to consider the needs of sick patients who do not have the ability to travel far for medication.
"My father was a cancer patient. He was thrilled to be able to find his medication in town," said a tearful Charloa Burker. "He was thrilled and he was treated so well at the Second Avenue dispensary."
Burker's father died last year.
For the most part, the proposed ordinance would regulate the "collective" cultivation of medical marijuana. Collectives are places where people pool their money and time to grow marijuana in one central location. Dispensaries simply distribute and are already prohibited by law.
While state law allows collectives, it places few limits on the activity and some cities, like San Mateo, are taking steps to fill the void.
The ordinance would require collectives to register with the Police Department to prevent law enforcement mistakes by informing officers where lawful cultivation of marijuana is taking place.
It would also require collective growers to obtain a license, so the city could adequately address neighborhood impact. People who grow marijuana on their own property for personal use will not be subject to the new requirements, according to the report.
The ordinance will establish conditions to address safety and security. The ordinance will prohibit advertising of the activity, smoking marijuana on site and sale of marijuana at the collective. It will require security lighting, alarms and that the marijuana be grown indoors, according to the report.
The ordinance will prohibit collectives from being anywhere in the city except manufacturing and service commercial areas, according to the report.
City officials were asked to address medical marijuana collectives last year after three were shut down in raids that occurred Aug. 29, 2007. Two owners attended last night's meeting and told the council the Drug Enforcement Agency raided their businesses but never charged them with a single crime.
California voters passed Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act, in 1996, allowing sick patients to either grow their own marijuana or have a primary caregiver grow it for them. In 2003, the state legislature passed the Medical Marijuana Program Act to clarify vague portions of Proposition 215.
Cities remain stuck between the vague state law that allows medical marijuana and federal law that prohibits it.
Following last year's raids, law enforcement officials claimed the clubs were not acting as collectives. Owners and directors of the clubs argued they are collectives because members are pooling their money for marijuana, providing a safe place to buy it and access to resources about using it.
The council will revisit the ordinance later this year.
Dana Yates can be reached by e-mail: dana@smdailyjournal.com or by phone: (650) 344-5200 ext. 106.
Monday, October 20, 2008
La Palma moves to ban illegal businesses
Monday, October 20, 2008
The City Council takes the ban against medical-marijuana dispensaries a step further.
By SARAH TULLY
The Orange County Register
La Palma City Council members don't just want to keep out medical-marijuana outlets. They want to forbid all businesses that might be illegal.
La Palma plans to go a step beyond most cities in outlawing medical-marijuana dispensaries.
While most Orange County cities have approved straight bans, the La Palma council tonight is set to consider an ordinance that would require all businesses to comply with city, state and federal laws.
Most California city officials have found conflicting laws when deciding what to do about medical-marijuana dispensaries: While federal law generally forbids marijuana possession, California law allows patients to use marijuana with doctors' permission.
In a July meeting, some La Palma council members said they were concerned that other businesses, too, could obtain licenses for illegal uses, like for fireworks and for weapons. While it is implied that such business activity would be criminal, the code wasn't explicit enough, they said.
"We thought by having an ordinance just outlawing illegal business, we're not picking on medical providers," Councilman Ralph Rodriguez said last week.
La Palma, the county's second-smallest city, has had no specific problems with illegal businesses within its less-than-two-square-mile radius.
Contact the writer: 714-704-3793 or stully@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/palma-marijuana-medical-2200346-businesses-illegal
The City Council takes the ban against medical-marijuana dispensaries a step further.
By SARAH TULLY
The Orange County Register
La Palma City Council members don't just want to keep out medical-marijuana outlets. They want to forbid all businesses that might be illegal.
La Palma plans to go a step beyond most cities in outlawing medical-marijuana dispensaries.
While most Orange County cities have approved straight bans, the La Palma council tonight is set to consider an ordinance that would require all businesses to comply with city, state and federal laws.
Most California city officials have found conflicting laws when deciding what to do about medical-marijuana dispensaries: While federal law generally forbids marijuana possession, California law allows patients to use marijuana with doctors' permission.
In a July meeting, some La Palma council members said they were concerned that other businesses, too, could obtain licenses for illegal uses, like for fireworks and for weapons. While it is implied that such business activity would be criminal, the code wasn't explicit enough, they said.
"We thought by having an ordinance just outlawing illegal business, we're not picking on medical providers," Councilman Ralph Rodriguez said last week.
La Palma, the county's second-smallest city, has had no specific problems with illegal businesses within its less-than-two-square-mile radius.
Contact the writer: 714-704-3793 or stully@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/palma-marijuana-medical-2200346-businesses-illegal
Austin police to begin citing, not arresting, some offenders
Plan to be finalized by year's end, chief says.
By Tony Plohetski
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Marijuana smokers with small amounts of the drug or people driving while their licenses are suspended could soon be spared a trip in the back of a jail-bound Austin police car.
By year's end, Police Chief Art Acevedo hopes to put in place a policy that would allow officers to ticket some offenders instead of taking them to the Travis County Jail. The move comes more than a year after state legislators passed a so-called "cite and release" law. The policy would apply only to certain Class A and Class B misdemeanor arrests.
"We are committed to it," Acevedo said last week. "We just have to work through the actual process."
Since the legislation became law in September 2007, civil libertarians, including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union, have urged Acevedo to put a program in place. Other Texas cities, including Dallas, have altered policies in the past year to give officers more flexibility in deciding which suspects get tickets and which go to jail.
The penalties for the offenses would not change. People who received citations would be given a court date, and there would be no change in how their cases would move through the court system.
In addition to the marijuana and driver's license charges, offenses that would fall under the law are criminal mischief, graffiti and theft when the damage is less than $500.
Proponents of the measure say a cite and release policy eases the strain on jails, saves relatively minor offenders from spending hours behind bars and frees officers to stay on the street and pursue more serious criminals. A recent study estimated that if the policy had been in place last year, about 15,000 Austin suspects could have been cited instead of taken to jail, a process that can take officers as many as three hours.
State Rep. Jerry Madden, R-Richardson, said he proposed the law after consulting with law enforcement officials from across the state because he supports keeping more officers on the street. Travis County Sheriff Greg Hamilton was among those who supported the legislation.
"I thought it made sense, that it is a smart-on-crime type bill," Madden said.
