Marijuana Anti-Prohibition Project 760.799.2055

1. President Elect Barack Obama Statement on DEA Raids of Medical Cannabis Dispensaries, as of 11/03/2008

On Tuesday, Barack Obama was elected to become the first African American President of the United States.  His campaign succeeded with a message of “Change”.  We’ll be unsure of what this means for ASA until our staff has an opportunity to meet with his transition team.  However, the following reply  from the Obama Campaign to an inquiry from a prominent medical cannabis advocate on November 3rd, represents his current stated position.  We felt it appropriate to share with you.

[Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting Obama for America to inquire about the Senator’s position on allowing severely ill patients to use marijuana for medical purposes.

Many states have laws that condone medical marijuana, but the Bush Administration is using federal drug enforcement agents to raid these facilities and arrest seriously ill people.  Focusing scarce law enforcement resources on these patients who pose no threat while many violent and highly dangerous drug traffickers are at large makes no sense.  Senator Obama will not continue the Bush policy when he is president.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Sincerely,

Obama for America]

This position is the direct result of activists from across the country communicating with the Obama Campaign in public and in private.  You’ve met with his staff, you’ve written letters and emails, you called his campaign office, and this statement came from the action you took.  It is evidence that the work you put in does have an impact.  For the first time in the history of ASA, our executive branch target for a federal medical cannabis law is with a President who at least seems willing to listen.  ASA will do everything in its power to hold the new President accountable. But keep in mind as we move forward together, that we can’t do it without you.

2. With 64% in Favor, Michigan Becomes the 13th Medical Cannabis State

On election day, voters in Michigan voted for two historic measures.  One rode the wave of national momentum, and helped to put the first African American President in the White House.  The other carried another wave of momentum that represented both the determined will of activists and organizers to overcome lies and fear, as well as the compassion and common sense of everyday Americans.  The people of Michigan chose overwhelmingly, with a vote of 64% in favor, to allow qualified patients to use and grow cannabis for medical reasons.  Michigan is the 13th state to pass such laws since California started the trend in 1996, and the first in the Midwest, bringing close to 25% of the US public within the boarders of a medical cannabis law.

No longer can this issue be framed as a West Coast or Northeast Liberal issue.  If Montana voting to pass with 62% in favor just a few short years ago wasn’t enough to convince nay-sayers that this is compassionate concern of everyday Americans, the Michigan vote surely must.  Michigan’s new law allows patients with debilitating medical conditions to possess up to 2.5 ounces of cannabis and to grow up to 12 plants in an indoor, locked facility, or to designate a caregiver to cultivate for them.

ASA’s goal is nothing short of a comprehensive federal law that allows for the safe, affordable access of cannabis for every patient who’s doctor approves.  We are striving toward a time when research into the medical properties of cannabis and cannabinoids are fully embraced, encourage, and widely funded by the federal government.  With this Michigan vote, we are closer than ever before.  You all should be proud of everything you’ve contributed, and use this excitement to push forward even harder.

As California knows well, the passage of a medical cannabis law is just the beginning of a long road of continued public, physician, and law enforcement education.  It’s the start of a struggle to educate law-makers of the nuances of medical cannabis patient care; what “Safe Access” really means, what legal and social protections are necessary for those who are authorized to use an effective medical treatment that is sanctioned by their state, but prohibited by their federal government.  It’s the first step in truly organizing to protect patient rights.  ASA will work hand in hand with our Michigan chapters and affiliates to help guide them through this process.  Congratulations are in order.

3. Berkeley Passes JJ, Endorses Dispensary Self-Regulation

Berkeley voters came to the polls this week to pass a medical cannabis measure that offers protections to local medical cannabis dispensaries!  The new ordinance will create a deputized council consisting of owners, advocates, and community members to regulate and create best practices for a cooperative and symbiotic dispensary-city relationship.  Measure JJ, which passed with 62% of the Berkeley vote, moved the Bay Area forward yet again in progressive medical cannabis regulation.  The huge margin of victory finally put to rest a controversy over this initiative attempt that started over 2 years ago, and led to ASA filing suit against Alameda County, which “lost” the entire voting record, prohibiting a recount in a more closely contested vote.

The ballot initiative creates a body for dispensary oversight where there is none.  It will deputize dispensary owners to form a transparent commission to work closely within the community to promote a model of cooperative involvement.  It provides a framework for City staff and dispensary operators to maintain the 3 “good neighbor” dispensaries that exist, and ensures that tax-paying dispensaries are not shut down by what is now an unworkable permitting process.

JJ’s changes are incremental, but vital for the future of medical cannabis in Berkeley. Once again, Berkeley can lead the way in integrating medical cannabis under city permission and control.  Campaign Co-directors Becky DeKeuster, of Berkeley Patients Group, and Attorney James Anthony worked hard to organize community support.  Special thanks go to Rishi Malhotra and all volunteers at Cal Berkeley Students for Sensible Drug Policy, Richard Muller and East Bay ASA volunteers, local Berkeley dispensaries, and all those who put in all their hard work to make this happen!

ShareThis

Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is celebrating the historic election of President-elect Barack Obama. We are reflecting on the many milestones tonight’s vote represents and celebrating a presumptive change in our national direction and a return to the spirit of optimism some of us remember from 1993.

Many medical cannabis patients and advocates are feeling a special sense of relief. The last two years have been particularly difficult for individuals authorized to use or provide medical cannabis in accordance with their state laws, but President-elect Obama has indicated that he will bring and end to federal raids. President-elect Obama’s voting record in the U.S. Senate coupled with his consistent remarks on the campaign trail demonstrate compassionate leadership. You can bet that ASA will be doubling our efforts to ensure that the Obama Administration ends the federal raid activity and other intimidation tactics designed to stymie the proper implementation of state medical cannabis laws and eliminate safe and legal access.