However, critics, including Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, said the law "sends the exact opposite signal" law enforcement officials should want to give offenders. "My thoughts are that the entire process is a very creative way to decriminalize how we prosecute drug cases in Texas," Bradley said.
Among Texas law enforcement agencies, the Travis County sheriff's department quickly put a cite and release program in place after the law took effect. Officials said that in the past year, deputies have cited about 140 people instead of arresting them.
Hays County officials are studying the issue.
Although the prosecution of misdemeanor crimes is the work of county attorney offices, Bradley said he has met with Williamson County officials to discuss the matter. He said law enforcement agencies in that county, which include the Round Rock and Cedar Park police departments, have no plans to begin citing and releasing offenders.
Houston police officials also said they do not plan to stop arresting certain Class A and Class B misdemeanor suspects. Dallas police leaders have begun allowing officers to cite, and not arrest, Class B offenders in some instances.
Roy Pinkston, treasurer for the Dallas Police Association, said that initially, officers were worried about the public's reaction to such a decision. Pinkston said he has not heard recent complaints.
"We had concerns about the public's perception, from the police association's view, that they felt we were going to be releasing criminals," he said.
Acevedo said that he has been working for months to put a cite and release program in place but that he has needed to discuss the issue with officials in Hays and Williamson counties, parts of which are in Austin officers' patrol areas.
"We just have to work through the actual processes in three different counties," he said.
Acevedo said he is aware that opinions of the policy differ.
"Some people think if you site and release them, you are being easier on them," he said. "Folks forget that on the back end of the process, the accountability and the penalties and consequences don't change."
Members of the group Keep Austin Safe, which includes ACLU representatives, presented Acevedo with a study in July to encourage him to embrace the program.
According to the report, Austin police arrested 5,910 people last year on Class A and Class B misdemeanor charges who, under the policy, could have been cited instead. An additional 9,902 people were arrested on Class C misdemeanor charges. Officers, who arrested a total of about 45,000 people last year, already have the discretion to ticket or arrest people suspected of committing Class C offenses.
The study also said those lower-level arrests make officers unavailable to respond to more violent crimes and erode trust between the community and police.
Wuthipong Tantaksinanukij, vice president of the Austin Police Association, said he thinks the change for Austin officers represents a new opportunity. "It's about being efficient," he said.
tplohetski@statesman.com; 445-3605
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/19/1019tickets.html
By Tony Plohetski
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Marijuana smokers with small amounts of the drug or people driving while their licenses are suspended could soon be spared a trip in the back of a jail-bound Austin police car.
By year's end, Police Chief Art Acevedo hopes to put in place a policy that would allow officers to ticket some offenders instead of taking them to the Travis County Jail. The move comes more than a year after state legislators passed a so-called "cite and release" law. The policy would apply only to certain Class A and Class B misdemeanor arrests.
"We are committed to it," Acevedo said last week. "We just have to work through the actual process."
Since the legislation became law in September 2007, civil libertarians, including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union, have urged Acevedo to put a program in place. Other Texas cities, including Dallas, have altered policies in the past year to give officers more flexibility in deciding which suspects get tickets and which go to jail.
The penalties for the offenses would not change. People who received citations would be given a court date, and there would be no change in how their cases would move through the court system.
In addition to the marijuana and driver's license charges, offenses that would fall under the law are criminal mischief, graffiti and theft when the damage is less than $500.
Proponents of the measure say a cite and release policy eases the strain on jails, saves relatively minor offenders from spending hours behind bars and frees officers to stay on the street and pursue more serious criminals. A recent study estimated that if the policy had been in place last year, about 15,000 Austin suspects could have been cited instead of taken to jail, a process that can take officers as many as three hours.
State Rep. Jerry Madden, R-Richardson, said he proposed the law after consulting with law enforcement officials from across the state because he supports keeping more officers on the street. Travis County Sheriff Greg Hamilton was among those who supported the legislation.
"I thought it made sense, that it is a smart-on-crime type bill," Madden said.
However, critics, including Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, said the law "sends the exact opposite signal" law enforcement officials should want to give offenders. "My thoughts are that the entire process is a very creative way to decriminalize how we prosecute drug cases in Texas," Bradley said.
Among Texas law enforcement agencies, the Travis County sheriff's department quickly put a cite and release program in place after the law took effect. Officials said that in the past year, deputies have cited about 140 people instead of arresting them.
Hays County officials are studying the issue.
Although the prosecution of misdemeanor crimes is the work of county attorney offices, Bradley said he has met with Williamson County officials to discuss the matter. He said law enforcement agencies in that county, which include the Round Rock and Cedar Park police departments, have no plans to begin citing and releasing offenders.
Houston police officials also said they do not plan to stop arresting certain Class A and Class B misdemeanor suspects. Dallas police leaders have begun allowing officers to cite, and not arrest, Class B offenders in some instances.
Roy Pinkston, treasurer for the Dallas Police Association, said that initially, officers were worried about the public's reaction to such a decision. Pinkston said he has not heard recent complaints.
"We had concerns about the public's perception, from the police association's view, that they felt we were going to be releasing criminals," he said.
Acevedo said that he has been working for months to put a cite and release program in place but that he has needed to discuss the issue with officials in Hays and Williamson counties, parts of which are in Austin officers' patrol areas.
"We just have to work through the actual processes in three different counties," he said.
Acevedo said he is aware that opinions of the policy differ.
"Some people think if you site and release them, you are being easier on them," he said. "Folks forget that on the back end of the process, the accountability and the penalties and consequences don't change."
Members of the group Keep Austin Safe, which includes ACLU representatives, presented Acevedo with a study in July to encourage him to embrace the program.
According to the report, Austin police arrested 5,910 people last year on Class A and Class B misdemeanor charges who, under the policy, could have been cited instead. An additional 9,902 people were arrested on Class C misdemeanor charges. Officers, who arrested a total of about 45,000 people last year, already have the discretion to ticket or arrest people suspected of committing Class C offenses.
The study also said those lower-level arrests make officers unavailable to respond to more violent crimes and erode trust between the community and police.
Wuthipong Tantaksinanukij, vice president of the Austin Police Association, said he thinks the change for Austin officers represents a new opportunity. "It's about being efficient," he said.
tplohetski@statesman.com; 445-3605
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/19/1019tickets.html
PAC has ties to pro-pot backers
Coalition donates money to several local politicians
By Tania Chatila, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/19/2008 11:29:57 PM PDT
A political action committee that has donated $17,425 to area politicians has close ties to the medical marijuana lobby, according to campaign finance documents and other official records.
Founded in 2006, the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment has donated $7,200 to the campaigns of Assemblyman Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, campaign finance statements show.
It also donated $10,225 to campaigns for city council members and hopefuls in Azusa, Covina, La Puente, Baldwin Park and El Monte, records show.
The political action committee was started by Philip Lujan - La Puente Mayor Louie Lujan's brother - and Liz McDuffie, who are prominent activists in the effort to reform marijuana laws.
Philip Lujan, 26, said he also founded the Southern California branch of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) about four years ago. He said he currently serves on its board.
And the business license for McDuffie's retail store at 46 N. Mentor Ave. in Pasadena is for the physicians referral service MCCdirectory.org, according to Pasadena officials.
MCCdirectory.org is the Web Site for Medical Cannabis Caregivers, a directory with doctors who provide "consultation and recommendation regarding medical cannabis," according to the site.
Pasadena prohibits the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries.
McDuffie's shop doubles as Ritz Resale, a clothing store. She resigned from the environmental PAC in June due to time constraints. McDuffie did not return several calls seeking comment over the past week.
Lujan said the environmental and his marijuana-related activism are not connected.
The PAC's mission statement is to "support candidates that believe in protecting the natural environment."
"You know what, activism is very dear to my heart and the coalition doesn't have anything to do with any other entity," Philip Lujan said.
He and McDuffie started the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment after college professors encouraged Philip Lujan to act on his passion for the environment, he said.
The PAC has no official Web site and its address in Los Angeles is Philip Lujan's office. He also does some work for NORML at the same address, he said.
A previous West Hollywood address listed on the PAC's state records from 2006 is also the address listed for the Southern California chapter of NORML, according to the NORML Web site.
Up until last week, the myspace.com Web site dedicated to the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment listed as "friends" several marijuana-related organizations, such as the "Black Dog 420 Bakery," "SoCal NORML," "420 Girls" and "Puff Mama's Bakery."
The number 420 is commonly used when referring to marijuana. The site has since been taken down.
Lujan said the page was an experiment and was not the environmental PAC's site. He had not logged on since January.
Hernandez, who received the most donations from the PAC, said the entity's mission statement "says absolutely nothing about medical marijuana."
"It's completely separate issues," Hernandez said of the marijuana activism and the environment.
Generally speaking, Hernandez said "if it's truly for medical purposes" and if medical marijuana could be dispensed safely, he would have no concerns about the issue.
"But some of these (dispensaries) aren't set up that way," he said.
In August Hernandez - an optometrist by trade - voted for AB 2279, a bill that would have prohibited employers from discriminating against employees based on their qualifications as a medical marijuana patient, state records show.
The bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last month.
"I make my decisions based on policy," Hernandez said, "not on the money given to me by an entity or individual."
Many politicians who took money from the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment voted against allowing the sale of marijuana in their cities.
That PAC paid for $5,100.59 in dual mailers for Azusa Councilman Angel Carrillo and former Azusa Councilwoman Diana Chagnon, $700 to Baldwin Park Councilwoman Monica Garcia and a combined $4,025 in mailers and money to La Puente council members Dan Holloway, Nadia Mendoza and Louie Lujan, campaign finance records show.
At an August 2007 City Council meeting, Holloway voiced his support for banning dispensaries in La Puente.
"I'm not opposed to medical marijuana," Holloway said last week. "I'm just opposed to having dispensaries in our city at this time."
Holloway said he supported the PAC's stated goals of creating a safe and clean environment.
"As long as I don't see any sort of cross use of funds (I'm fine)," he said.
In Baldwin Park, Garcia also supported extending a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. She did not return calls seeking comment on Friday.
In Azusa, a 2007 ordinance supported by Chagnon and Carrillo prohibits the use of "businesses, operations or uses contravening state or federal law."
In 1996 California voters approved Proposition 215, which allows marijuana to be used for medicinal purposes. But it is still banned by federal law.
Carrillo did not return calls for comment.
The environmental PAC's close ties to the marijuana reform lobby did not sit well with Industry Mayor Dave Perez, who gave the committee $1,000 in 2007.
Dispensaries are illegal in Industry.
"It's the perception," Perez said. "If I would have known the correlation, I wouldn't have gotten involved. In other words, I should have done my research."
Perez said his initial decision to donate to the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment was based on recommendations from business owners.
"I thought it was for a better environment and enhancing the city of La Puente ... (I didn't know) the leaders of this organization had other menus," Perez said. "They definitely won't get any more of my money."
Louie Lujan voted for a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in La Puente in 2007, but failed to support a permanent ban on the shops in August, official city minutes show.
Philip Lujan said the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment held a single fund-raiser at Vive Lounge in Pasadena that was not "very successful."
tania.chatila@sgvn.com
(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2109
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_10764669
__._,_.___
By Tania Chatila, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/19/2008 11:29:57 PM PDT
A political action committee that has donated $17,425 to area politicians has close ties to the medical marijuana lobby, according to campaign finance documents and other official records.
Founded in 2006, the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment has donated $7,200 to the campaigns of Assemblyman Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, campaign finance statements show.
It also donated $10,225 to campaigns for city council members and hopefuls in Azusa, Covina, La Puente, Baldwin Park and El Monte, records show.
The political action committee was started by Philip Lujan - La Puente Mayor Louie Lujan's brother - and Liz McDuffie, who are prominent activists in the effort to reform marijuana laws.
Philip Lujan, 26, said he also founded the Southern California branch of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) about four years ago. He said he currently serves on its board.
And the business license for McDuffie's retail store at 46 N. Mentor Ave. in Pasadena is for the physicians referral service MCCdirectory.org, according to Pasadena officials.
MCCdirectory.org is the Web Site for Medical Cannabis Caregivers, a directory with doctors who provide "consultation and recommendation regarding medical cannabis," according to the site.
Pasadena prohibits the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries.
McDuffie's shop doubles as Ritz Resale, a clothing store. She resigned from the environmental PAC in June due to time constraints. McDuffie did not return several calls seeking comment over the past week.
Lujan said the environmental and his marijuana-related activism are not connected.
The PAC's mission statement is to "support candidates that believe in protecting the natural environment."