In 2006, ASA opened the first office in the nation’s capitol dedicated exclusively to medical cannabis advocacy. We learned quickly that nothing happens in Washington, DC, because it should. You have to make change happen, it doesn’t happen to you! This transition in government will mean that we will have to work harder than ever to support comprehensive changes to federal policy that ensure safe access for individuals who use cannabis to control symptoms of HIV/AIDS, cancer, Multiple Sclerosis, and other serious or chronic diseases.

A new Congress and Presidential Administration may finally create an opportunity to advance ASA’s National Policy Agenda. ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer and Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson are working everyday in Washington, DC, to be sure we can take advantage of this historic opportunity. They are talking with Washington insiders who will help build the new President’s transition team and advise the President-elect on key appointments. They are also building a powerful coalition of condition-based health care advocates for medical cannabis who will have the ear of the new Administration and Congress.

I am confident this strategic work will pay off – but it will take time and enthusiastic support from our base. Never think that change in medical cannabis will come automatically. We need to keep educating elected officials and telling our story in the media. We have to keep protesting to shine a national spotlight on federal interference and intimidation. We have to keep putting our time, creative energy, and money into the grassroots campaign for safe access, perhaps now more than ever.

ShareThis

Protesters Rally Against Local Cops, Support Addison DeMoura in Modesto

On Tuesday, community members came out to support Addison DeMoura, operator of a nonprofit medical cannabis dispensing collective in Oakdale, raided by local police in 2007. The Oakdale Natural Choice Collective had not been open for 4 months before a local drug task force came in and shut it down, though according to defendants, DeMoura and the collective were operating in full compliance with California law.

Protesters and leaders from various groups came from across the state to show their anger toward a law enforcement agency which refuses to follow state law.  This type of community support is necessary for patients facing harassment and intimidation by the very law enforcement bodies sworn to protect them.

Law Enforcement in Stanislaus County are notorious for not following California’s medical cannabis law.  Ballot initiatives and statutes passed by the state legislature have little impact on the actions of law enforcement, whom some have criticized as being well-known for taking the law into their own hands.  Local police have often made public statements denying the legality of medical cannabis in California, and demonstrating opposition to California law.

DeMoura’s case has been a source of intense frustration, even aside from vindictive targeting, prosecution, and law enforcement abuse.  The case has been defined by a long series of delays and continuances that began to seem as though the court was almost toying with the defendants.  Arraignment hearings were regularly rescheduled, at first every couple of months, but at one point the court would order DeMoura to show up every week only to be dismissed and rescheduled.  Monday’s hearing was again postponed until the end of November.

Thanks go out to all those who came out to support Addison, his wife Jessica, and other co-defendants as they stood up to law enforcement who want to decide for themselves which of California’s laws they should follow.

San Diego Supervisors Continue to Challenge State’s ID Cards

Despite record budget deficits and widespread accusation of money mishandling in San Diego, County Supervisors will continue to spend even more scarce resources challenging California’s settled medical cannabis laws to the US Supreme Court. Americans for Safe Access Chief Counsel Joe Elford has argued that the county must comply with a 2004 state law which mandated they create ID cards for medical cannabis patients, and the county, which has refused to implement, has now lost twice in state courts and been denied review by the California Supreme Court.  Legal authorities agree that San Diego County’s position, that it does not have to follow California law because federal law is different, is far-fetched at best.

While Merced and San Bernardino Counties initially signed on with San Diego as co-plaintiffs, after the first defeat, Merced County opted to drop its suit and carry out the program, having since issued some 30 state ID cards to medical cannabis patients. The cards are intended to make it easier for police to determine who is or is not compliant with the state medical cannabis laws, both decreasing their workload and helping to keep law-abiding and seriously ill people protected and out of jail.    Several San Diego County Supervisors who voted to devote resources to the long shot appeal to the nation’s top court even baldly admitted they did so because they don’t believe that cannabis has medical value, including Supervisor Bill Horn who said, “I don’t think its right…”

After the appellate court victory, ASA’s legal staff sent letters to counties that had not yet issued the patient ID’s, informing them of their obligation to enact the program, and of the risk of litigation by ASA if they continued to obstinately refuse to implement. Since then, most counties have quickly begun to step in line and comply, including Kings, Fresno, and San Joaquin, who have since voted to issue the cards.  The US Supreme Court reviews only between 1-2% of over 7500 cases requested every year, and are typically those which have divided lower courts.  There has been unanimous agreement among California courts that San Diego is wrong.  Yet in a faltering economy with unemployment rising, in a county saturated with corruption convictions, mismanagement accusations, and federal investigations of public officials, the zealot Supervisors have decided to ignore actual governance in favor of continuing this quixotic quest to punish patients.

Trinity Supervisors Revert Back to State Limits, Gardena City Council Bans Dispensaries

This week, Trinity County Supervisors voted to repeal a year-old ordinance that allowed qualified medical cannabis patients to possess up to three pounds and 12 plants of medical cannabis. Approximately 300 citizens showed up to the meeting to voice their opinions, after which the Board voted unanimously to decrease allowable limits back to the state level. Some supervisors felt that the initial ordinance had attracted commercial growers to the area, while others were less concerned about the limits themselves than they were about complaints by law enforcement of having to patrol the entire county.  Why it would become easier to patrol the entire county to find patients with lower amounts of cannabis was not clarified by police.

Also this week, the Gardena City Council voted unanimously to ban medical cannabis dispensaries, acting before the end of a 2006 moratorium set to expire next month.

ShareThis

1. San Mateo City Council Moves to Regulate Medical Cannabis Dispensaries

The city of San Mateo this week took steps toward regulations that would oversee the operation of medical cannabis dispensaries this week.  The review of the draft ordinance, which took place at a special city council study session and is to be considered for a vote later this year, was generally viewed favorably by officials and the public alike, though there was some concern over what was seen by some as problematic language.

City staff drafted the proposal after federal agents and local police raided dispensaries in August of last year.  This week’s meeting was an attempt by the city to bring clarity, consistency, and hopefully safety to San Mateo residents and dispensary operators. "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.