"You know what, activism is very dear to my heart and the coalition doesn't have anything to do with any other entity," Philip Lujan said.
He and McDuffie started the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment after college professors encouraged Philip Lujan to act on his passion for the environment, he said.
The PAC has no official Web site and its address in Los Angeles is Philip Lujan's office. He also does some work for NORML at the same address, he said.
A previous West Hollywood address listed on the PAC's state records from 2006 is also the address listed for the Southern California chapter of NORML, according to the NORML Web site.
Up until last week, the myspace.com Web site dedicated to the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment listed as "friends" several marijuana-related organizations, such as the "Black Dog 420 Bakery," "SoCal NORML," "420 Girls" and "Puff Mama's Bakery."
The number 420 is commonly used when referring to marijuana. The site has since been taken down.
Lujan said the page was an experiment and was not the environmental PAC's site. He had not logged on since January.
Hernandez, who received the most donations from the PAC, said the entity's mission statement "says absolutely nothing about medical marijuana."
"It's completely separate issues," Hernandez said of the marijuana activism and the environment.
Generally speaking, Hernandez said "if it's truly for medical purposes" and if medical marijuana could be dispensed safely, he would have no concerns about the issue.
"But some of these (dispensaries) aren't set up that way," he said.
In August Hernandez - an optometrist by trade - voted for AB 2279, a bill that would have prohibited employers from discriminating against employees based on their qualifications as a medical marijuana patient, state records show.
The bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last month.
"I make my decisions based on policy," Hernandez said, "not on the money given to me by an entity or individual."
Many politicians who took money from the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment voted against allowing the sale of marijuana in their cities.
That PAC paid for $5,100.59 in dual mailers for Azusa Councilman Angel Carrillo and former Azusa Councilwoman Diana Chagnon, $700 to Baldwin Park Councilwoman Monica Garcia and a combined $4,025 in mailers and money to La Puente council members Dan Holloway, Nadia Mendoza and Louie Lujan, campaign finance records show.
At an August 2007 City Council meeting, Holloway voiced his support for banning dispensaries in La Puente.
"I'm not opposed to medical marijuana," Holloway said last week. "I'm just opposed to having dispensaries in our city at this time."
Holloway said he supported the PAC's stated goals of creating a safe and clean environment.
"As long as I don't see any sort of cross use of funds (I'm fine)," he said.
In Baldwin Park, Garcia also supported extending a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. She did not return calls seeking comment on Friday.
In Azusa, a 2007 ordinance supported by Chagnon and Carrillo prohibits the use of "businesses, operations or uses contravening state or federal law."
In 1996 California voters approved Proposition 215, which allows marijuana to be used for medicinal purposes. But it is still banned by federal law.
Carrillo did not return calls for comment.
The environmental PAC's close ties to the marijuana reform lobby did not sit well with Industry Mayor Dave Perez, who gave the committee $1,000 in 2007.
Dispensaries are illegal in Industry.
"It's the perception," Perez said. "If I would have known the correlation, I wouldn't have gotten involved. In other words, I should have done my research."
Perez said his initial decision to donate to the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment was based on recommendations from business owners.
"I thought it was for a better environment and enhancing the city of La Puente ... (I didn't know) the leaders of this organization had other menus," Perez said. "They definitely won't get any more of my money."
Louie Lujan voted for a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in La Puente in 2007, but failed to support a permanent ban on the shops in August, official city minutes show.
Philip Lujan said the Coalition for a Safe and Clean Environment held a single fund-raiser at Vive Lounge in Pasadena that was not "very successful."
tania.chatila@sgvn.com
(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2109
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_10764669
__._,_.___
Friday, October 17, 2008
FIREMAN'S 'POT' LUCK RUNS OUT
FIREMAN'S 'POT' LUCK RUNS OUT
By JOHN DOYLE
Posted: 4:39 am
October 17, 2008
A city firefighter who peddled marijuana over the Web was busted after he sold drugs to an undercover cop, police said.
Michael Seise, 32, was busted Wednesday after he allegedly sold $40 worth of pot to an undercover officer on Staten Island.
After his arrest, police found three small plastic bags with what they believed to be cocaine residue inside his car, sources said.
Seise, a three-year veteran, is assigned to Ladder 82 on Staten Island. He has been suspended.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10172008/news/regionalnews/firemans_pot_luck_runs_out_133998.htm
By JOHN DOYLE
Posted: 4:39 am
October 17, 2008
A city firefighter who peddled marijuana over the Web was busted after he sold drugs to an undercover cop, police said.
Michael Seise, 32, was busted Wednesday after he allegedly sold $40 worth of pot to an undercover officer on Staten Island.
After his arrest, police found three small plastic bags with what they believed to be cocaine residue inside his car, sources said.
Seise, a three-year veteran, is assigned to Ladder 82 on Staten Island. He has been suspended.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10172008/news/regionalnews/firemans_pot_luck_runs_out_133998.htm
COUNTY'S APPEAL OF POT LAW REJECTED
State High Court Won't Hear Case
The California Supreme Court yesterday declined to consider the
latest appeal from San Diego County in its years-long effort to
resist state medical marijuana laws.
"This is a resounding victory for seriously ill Californians and for
California voters," said Adam Wolf of the American Civil Liberties
Union, which is co-defending the case along with the state Attorney
General's Office and the advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.
"It's an affirmation of the legitimacy of state medical marijuana laws."
Even before the court's decision, the county Board of Supervisors
directed its lawyers to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Senior
Deputy County Counsel Thomas Bunton said.
"We always believed our best chance to prevail in this case was at
the U.S. Supreme Court," he said.
In 2006, the county sued rather than implement the state law that
requires counties to issue medical marijuana ID cards. A majority of
supervisors said they could not embrace a state law they considered a
violation of federal law.
San Bernardino and Merced counties originally joined the suit,
although Merced County supervisors later reversed course and voted to
begin issuing the cards.
Marijuana remains illegal under federal drug statutes despite laws in
at least 11 states permitting qualified patients to use it as a pain reliever.
The county's suit was rejected in Superior Court in 2006. The county
appealed and lost, then appealed again to the state high court.
Sick and dying patients, who were awarded the right to use and grow
marijuana by California voters in 1996, say the cards help police
decide who is using marijuana legally and who might be abusing the drug.