The ordinance would require collectives to register with the Police Department  and collective growers to obtain a license. In addition, the ordinance will require certain security standards, such as on-site cameras, security lighting, and alarms, and will prohibit advertising and exchange of cannabis for money at the collective. The ordinance will prohibit collectives from being anywhere in the city except manufacturing and service commercial areas, according to the report.  Though it was encouraging for San Mateo officials to be considering these regulations, certain functional difficulties presented themselves with the ordinance, such as how a collective could continue to function and maintain itself if members were not allowed to exchange money for cannabis on site.  Residents of San Mateo are encouraged to participate in upcoming council meetings where the draft resolution will be considered.

2. San Joaquin County Votes to Implement  Patient ID Program

The San Joaquin Supervisors voted 3-2 to implement the medical cannabis ID card program earlier this week, which has been mandatory for counties since SB420 passed the CA State Legislature in 2004. Though some on the board expressed a desire to continue to avoid implementing, the consensus was that officials’ hands were tied, that the program was legally required by the state, and that there seemed to be no other way to avoid making the ID that would help people living with serious illnesses avoid going to jail needlessly.

According to Bill Mitchell, San Joaquin County Public Health Director, the demand for the ID card hasn’t been large, but there has been speculation that the interest will increase once the county begins to administer the program. Though voluntary, the ID cards help protect patients from unnecessary arrest, as law enforcement typically rely on the card as the most legitimate form of documentation asserting a patient’s status as legal under California Proposition 215 .   Law enforcement are technically required to accept any doctor recommendation.

The County is scheduled to hear public comments on proposed costs of the ID to applicants on November 4, at the Supervisors Meeting, 222 E. Weber in Stockton.

3. La Palma City Council Bans Medical Cannabis Dispensaries

La Palma City Council members effectively banned medical cannabis dispensaries within city limits by voting on an ordinance that bans any establishment that violates local, state, or federal laws.  The vote was clearly directed at those qualified patients seeking to gain access to cannabis as treatment, though the ordinance language was ambiguous.

At least one medical cannabis patient attended the meeting and made a tearful plea to dissuade the council members.  Lisa Boynton said that cannabis helped her deal with her pain, and that she needed a place where she could safely get it.  "Your community is suffering from this," said Boynton, referring to the vote.  Wanting to come off as compassionate to those living with serious illnesses, La Palma City Councilors claimed their hands were tied, that they had to "maintain the laws of our state and federal government" according to Council Member Christine Barnes.

The argument was unconvincing, and demonstrated to many that the council members for the smallest municipality in Orange County were either uneducated on state and federal supremacy laws, or purposefully misrepresenting them.  State law clearly allows collectives and cooperatives according to guidelines recently issued by California Attorney General Jerry Brown, cities and counties throughout California have regulated them with no legal disputes, and numerous courts at both the state and federal levels have held that municipal and state governments can keep and implement effective medical cannabis laws.

ShareThis

This is a guest blog by a former medical marijuana dispensing collective operator in Santa Barbara County, who was recently forced to close his collective as a result of federal pressure. The author wishes to remain anonymous.

I am a legal medical marijuana patient who, until recently, operated a neighborhood dispensing collective in a small city in Santa Barbara County. I opened the facility in 2007 because I wanted to help patients get the medicine they need at a reasonable price. The short time we were open was one of the most rewarding of my career. What a privilege to help people get better and see some hope come back into their eyes.

We were careful to do things right. We were good neighbors, obeyed the law, and paid our taxes. Unfortunately, doing things right is still illegal under federal law. My colleagues and I in Santa Barbara County were not surprised when our landlords started getting letters from the DEA threatening prosecution and asset forfeiture. The DEA mailed hundreds of these letters to law abiding property owners all over California beginning in the summer of 2007. I have always been candid with my landlord and was a conscientious tenant. I shared the asset forfeiture material ASA provided with my landlord, and he agreed to take a wait and see approach.

That changed in July of this year, when my landlord received a new letter from the US Attorney’s Office summoning him to a private meeting. The purpose was to deliver an ultimatum: evict your tenant or face prosecution and asset forfeiture. This new tactic escalated the situation in Santa Barbara County to crisis level. Unlike the DEA, the US Attorney has the authority to press charges or file for forfeiture. My landlord, and six or seven others like him in the county, was now in an untenable position. He wanted me as a tenant, but could not afford to be prosecuted or lose his property. It was time for me to go.

When news that the US Attorney’s Office was involved broke in July, ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer flew in from Washington, DC, and she and California Director Don Duncan called a meeting of collective operators and property owners in Santa Barbara. They did their best to reassure property owners, and set up a series of meetings with local and federal representatives to build opposition to the new federal attack on patients’ access. Meanwhile, ASA staff in Washington, DC, took our story directly to US House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), who was already preparing for Congressional oversight hearings focused on DEA interference and intimidation.

I have high hopes for Chairman Conyers’ investigation, but Santa Barbara is not out of the woods yet. Just this week, DEA Agent David Sheets – a long time nemesis of patients and operators here – was seen conducting surveillance at one of the only collectives left in the area. We may still find that our county is the only one in California to face landlord prosecution and asset forfeiture. If that happens, it will send a chill through California’s medical marijuana community and escalate pressure on landlords statewide.

There is a lot of talk about hope in this election season. Those of us in Santa Barbara are hoping this escalation is just another bluff by federal ideologues bent on inflicting maximum casualties on the medical marijuana community in the waning days of the Bush Administration. We are also hoping the rest of California notices what is happening here and stands behind us. I hope that new Administration will bring new polices, and I can go back to helping my patients.

ShareThis

1. California Supreme Court Makes Medical Cannabis Victory Final

On Thursday, the California Supreme Court decided not to hear an appeal from San Diego County in their attempt to invalidate California’s medical cannabis ID card program.  The refusal by the state’s highest court means that ASA’s July victory in the appellate court stands, and the decision that federal law does not trump state law is final.

ASA intervened in the lawsuit on behalf of patients in 2006, after San Diego County refused to issue state medical cannabis ID cards to patients, as required under Senate Bill 420, passed by the California Legislature in 2003. Both superior and appellate courts ruled in our favor, affirming that counties cannot just decide for themselves whether or not to follow the law. The Supreme Court¹s decision not to hear an appeal means that because of our victory, San Diego and all other counties must implement California law.

After we won in appellate court, ASA’s Chief Counsel, Joe Elford, contacted every county in California that had followed San Diego’s lead by refusing to initiate the program.  Elford made it clear to these hold-out counties that it is against the law for them not to implement the ID card program, and that we were watching them closely. As a result, two California counties,  (Fresno and Kings) ­ voted to issue the patient ID’s almost immediately. Now, ASA is again following up with a warning for remaining California counties that refuse to obey the law.  According to Elford, “We are prepared to commence litigation.”

The implications of the San Diego victory are far-reaching. Elected officials at every level of government often cite federal law as a reason not to obey California voters. And officials across the country who are looking at medical cannabis in their own states are often unsure if federal law trumps state action. With this case they’ll know it does not.

2. Garden Grove bans medical marijuana dispensaries

Garden Grove City Council members voted 4 - 1 to ban medical cannabis dispensaries within city limits this week, an ordinance which becomes active in just one month.

Over 25 people showed up to the city council meeting to oppose the dispensary ban, though news accounts do not mention one person who spoke in support. Patients, some in wheelchairs, pleaded with the council to allow one dispensary in particular, seven month old “Unit-D”, to remain as a place to access medication in town.  Reports from local police that were submitted to council members showed no legal incidents or complaints associated with the dispensing collective since it opened.

Despite no evidence or suggestion of problems, only council member Mike Rosen voted to allow Unit D to remain open under a conditional use permit.  Other officials brought forth confusing claims and concerns.  Councilmember Steve Jones claimed that the City of Garden Grove would be held liable for “poor quality” medical cannabis that might be given to qualified patients.  What “poor quality” means, how it could be interpreted and by whom, what would be the impact on patients who used “poor quality” cannabis, and whether or not there existed any such legal precedent anywhere in the 12 states that allow medical cannabis, was not explained by Jones.  Jones and three others voted to ban the treatment centers.

ShareThis

Major DEA Raid Activity in Southern California and Alameda County, Despite AG Guidelines, Federal Inquiries, and Pending Litigation

Federal agents moved into California this week, conducting paramilitary style raids on four medical cannabis dispensaries. Two raids occurred in Long Beach, in addition to one in Laguna Beach and one in Alameda County.  Accounts from all collectives separately describe DEA agents seizing equipment, destroying property, and intimidating volunteers and patients physically and verbally.  Personal information of all patients, volunteers, and employees were taken, though no arrests were made.

Local law enforcement participated in the raids in Alameda and Laguna Beach, though it is unconfirmed whether local police were involved in the Long Beach raids. This comes just one month after California Attorney General Jerry Brown explicitly directed all California police to obey local and state, not federal laws.  It was uncertain why local police were violating the directive of the Attorney General, though departments that participated have been identified as expressly hostile to California’s medical cannabis law.

DEA tactics have come under increased scrutiny by local, state, and federal officials in recent months.  As California’s medical cannabis law is strengthened through litigative and legislative acts, DEA activity has increased,  signaling a disregard by federal agents for state law. The raided dispensaries were operating legally under California Proposition 215 (1996), Senate Bill 420 (2003), and official dispensary guidelines issued by the California Attorney General (2008).  At least one of the collectives that was raided, We Are Hemp, operated under a license by Alameda County.

DEA activity continues despite attempts at oversight and scrutiny.  A federal court recently allowed a lawsuit to move forward which alleges DEA is illegally trying to disrupt California law.  In addition, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees DEA activity, has begun interrogating DEA over the intent and effectiveness of these aggressive raid tactics.  Raids conducted by the agency will be used as evidence both in the trial and in Congressional oversight hearings, should they move forward.

Thankfully, ASA was able to respond quickly to the raid in Alameda using our Text Message Emergency Response system.  We were alerted about the raid from an activist, and immediately sent text messages to activists telling them to go down and protest the DEA as they raid.  Its a critical component of our strategy.  Please sign up for our Emergency Response.

Los Angeles Protest Demands Justice for Charles Lynch, Asks Congress to Intervene

A major protest in LA this week further accented the concern over escalating DEA activity in California.  Over 350 people attended a protest to support former Morro Bay dispensary collective Charles Lynch, whose story of local compliance and community compassion met with aggressive DEA arrest and prosecution made national news and drew support by various activist bodies, including Drew Carey’s Reason.tv.

Organized by LA ASA’s Cheryl and a team of dedicated activists, the protest was attended by numerous criminal justice and patient rights organizations, and took place in front of the LA Federal Courthouse on the day Lynch was to have a hearing on a motion for a new trial.  This hearing has been delayed to November 4.

Lynch operated his permitted collective within the mandates of state and local law, but the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff took issue with his facility and called in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to close him down.

There are more than one hundred Americans facing federal prosecution for medical cannabis right now. None of these people will be able to tell jurors that their actions were legal under state law, explain their compassionate motives, or even say the words "medical cannabis" in court. They will all be portrayed as vicious drug dealers, as prosecutors demand and federal judges require. With conviction rates over 90% in federal court, few of these defendants have hope of justice.

California Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in People v. Mentch

This week, the California Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that will decide exactly what actions individuals must take in order to be defined as a primary caregiver under California’s medical cannabis laws.  People v. Mentch is the fifth medical cannabis case to be heard before the State’s Supreme Court.

In addition to determining whether one can be classified as a primary caregiver simply by providing medical cannabis to qualified patients, the court will also address the question of how judges must instruct jurors with regard to similar cases.

Roger Mentch was arrested in 2003 and charged with illegal marijuana sales for supplying medicine to five patients.  Mentch counseled the patients about the types of strains that would be suit their medical needs, grew and tested multiple strains, and drove two of the patients to doctor’s appointments.  In court, Mentch attempted to assert a defense based on his status as a primary caregiver.  The trial court rejected the defense and refused to instruct the jury on it, finding that Mentch had failed to establish himself as a primary caregiver.