"Right now patients are being persecuted by police," said Rudy Reyes,
a medical marijuana patient badly burned in the 2003 Cedar fire. "If
I have a card, the cops know automatically what to do and how to behave."
The county has 90 days to file its petition with the nation's high
court. If the court declines to hear the case, the county would
likely be notified sometime next spring. If it is accepted, a ruling
probably would not be issued until 2010.
The California Supreme Court yesterday declined to consider the
latest appeal from San Diego County in its years-long effort to
resist state medical marijuana laws.
"This is a resounding victory for seriously ill Californians and for
California voters," said Adam Wolf of the American Civil Liberties
Union, which is co-defending the case along with the state Attorney
General's Office and the advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.
"It's an affirmation of the legitimacy of state medical marijuana laws."
Even before the court's decision, the county Board of Supervisors
directed its lawyers to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Senior
Deputy County Counsel Thomas Bunton said.
"We always believed our best chance to prevail in this case was at
the U.S. Supreme Court," he said.
In 2006, the county sued rather than implement the state law that
requires counties to issue medical marijuana ID cards. A majority of
supervisors said they could not embrace a state law they considered a
violation of federal law.
San Bernardino and Merced counties originally joined the suit,
although Merced County supervisors later reversed course and voted to
begin issuing the cards.
Marijuana remains illegal under federal drug statutes despite laws in
at least 11 states permitting qualified patients to use it as a pain reliever.
The county's suit was rejected in Superior Court in 2006. The county
appealed and lost, then appealed again to the state high court.
Sick and dying patients, who were awarded the right to use and grow
marijuana by California voters in 1996, say the cards help police
decide who is using marijuana legally and who might be abusing the drug.
"Right now patients are being persecuted by police," said Rudy Reyes,
a medical marijuana patient badly burned in the 2003 Cedar fire. "If
I have a card, the cops know automatically what to do and how to behave."
The county has 90 days to file its petition with the nation's high
court. If the court declines to hear the case, the county would
likely be notified sometime next spring. If it is accepted, a ruling
probably would not be issued until 2010.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Dangerous harvest Pot-related thefts, rising violence predicted
Dangerous harvest
Pot-related thefts, rising violence predicted
By Dave Moller
Senior Staff Writer
The Union (Nevada City, CA) Oct 2
With the season for harvesting marijuana underway, Nevada County drug
enforcement officials fear it could become bloody and dangerous.
While there seems to be a lack of Mexican national grows this year
and fewer confiscated plants because of it, harvest thefts and
violence are still expected, according to Sgt. Bill Smethers at the
Nevada County Sheriff's Narcotics Task Force.
Two recent incidents, and violence seen last year, show an unsettling trend.
"People are aware the dope's there, and it's easy pickin's," Smethers said.
"We expect, with the harvest season just starting, that we'll see
increased violence with thieves or people protecting their plants,"
added Sgt. Shannan Moon of the Sheriff's Office.
Despite the rising violence, seizures of marijuana plants have
decreased after two dramatic years.
In both 2006 and 2007, county narcotics investigators raided large
marijuana plantations in the South Fork Yuba River canyon linked to
Mexican crime rings.
This year, officers have not staged as many raids because they area
awaiting direction from several pending court cases involving medical
marijuana, Smethers said. Some pot patches that might have been
pulled in recent years were not because of the legal uncertainties
around them, he added.
Thieves pose as FBI agents
Early Wednesday, thieves posing as FBI agents marked the beginning of
the marijuana harvest season.
About 1 a.m. Wednesday, two men with guns entered a home on the 12000
block of Quaker Hill Cross Road, on Banner Mountain east of Nevada
City, and took about two to three and one-half pounds of marijuana,
Moon said.
Officers at the scene learned the two victims had just trimmed and
bagged the marijuana when the heist occurred.
One of the suspects had a small firearm as he entered the room and
said, "FBI" to the victims, Moon said. The victims were ordered to
give up their car keys, wallets and cell phones before the suspects
left with the marijuana.
The victims said the getaway car was a dark, gun-metal gray
Mitsubishi Eclipse that went south on Quaker Hill Cross Road toward
Red Dog Road. The first suspect is described as a man 6-foot-3-inches
tall, about 275 pounds, with short dark hair, black shorts, a white
T-shirt and multiple tattoos on both arms.
The second suspect is a man 5-feet-10-inches tall, about 200 pounds,
with a shaved head, wearing a gray-hooded sweat shirt and baggy pants.
The incident was not the first involving firearms and marijuana in
the county this year, Moon said. On Sept. 5, two people in the area
of Woodbury Drive and Dog Bar Road were held at gunpoint and
pistol-whipped by three individuals who suspected they had stolen
their marijuana.
That case is under investigation and could have involved members of
the Vagos motorcycle gang in Sacramento, Moon said.
2007 a violent year
The pistol-whipping was similar to one of three violent pot patch
incidents last year.
On Oct. 14, 2007, five people entered a home in the same area of
Woodbury Drive and Dog Bar Road, armed with crow bars, baseball bats
and at least one gun, demanding money and marijuana.
When deputies got to the scene, they found eight people bound and
beaten on the floor, including one with a broken neck. A van was
found at the scene loaded with freshly cut marijuana.
Several days later, two men burst into a Cedar Ridge home and
assaulted two men there with a wooden baseball bat that had metal
bolts screwed into its barrel to form a crude mace. One man was
seriously injured and another got hit in the face with the mace.
The two attackers fled the scene without any marijuana when one of
the victims said he had a gun. Investigators found about 20 pot
plants at the site.
The incident caused Sheriff's Capt. Ron Smith to say at the time, "If
you're minding your own business, sitting at home manicuring your pot
plants, you might want to lock your door. This is the risk you take."
On Sept. 29 last year, two men burst into a home on the San Juan
Ridge where another man was growing marijuana. The victim shot
intruder John Scott Shelton, 31, of Linda, with a shotgun at close
range and killed him.
Shelton had an AR-15 assault rifle and the other man - who eluded the
authorities - left behind a .22-caliber weapon.
Now, officers fear those kinds of scenarios could happen again.
"As we saw with last year, people protecting their plants is a public
concern," Moon said Wednesday. "If you see it, smell it and you
believe it's illegal, contact us. Get out of there when you see a
garden," legal or not.
Pot-related thefts, rising violence predicted
By Dave Moller
Senior Staff Writer
The Union (Nevada City, CA) Oct 2
With the season for harvesting marijuana underway, Nevada County drug
enforcement officials fear it could become bloody and dangerous.
While there seems to be a lack of Mexican national grows this year
and fewer confiscated plants because of it, harvest thefts and
violence are still expected, according to Sgt. Bill Smethers at the
Nevada County Sheriff's Narcotics Task Force.
Two recent incidents, and violence seen last year, show an unsettling trend.
"People are aware the dope's there, and it's easy pickin's," Smethers said.
"We expect, with the harvest season just starting, that we'll see
increased violence with thieves or people protecting their plants,"
added Sgt. Shannan Moon of the Sheriff's Office.
Despite the rising violence, seizures of marijuana plants have
decreased after two dramatic years.
In both 2006 and 2007, county narcotics investigators raided large
marijuana plantations in the South Fork Yuba River canyon linked to
Mexican crime rings.
This year, officers have not staged as many raids because they area
awaiting direction from several pending court cases involving medical
marijuana, Smethers said. Some pot patches that might have been
pulled in recent years were not because of the legal uncertainties
around them, he added.
Thieves pose as FBI agents
Early Wednesday, thieves posing as FBI agents marked the beginning of
the marijuana harvest season.
About 1 a.m. Wednesday, two men with guns entered a home on the 12000
block of Quaker Hill Cross Road, on Banner Mountain east of Nevada
City, and took about two to three and one-half pounds of marijuana,
Moon said.
Officers at the scene learned the two victims had just trimmed and
bagged the marijuana when the heist occurred.
One of the suspects had a small firearm as he entered the room and
said, "FBI" to the victims, Moon said. The victims were ordered to
give up their car keys, wallets and cell phones before the suspects
left with the marijuana.
The victims said the getaway car was a dark, gun-metal gray
Mitsubishi Eclipse that went south on Quaker Hill Cross Road toward
Red Dog Road. The first suspect is described as a man 6-foot-3-inches
tall, about 275 pounds, with short dark hair, black shorts, a white
T-shirt and multiple tattoos on both arms.
The second suspect is a man 5-feet-10-inches tall, about 200 pounds,
with a shaved head, wearing a gray-hooded sweat shirt and baggy pants.
The incident was not the first involving firearms and marijuana in
the county this year, Moon said. On Sept. 5, two people in the area
of Woodbury Drive and Dog Bar Road were held at gunpoint and
pistol-whipped by three individuals who suspected they had stolen
their marijuana.
That case is under investigation and could have involved members of
the Vagos motorcycle gang in Sacramento, Moon said.
2007 a violent year
The pistol-whipping was similar to one of three violent pot patch
incidents last year.
On Oct. 14, 2007, five people entered a home in the same area of
Woodbury Drive and Dog Bar Road, armed with crow bars, baseball bats
and at least one gun, demanding money and marijuana.
When deputies got to the scene, they found eight people bound and
beaten on the floor, including one with a broken neck. A van was
found at the scene loaded with freshly cut marijuana.
Several days later, two men burst into a Cedar Ridge home and
assaulted two men there with a wooden baseball bat that had metal
bolts screwed into its barrel to form a crude mace. One man was
seriously injured and another got hit in the face with the mace.
The two attackers fled the scene without any marijuana when one of
the victims said he had a gun. Investigators found about 20 pot
plants at the site.
The incident caused Sheriff's Capt. Ron Smith to say at the time, "If
you're minding your own business, sitting at home manicuring your pot
plants, you might want to lock your door. This is the risk you take."
On Sept. 29 last year, two men burst into a home on the San Juan
Ridge where another man was growing marijuana. The victim shot
intruder John Scott Shelton, 31, of Linda, with a shotgun at close
range and killed him.
Shelton had an AR-15 assault rifle and the other man - who eluded the
authorities - left behind a .22-caliber weapon.
Now, officers fear those kinds of scenarios could happen again.
"As we saw with last year, people protecting their plants is a public
concern," Moon said Wednesday. "If you see it, smell it and you
believe it's illegal, contact us. Get out of there when you see a
garden," legal or not.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Garden Grove bans medical marijuana dispensaries
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Garden Grove bans medical marijuana dispensaries
Council members approve second reading of city ordinance that would not
allow clinics within city limits.
By DEEPA BHARATH
The Orange County Register
GARDEN GROVE รข€“ An ordinance to ban medical marijuana dispensaries within
city limits will become effective 30 days from today after council members
voted 4-1 to pass such an ordinance.
The City Council approved the second reading of the ordinance tonight, with
Councilman Mark Rosen casting the sole dissenting vote.
More than 25 people came to the meeting in Council Chambers to show their
support for medical marijuana dispensaries in general. Several spoke in
support of one particular clinic, Unit-D on Brookhurst Street, which has
been operating for seven months and is popular among Orange County medical
marijuana patients.
Rosen said he received reports from the city's police department that there
have been no criminal or other disruptive incidents reported at Unit-D since
it opened up.
"To ban this is mired in mid-20th-century thinking," he said.
Rosen argued that Unit-D should be allowed to continue with a
conditional-use permit. But his fellow council members disagreed.
Councilman Steve Jones said he does not want the city to become exposed to
liability for poor-quality drugs, which may be sold in these facilities.
"As a city, we have no control over the quality of products sold in these
places, but we still have to assume liability for them," he said.
Many patients addressed the council. Some, such as Marla James, approached
the podium in wheelchairs.
"The information you have received is biased and outdated," she told the
council. "I'm asking you to postpone your vote until you learn all the
facts."
Unit-D will continue to operate in Garden Grove until it is not possible for
it to do so, said Joe G., one of the main business owners who attended the
meeting, but did not speak. He asked that he not be identified by his last
name because of his involvement in various local community organizations.
"This is not over," he said outside Council Chambers. "We are going to use
all our resources to make sure we continue to remain, whether it's in Garden
Grove or somewhere else."
Contact the writer: 714-445-6685 or dbharath@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/council-city-unit-2195383-continue-medical
Garden Grove bans medical marijuana dispensaries
Council members approve second reading of city ordinance that would not
allow clinics within city limits.
By DEEPA BHARATH
The Orange County Register
GARDEN GROVE รข€“ An ordinance to ban medical marijuana dispensaries within
city limits will become effective 30 days from today after council members
voted 4-1 to pass such an ordinance.
The City Council approved the second reading of the ordinance tonight, with
Councilman Mark Rosen casting the sole dissenting vote.