On appeal, the court unanimously disagreed. The California Supreme Court then granted review, primarily to resolve the issue of what type of evidence is necessary to allow the jury to consider whether one is a “primary caregiver,” which is defined in the Compassionate Use Act as one who “consistently assumes the responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of” a qualified patient.

ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford filed an amicus brief contending that cultivating cannabis for a qualified patient alone qualifies one to assert a medical cannabis defense (and Mentch’s attorney argued this point in court).  The Attorney General, on the other hand, contends that one is only a primary caregiver if he “consistently assumes the responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of” a qualified patient, aside from providing medical cannabis.  The court will issue a ruling in, at most, 90 days.

Correction: Acrata City Council Dispensary Action

Last week’s ASA Weekly Alert reported that the Arcata City Council’s had a marijuana task force and had approved dispensary regulations for the city. This was not true.  Thank you to the readers who caught this error, which was a mix-up with action taken by another city council.

The City of Arcata does not have a Marijuana Task Force, and city officials recently signed off on a draft of potential dispensary regulations, which now go back to the Arcata Planning Commission for further review at the City Council meeting on November 5th.

We apologize for any inconvenience.

ShareThis

Many of you may have noticed ASA’s new pink tint for the last few days.  Yes, its true, we’ve gone pink.

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, so ASA’s website has gone pink in a show of support for those who are or have suffered through breast cancer.  We’re encouraging people to go to our site and click on the “Go Pink” button in the upper right of our homepage.  There you’ll find resources with information on how to contribute to raising awareness and support for breast cancer survivors.

Aside from the fact that cancer has at one time impacted the lives of most, if not all of us, and supporting Susan G Komen for the Cure is just the right thing to do, we’re encouraging all of our members to remember the importance of reaching out.  This month, please give of yourself. Give your time, your money, your resources, or your ideas to further helping those living with and living through illness.

In our line of work sometimes outsiders can lose sight of the fact that we’re working with illness and pain as much as any other condition-focused foundation like Susan G Komen for the Cure.  Sometimes in the media and in the public eye, the “pot” gets all the attention and the people get left to the wayside.  We’re always trying to bring the focus back where it belongs, to the courageous people who live everyday in a fight to survive.  This is what’s most important.

Please visit Susan G Komen for the Cure, and find out how you can help.

ShareThis

This afternoon around 2pm, we received a call that the DEA was in the process of raiding We Are Hemp, a dispensing collective in San Lorenzo.  We all immediately jumped into our raid-response roles, and I rushed to the computer to send out a text message alert to over 500 patients and allies in the Bay Area, asking everyone to come down, bring signs, and show their support.  Meanwhile, another staff member was busy gathering signs and arranging for transportation to the site, while another staff member was alerting the media, making sure there would be significant coverage of the raid.

Besides the fact that the dispensing collective was in compliance with California State law and the recently issued Attorney General guidelines, We Are Hemp also had a business permit from the County of Alameda.  So the county can issue permits, give their official approval, and then turn around and let their Sheriffs assist in a DEA raid?  This is absolutely ridiculous and a blatant affront to California state law.

It is always incredibly upsetting when there is a raid on a dispensing collective, but what often adds to my personal frustration is the fact that I normally am not able to physically go down to the site and show my support.  This time however, the raid was right in our back yard and I was able to go onsite with another staff member and protest these atrocious actions on the part of the DEA and our local Alameda County Sheriffs.  It actually felt so good to be there, to be able to physically do something, even if that was just holding a sign, chanting “We’re Patients, Not Criminals!” and watching DEA agents and Sheriffs get flustered when they saw us taking their pictures.  We even met some neighbors of the dispensing collective who were just as outraged as we were!  Although not patients themselves, they were very supportive of We Are Hemp and said that the dispensing collective had really improved the safety in the area.  Appalled that something like this could actually happen, these two new allies grabbed their own “Stop Arresting Medical Marijuana Patients” signs and joined the demonstration.
One of our most powerful tools during a raid like this is our very own physical presence.  With each added person that arrives onsite to show support, our message becomes that much stronger.  With one extra voice, we become that much more difficult for them to ignore.  The next time the DEA tries to raid in our neighborhood, go down and show your support, or send someone in your stead if your cannot go yourself.  With so many major changes happening right now in our country, this is the time to make our voices heard!

ShareThis

The California Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in the Court’s fifth medical marijuana case.  At issue were two questions:  (1) can one qualify as a primary caregiver solely by consistently providing a patient with medical marijuana, and (2) how should the jury be instructed regarding the burden on defendants when they assert a medical mariuana defense?

The case involves medical marijuana cultivator Roger Mentch, who supplied medicine to five patients.  In addition, Mentch counseled the patients about the types of strains that would be suit their medical needs, as he grew multiple strains that he tested himself, and he drove two of the patients to doctor’s appointments.  After the cops busted Mentch and charged him with illegal marijuana sales, Mentch attempted to assert a defense based on his status as a primary caregiver.  The trial court rejected the defense and refused to instruct the jury on it, finding that Mentch had failed as a matter of law to establish that he qualified as a primary caregiver.

On appeal, the court unanimously disagreed.  In the published decision of People v. Mentch, the court found that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to instruct the jury on a primary caregiver defense, since Mentch had done more than simply supply marijuana to patients.  At the Attorney General’s behest, the California Supreme Court granted review of the case, primarily, to resolve the issue of what type of evidence is necessary to allow the jury to consider the question whether one is a “primary caregiver,” which is defined in the Compassionate Use Act as one who “consistently assumes the responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of” a qualified patient.