More than 25 people came to the meeting in Council Chambers to show their
support for medical marijuana dispensaries in general. Several spoke in
support of one particular clinic, Unit-D on Brookhurst Street, which has
been operating for seven months and is popular among Orange County medical
marijuana patients.
Rosen said he received reports from the city's police department that there
have been no criminal or other disruptive incidents reported at Unit-D since
it opened up.
"To ban this is mired in mid-20th-century thinking," he said.
Rosen argued that Unit-D should be allowed to continue with a
conditional-use permit. But his fellow council members disagreed.
Councilman Steve Jones said he does not want the city to become exposed to
liability for poor-quality drugs, which may be sold in these facilities.
"As a city, we have no control over the quality of products sold in these
places, but we still have to assume liability for them," he said.
Many patients addressed the council. Some, such as Marla James, approached
the podium in wheelchairs.
"The information you have received is biased and outdated," she told the
council. "I'm asking you to postpone your vote until you learn all the
facts."
Unit-D will continue to operate in Garden Grove until it is not possible for
it to do so, said Joe G., one of the main business owners who attended the
meeting, but did not speak. He asked that he not be identified by his last
name because of his involvement in various local community organizations.
"This is not over," he said outside Council Chambers. "We are going to use
all our resources to make sure we continue to remain, whether it's in Garden
Grove or somewhere else."
Contact the writer: 714-445-6685 or dbharath@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/council-city-unit-2195383-continue-medical
Four arrested in pot plant robbery
Watsonville
Four arrested in pot plant robbery
An armed robbery of a man's medicinal marijuana garden led to four arrests on Tuesday, according to Sgt. Mario Sulay of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office.
At 10 a.m., Lane Ryan Goodale, 49, led three Watsonville area juveniles to the victim's house on Dick Phelps Road, according to Sulay. The victim confronted the four men in his backyard and one of them pointed a gun at the victim, Sulay said. The other men involved were reported to be holding baseball bats. One of the juveniles threw the bat at the victim before they fled in their Nissan Maxima.
A deputy responded to the call and witnessed the car pull onto Green Valley Road. With the assistance of California Highway Patrol and Watsonville police, the car was pulled over. Officers found freshly cut marijuana plants in the trunk, along with beanies, ski masks, a handgun and other weapons. Goodale was taken to County Jail for conspiracy to commit robbery with a firearm and contributing to the delinquency of minors, according to Sulay. The minors were booked into Juvenile Hall.
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_10724597?source=rss
Four arrested in pot plant robbery
An armed robbery of a man's medicinal marijuana garden led to four arrests on Tuesday, according to Sgt. Mario Sulay of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office.
At 10 a.m., Lane Ryan Goodale, 49, led three Watsonville area juveniles to the victim's house on Dick Phelps Road, according to Sulay. The victim confronted the four men in his backyard and one of them pointed a gun at the victim, Sulay said. The other men involved were reported to be holding baseball bats. One of the juveniles threw the bat at the victim before they fled in their Nissan Maxima.
A deputy responded to the call and witnessed the car pull onto Green Valley Road. With the assistance of California Highway Patrol and Watsonville police, the car was pulled over. Officers found freshly cut marijuana plants in the trunk, along with beanies, ski masks, a handgun and other weapons. Goodale was taken to County Jail for conspiracy to commit robbery with a firearm and contributing to the delinquency of minors, according to Sulay. The minors were booked into Juvenile Hall.
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_10724597?source=rss
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
S.F. leads way on user-friendly med pot clubs
C.W. Nevius, Chronicle Columnist
Monday, October 13, 2008
(10-13) 19:34 PDT -- Three years ago, agents from the federal Drug
Enforcement Agency broke down the door of a South of Market medical pot club
and raided the premises. It looked like the first skirmish between federal
agents and the city, which passed liberal pot laws in 1996.
Instead, the city took the crackdown as a wake-up call.
Quietly, with little fanfare, San Francisco is on the way to becoming a
model for medical marijuana clubs done the right way. Exploitive,
profit-hungry drug clubs are being forced out and community-based,
patient-friendly ones are becoming the norm. Neighbors have shut down
dispensaries in school zones and patient services have been increased.
Beginning in 2005, when Mayor Gavin Newsom worried aloud about "a path that
would allow for a club on every street corner," the city has made a series
of small steps that have improved a situation that was nearly out of
control. A moratorium on new clubs was enacted and Supervisors Ross
Mirkarimi and Michela Alioto-Pier pushed for restrictive legislation. Among
other things, all pot clubs were required to get an operating permit from
the Planning Commission. Neighborhood input, proximity to schools, and
criminal and employment background checks were all included in the
consideration for a permit.
Since then, almost half of the clubs have closed.
And here's an indication of just how well the regulations have worked. When
state Attorney General Jerry Brown proposed strict state guidelines for
marijuana dispensaries in August, and Newsom's office drafted similar
regulations a month later, advocates responded immediately - they said they
were wholeheartedly in favor.
"We went through 10 years of an unregulated cannabis environment," said
Kevin Reed, president of Green Cross dispensary, which delivers medical
marijuana to patients. "Now they are going to try something completely
different, and to see it run correctly is a wonderful thing."
Nothing speaks to the spirit of cooperation like the recent fuss kicked up
about a proposal by Newsom to require clubs to record the names and
addresses of patients. That requirement is stricter than Brown's proposal
that the clubs keep some sort of general "membership records. "
Pot advocates are concerned about patients' confidentiality rights and fear
it may be a step toward bringing criminal charges against pot users.
But the mayor's office promises to continue working with the responsible
club owners and that any other suspicions about their intentions are just
paranoid fantasy.
"We understand the concern," said Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard. "And we
are happy to work with them on that. If there's a way to protect patient
confidentiality, we'd be interested in making the changes so that could be
accomplished."
That's the spirit of cooperation that has generally typified the pot club
issue in the last three to four years. The concern about confidentiality
demonstrates that that there is still a certain amount of suspicion between
marijuana advocates and the city, but in general they've been on the same
page. When it became clear that some unscrupulous dealers were in to make a
quick buck, legitimate pot club operators spoke up against them.
"This was never meant to be a money-making scheme," said the Rev. Randi
Webster, the former executive director of the San Francisco Patients
Cooperative. "A lot of those places were just money, money, money."