Whereas ASA filed an amicus brief contending that cultivating marijuana for a qualified patient, standing alone, qualifies one to assert a medical marijuana defense (and Mentch’s attorney argued this in court today), the Attorney General contends that one is only a primary caregiver if he “consistently assumes the responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of” a qualified patient, aside from marijuana providing.  The crux of the issue is the role of the jury in defining a “primary caregiver” versus the court excluding this issue from the jury’s consideration on the basis that persons like Mentch do not qualify as a matter of law.

This, I think, is the reason the Court asked the second question about the proper instructions to be given to jurors about the burden on medical marijuana defendants who raise a Compassionate Use Act defense, which strikes me as the more important of the two questions.  I’ll try my best to explain, but it gets rather technical.  In People v. Mower, the California Supreme Court held that a patient had the burden of coming forward with some evidence that he qualified for a defense under the Compassionate Use Act, but that he only need enough evidence to raise a reasonable doubt on the issue.  Oddly, some courts issued instructions suggesting that the defendant had the burden of establishing the defense by a preponderance of the evidence, so the instructions needed some fixing.  Based on the questioning at today’s oral argument in Mentch, it seems that the Court will set the framework as follows:  A defendant must come forward with some evidence on each of the elements of the defense and the judge (not the jury) decides whether he has done so.  If not, the jury is not instructed on the Compassionate Use Act at all.  If so, the jury will be told what the defense entails and that it is the government’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense does not apply.  Or something like that.  We’ll find out in, at most, 90 days.

ShareThis

A noisy crowd of 350 medical cannabis supporters gathered in front of the federal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles to call for a new trial for Charles C. Lynch, the operator of a Morro Bay medical cannabis collective raided by the DEA in March of last year. Lynch, who operated Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers with the blessing of the City of Morro Bay, faces decades in federal prison following his conviction last month. His attorneys are asking Judge George Wu for a new trial on November 4.

The larger-than average crowd braved the notorious Los Angeles heat and tolerated crowded conditions on the narrow sidewalk between the barricades protecting the courthouse along Spring Street and the spacious lawn – which was strictly off limits to protesters. They even took the malfunctioning PA system in stride, pressing in close to hear from the defendant, his attorneys, and a handful of other speakers. Cars and a steady stream of buses honked in support as protesters waived signs and banners in support of Lynch and medical cannabis.

The story surrounding Charles Lynch’s arrest and prosecution strikes a nerve in the medical cannabis community because his case illustrates the fundamental injustice of those caught between state and federal law: doing things right is still a crime. Lynch operated his permitted collective within the mandates of state and local law, but the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff took issue with his facility and called in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to close him down. Lynch now faces between five and one hundred years in prison and up to four million dollars in fines for playing by the rules under state law.

What is even more disturbing than Lynch’s plight is the fact that he is not alone. There are more than one hundred Americans facing federal prosecution for medical cannabis “crimes” right now. None of these people will be able to tell jurors that their actions may be legal under state law or explain their compassionate motives. With conviction rates over 90% in federal court, few of these defendants have hope of justice. It is imperative that Americans for Safe Access (ASA) succeed in harmonizing federal law with the laws of the states that allow for medical cannabis if we are going to stop this injustice.

But we can not let the our local law enforcement and elected representatives off the hook. Remember how Charles C. Lynch got into trouble in the first place. He worked with his local government to get the right permits and obeyed state law. It was the Sheriff who took it upon himself to call in the DEA and usurp state law. The courts have been clear on this topic – local governments and state law enforcement must uphold Proposition 215 and other medical cannabis laws despite the fact that they differ from federal law. We must hold elected officials – including mean-spirited Sheriffs – accountable when they fail to uphold our voter-approved medical cannabis laws.

California voters must insist that their elected representatives fully implement state law, and use legislation and litigation to reign in non-compliant law enforcement. ASA is working every day to protect and expand patients’ rights in California, but we need your help to keep doing it. Next time you hear about a protest in your community, come out and join a few hundred of your friends to make your voice heard. Don’t worry… we’ll make room for you on the sidewalk!

You can also help out by joining ASA today!

ShareThis

1. Governor Schwarzenegger Vetoes Anti-Employment Discrimination Bill

Governor Schwarzenegger jeopardized the financial security for California’s most seriously ill by vetoing ASA’s anti-employment discrimination bill (AB 2279 ), which would have protected the jobs of legal medical cannabis patients statewide.  As it stands, thanks to the 2007 California Supreme Court ruling in Ross v. Ragingwire , those who are legally qualified to use cannabis as a treatment option under California law may be fired from their jobs because of it.

The incredible effort put forth by ASA staff and activists in lobbying, building powerful coalitions with health care groups and labor unions, and working with the bill’s sponsor, Assemblymember Mark Leno (D) had led to positive momentum for this important step toward equality for medical cannabis patients.  The bill passed through both the California Assembly and Senate, and reached the Governor’s desk in the midst of an unprecedented display of sweeping vetoes by Governor Schwarzenegger. The message that the Governor attached to the veto implied that he felt California voters passed Proposition 215 without intending to protect patients from employment discrimination and the right to financially support themselves and their families.

Most everyone outside of the Governor’s mansion believes that people who live with illness should be encouraged to work rather than rely on services from the state, further straining our tight budget.  We saw a greater mobilization of our members than almost ever before, with AB 2279 receiving more  pressure from constituents than almost any other bill the Governor considered.  This kind of action demonstrates what our community can do when we bind together across the state . Medical cannabis is making powerful progress in dispensary regulations and ID cards , and we’re making new legal in-roads all the time.  ASA has vowed to bring this fight for job security even more aggressively next year, and we know you’ll be right there with us!

2. Palm Springs and Arcata Move Forward on Dispensary Regulations

In two different parts of the state, local governments continue to take important steps to expand California’s medical cannabis program.  Officials for the cities of Arcata and Palm Springs moved toward new regulations this week to address dispensary operation and maintenance, bringing their jurisdictions up to code and in compliance with both California law (SB 420 ) and with the recently issued guidelines by Attorney General Jerry Brown.

The Arcata City Council is considering dispensary regulations that were brought to it by the City Planning Commission as part of its land use zoning deliberations.  The Planning Commission was delayed in bringing proposed regulations to the city in August due to the release of the AG guidelines, which it wanted to to review before issuing its own recommendations.  The council is considering these regulations, which would be a welcome step by community members who rely on medical cannabis dispensary services.   (**This paragraph has been edited for errors since first posted.**10/6/08)

Officials in Palm Springs also moved forward with civil codes allowing and regulating dispensaries.  The proposed draft ordinance, which has the support of the Mayor and most council members , would bring zoning and operation requirements to an area which, only months prior, had been considering banning public medical cannabis services outright.  The draft ordinance was referred to the city’s planning commission for review, and will be returned to the city council.

Carlo Sarmiento, a volunteer at Community Caregivers, said of the proposed guidelines, which may rezone the dispensing collective,  “Our original goal is to get this medicine to the patient… If it requires us to move, we would still have to follow (that) goal.”   The turnaround for Palm Springs was the result of education and pressure from members of the community on city regulators; it did not happen on its own.  Its absolutely critical that community members who live in areas where access to medical cannabis is restricted or denied outright take control of their local governments, working individually to call officials and cooperatively with ASA chapters or other community groups to inform apprehensive local lawmakers of their duty to comply with state law and to those living with illness in their neighborhoods.

Read more about Arcata and Palm Springs on medical cannabis.

3. Tragedy Strikes Los Angeles Dispensary, Security Guard Shot

In a horrible example of the need for greater protection from local law enforcement, a security guard at an Los Angeles dispensary was shot and killed while on duty this week. ASA’s sincere thoughts and prayers go out to the friends and family of Noe Campos Gonzalez, 25, who was fatally shot about 3:30 p.m.Wednesday at the La Brea Collective in Los Angeles.  The unarmed Gonzalez was shot in an apparent robbery attempt, and law enforcement have identified two suspects in the shooting.

The tragedy struck as the LA medical cannabis community is coming together to support dispensary owner Charles Lynch at the LA federal courthouse on Monday.  Lynch will be sentenced on federal charges for his role in running a medical cannabis dispensary.  Local law enforcement have been exceptional in working to bring the violent perpetrators to justice, which underscores the need for positive relationships between collectives and police in every community.   At this time, La Brea Collective and the Gonzalez family need the support of the community.  Thanks to everyone who’s been present through this difficult time.

ShareThis

1. In Vindictive Raid, Riverside Police Destroy Small Patient Collective

Riverside Police brought almost 20 law enforcement officers to a small medical cannabis collective, destroying and seizing property, harassing one 81 year old patient and another woman with severe multiple sclerosis, and arresting medical cannabis patient Martin Victor on $50,000 bond.

When the Riverside officers arrived at the nine-patient collective, Mr. Victor presented them with documentation affirming the legality of the 50 - 70 plant garden, well within the limits for a collective of that size.  However, the officers disregarded the recommendations and proceeded to destroy the garden, including a chain fence, cameras, and motion detectors.  They also seized medicine and other personal property, including the Victors’ computer. Police justified the harassment, destruction of property, and arrest of Victor by stating that the nine patients growing cannabis collectively for each other did not have a city permit to operate as a business under the recently released Attorney General guidelines.

Local medical cannabis activists Lanny Swerdlow and Dave Herrick were members of the small collective. Victor, who was arrested on three felony charges in the raid, was scheduled to testify last Monday in a trial in defense of Swerdlow, who is accused of “pushing” a reserve of the Riverside Sheriff’s Department at a public anti-medical cannabis group meeting.  Though Victor was in jail at the time of the trial, Swerdlow was nonetheless acquitted by a jury that did not find the Sheriff’s reserve officer “believable”.  Some have speculated the raid on the small collective was an attempt by the Riverside police to keep Victor from testifying and to intimidate, threaten, and suppress the activities of activists in the area.

There have long been accusations of rampant corruption of law enforcement in Riverside.  Though police abuse against medical cannabis patients is an unfortunate reality, rarely do we see the type of blatant and vindictive use of police power to harass and harm law abiding citizens, as in this case.  ASA is reviewing our options and may pursue legal action against Riverside Police.

2. Man Sues Seal Beach Police for Taking Medical Cannabis

In a backlash against law enforcement harassment, former Seal Beach resident Bruce Benedict, a medical cannabis patient who suffers from Hepatitis C, is suing city police for violation of health and safety codes and breach of contract, alleging they unlawfully seized 40-50 medical cannabis plants and then coerced him to move and to become a police informant.

The suit alleges that after Benedict called Seal Beach Police on an unrelated matter, officers Mike Henderson and David Barr entered his home after smelling cannabis. Though Benedict showed them his recommendations and asserted his status as a legal patient and caregiver under California law, the officers took pictures of Benedict’s medical cannabis and brought it to the local District Attorney, who refused to pursue charges against a legal patient.  Unsatisfied, the officers called federal agents and returned to Benedict’s home with the DEA, who arrested and charged him.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown recently released guidelines as a reference for law enforcement to use when dealing with medical cannabis encounters.  The guidelines state that police should follow state, not federal laws with regard to medical cannabis, and according to the guidelines, it would have been inappropriate for the Seal Beach officers to call DEA after finding Benedict compliant with local laws.

Though this is the first case of its kind, the Garden Grove decision by the California Supreme Court affirmed the right of the return of  medical cannabis to patients if it is wrongfully seized by police.

3. This Week’s Recap: City and County Medical Cannabis Regulations

A series of recent events have led to local governments enacting medical cannabis regulations.   The Attorney General guidelines, which describe how law enforcement should deal with medical cannabis encounters, has prompted some cities and counties to reconsider their medical cannabis bans and moratoriums.  Also, ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford recently sent letters to California counties that have refused to implement the medical cannabis ID card program.  The letters encouraged county supervisors to implement the program or face potential legal action by ASA, and led directly to some counties voting to implement the program.