Shona Gochenaur, executive director of Axis of Love pot advocacy group, said
in the last two years fly-by-night dealers have moved from city to city as
officials strengthen the regulations.
"They knew they were only staying here until the gray areas were defined,"
she said. "They made as much money as they could, but now that we are
setting guidelines they are moving on."
Reed said that three to four years ago the city had 42 clubs. Now it is down
to 25 and he thinks more will close soon in part because of how hard it is
to get a final operating permit. Dispensaries have until January to meet
requirements to get a permit, which requires, among other things, that the
clubs get separate approval from a number of city agencies and do background
checks of employees.
"What is happening now will actually weed out a lot of the (clubs),"
Gochenaur said. "What we are saying is that excessive profit is not OK. Not
having direct patient services is not OK. These people are going to say
'this is not my entrepreneurial dream' and they are not going to want to do
it."
This is not only interesting because of how it is playing out in the city,
but there are also national ramifications. Gochenaur says as many as 12
states are keeping an eye on how things play out in pot clubs California,
and San Francisco is leading the way in the state.
She thinks they will look to the city as a model of how to regulate the
clubs. God knows, the city has made plenty of mistakes along the way. At one
point a pot club was housed in the ground floor of a Care Not Cash hotel
that housed many recovering addicts. Those are the kind of missteps that had
to be corrected.
But Gochenaur thinks we're almost there.
"We've come a long, huge way from 2005 when neighbors were lining the halls
of City Hall to say they were concerned," she said.
There are still some neighborhood complaints, but today local pot clubs are
surprisingly dull and uncontroversial places. If you had predicted that
three years ago, critics would have likely had just one question.
What have you been smoking?
C.W. Nevius' column runs Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays. E-mail him at
cwnevius@sfchronicle.com.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/13/BAS313G9VL.DTL
--
Monday, October 13, 2008
(10-13) 19:34 PDT -- Three years ago, agents from the federal Drug
Enforcement Agency broke down the door of a South of Market medical pot club
and raided the premises. It looked like the first skirmish between federal
agents and the city, which passed liberal pot laws in 1996.
Instead, the city took the crackdown as a wake-up call.
Quietly, with little fanfare, San Francisco is on the way to becoming a
model for medical marijuana clubs done the right way. Exploitive,
profit-hungry drug clubs are being forced out and community-based,
patient-friendly ones are becoming the norm. Neighbors have shut down
dispensaries in school zones and patient services have been increased.
Beginning in 2005, when Mayor Gavin Newsom worried aloud about "a path that
would allow for a club on every street corner," the city has made a series
of small steps that have improved a situation that was nearly out of
control. A moratorium on new clubs was enacted and Supervisors Ross
Mirkarimi and Michela Alioto-Pier pushed for restrictive legislation. Among
other things, all pot clubs were required to get an operating permit from
the Planning Commission. Neighborhood input, proximity to schools, and
criminal and employment background checks were all included in the
consideration for a permit.
Since then, almost half of the clubs have closed.
And here's an indication of just how well the regulations have worked. When
state Attorney General Jerry Brown proposed strict state guidelines for
marijuana dispensaries in August, and Newsom's office drafted similar
regulations a month later, advocates responded immediately - they said they
were wholeheartedly in favor.
"We went through 10 years of an unregulated cannabis environment," said
Kevin Reed, president of Green Cross dispensary, which delivers medical
marijuana to patients. "Now they are going to try something completely
different, and to see it run correctly is a wonderful thing."
Nothing speaks to the spirit of cooperation like the recent fuss kicked up
about a proposal by Newsom to require clubs to record the names and
addresses of patients. That requirement is stricter than Brown's proposal
that the clubs keep some sort of general "membership records. "
Pot advocates are concerned about patients' confidentiality rights and fear
it may be a step toward bringing criminal charges against pot users.
But the mayor's office promises to continue working with the responsible
club owners and that any other suspicions about their intentions are just
paranoid fantasy.
"We understand the concern," said Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard. "And we
are happy to work with them on that. If there's a way to protect patient
confidentiality, we'd be interested in making the changes so that could be
accomplished."
That's the spirit of cooperation that has generally typified the pot club
issue in the last three to four years. The concern about confidentiality
demonstrates that that there is still a certain amount of suspicion between
marijuana advocates and the city, but in general they've been on the same
page. When it became clear that some unscrupulous dealers were in to make a
quick buck, legitimate pot club operators spoke up against them.
"This was never meant to be a money-making scheme," said the Rev. Randi
Webster, the former executive director of the San Francisco Patients
Cooperative. "A lot of those places were just money, money, money."
Shona Gochenaur, executive director of Axis of Love pot advocacy group, said
in the last two years fly-by-night dealers have moved from city to city as
officials strengthen the regulations.
"They knew they were only staying here until the gray areas were defined,"
she said. "They made as much money as they could, but now that we are
setting guidelines they are moving on."
Reed said that three to four years ago the city had 42 clubs. Now it is down
to 25 and he thinks more will close soon in part because of how hard it is
to get a final operating permit. Dispensaries have until January to meet
requirements to get a permit, which requires, among other things, that the
clubs get separate approval from a number of city agencies and do background
checks of employees.
"What is happening now will actually weed out a lot of the (clubs),"
Gochenaur said. "What we are saying is that excessive profit is not OK. Not
having direct patient services is not OK. These people are going to say
'this is not my entrepreneurial dream' and they are not going to want to do
it."
This is not only interesting because of how it is playing out in the city,
but there are also national ramifications. Gochenaur says as many as 12
states are keeping an eye on how things play out in pot clubs California,
and San Francisco is leading the way in the state.
She thinks they will look to the city as a model of how to regulate the
clubs. God knows, the city has made plenty of mistakes along the way. At one
point a pot club was housed in the ground floor of a Care Not Cash hotel
that housed many recovering addicts. Those are the kind of missteps that had
to be corrected.
But Gochenaur thinks we're almost there.
"We've come a long, huge way from 2005 when neighbors were lining the halls
of City Hall to say they were concerned," she said.
There are still some neighborhood complaints, but today local pot clubs are
surprisingly dull and uncontroversial places. If you had predicted that
three years ago, critics would have likely had just one question.
What have you been smoking?
C.W. Nevius' column runs Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays. E-mail him at
cwnevius@sfchronicle.com.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/13/BAS313G9VL.DTL
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