Garden Grove Bans Dispensaries
At the city level, Garden Grove banned dispensaries within city limits last week, despite testimony from patients who spoke out against the ban, and no one coming forward in favor.  Currently there is one dispensary operating in Garden Grove, and police told city officials there had been not one legal incident at or near the facility in the seven months its been operating.  City officials then voted to ban it, claiming dispensaries would be too hard on police. They also claimed that the state hadn’t yet fully decided on the issue, despite the Attorney General guidelines which affirmed the legality of dispensaries.

Arcadia Officials Enact Moratorium
In Arcadia, city officials enacted a 45-day moratorium on medical cannabis dispensaries to study their options with regard to regulations.  However, Arcadia Mayor Robert Harbicht says he’s opposed to allowing patients safe access through collectives or dispensaries in his town.   Citizens have 45 days to organize and to provide information to city officials on the need for dispensaries to assist the community of medical cannabis patients.

Laguna Woods Becomes First in OC to Regulate Dispensaries
Laguna Woods, on the other hand, bucked a trend in Orange County last week and became the first in the area to approve and regulate dispensaries.  The retirement community has an average age of 78, and council members recognized that many citizens are dealing with end of life ailments and chronic pain.  Individuals who spoke in favor of the regulations at the city council meeting described buying medical cannabis from a street dealer, or not having access to cannabis at all.  “It’s a very positive step,” said Cha Hanna, Orange County ASA chapter coordinator. “All of the other cities that are banning [dispensaries] are violating the spirit of the Compassionate Use Act.”   Congratulations to everyone in Orange County, and especially to the OC ASA chapter.  If you would like to push for safe access in Orange, please email Cha:  channa.ocasa@yahoo.com.

Kings County Implements ID Cards
In another positive step this week, Kings County Supervisors voted to implement a state mandated program and distribute ID cards to medical cannabis patients. In response to ASA’s letter threatening potential legal action if they did not approve the program, Kings County attorneys contacted ASA before the vote to affirm that they would comply, almost 5 years after the ID card law was passed.  Congratulations yet again to ASA’s incredible legal team and all others who worked with Kings County!

ShareThis

Cheryl “Herbalicious” is an activist, a member of ASA and other organizations and a medical marijuana patient who suffers from chronic pain. She has met with all three of her congresswomen’s offices.  She has also attended city council meetings, volunteered at cooperatives, and written articles about medical cannabis for couple of cannabis publications such as Treating Yourself magazine. She has volunteered to help organize the Oct. 6, 11am protest for Charles C. Lynch outside the Federal Courthouse at 312 N. Spring St. Los Angeles.

The Verdict

On August 4, 2008, the jury in the Charles C. Lynch federal court case began their deliberations after arduous closing arguments, numerous jury instructions and a taxing two-week trial. I sat through that process to show my support for medical cannabis which has benefited me in many ways. Before leaving the courthouse on that first day of deliberation, I gave my phone number to both Reuven Cohen, one of Charlie’s federal public defenders, and to Charlie. Mr. Cohen said he would text me when the jury came back from deliberation.

I never got that text.  Later the following day, I found out via a web posting that Charlie was found guilty of conspiracy to possess and distribute marijuana, two counts of providing cannabis to adults under the age of 21 years old, possession with intent to distribute and maintaining a drug premises. The news of the verdict sent me into disarray.

How can Charlie be guilty? He followed all his business license requirements, city regulations, county restrictions, and state law. I’ve heard people question Charlie’s actions and accuse him of many things, but no evidence was presented in federal court that implied he broke state law. I realize he was being tried in federal court for breaking federal law, but he called the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) before opening his medical cannabis dispensary and was told, “It’s up to cities and counties to handle that [medical marijuana dispensary] matter”. And he did everything to follow local laws. Later, he explained to me some of the tedious precautions he took to operate a legitimate medical marijuana dispensary.

When I found out about the verdict, I was in disbelief. I called Charlie, but I got no answer, so I texted him. “Guilty on all five counts…still out on bail…have to appear on Oct. 6 8am…” was the message he sent back to me. I sent a text message announcing the difficult news to several people, including Don Duncan. Don responded with a text, “Terrible injustice! We must protest at his sentencing.” And so my protest planning escapades began.

When I Dream, I Dream Big

The very next morning, I got up early (actually I couldn’t sleep) and began working on protest plans even though the protest was exactly 2 months away.  I jumped the gun and began promoting an Oct. 6 nationwide protest in which every person who consumes cannabis would not go to work, school, and any other normal daily activity. The goal was to show the nation that we don’t work without our medicine and this country doesn’t work without us.

Call to Action

My goal is to get 2,000 supporters out to the federal courthouse on October 6. I told you, I dream big. Some people seem dead-set on focusing on 100 or 200 protesters.  I think if we set our sights on 200 protesters we’ll be lucky to get 20.  If we push for 2,000, we will get plenty of protesters and it would send a strong message to the federal government that we’re not going anywhere and we’re not going sit by and let them intimidate and interfere with our Constitutional and state rights.

What the government did to Charlie could easily happen to any and all dispensary owners and that scares me. I rely on dispensaries for my pain-relieving medicine. I can’t physically grow my own, and even if I could, my landlords would not allow it because they have been intimidated by federal actions in California. Why does it seem the good and innocent suffer from the federal government’s persecution of cannabis?

Two thousand protesters would be doable if ALL medical marijuana patients within Los Angeles attended the protest.  It seems there is plenty of time for patients to arrange for time off of work and school. I fully understand that not all patients can attend for different reasons.  Not being able to attend should not stop ALL patients from contributing in some way to these efforts.

See you all out at the protest October 6th at 11am at 312 N. Spring St. in Los Angeles, CA. For more information about the rally, please visit www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/FreeCharlesLynch.

ShareThis

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 2279 late last night, leaving hundreds of thousands of legal medical cannabis patients without protection from workplace discrimination. In a terse statement, the Governor said that employment protection was not the voters’ goal when they approved Proposition 215 in 1996. This is the same faulty logic offered by the California Supreme Court when they negated patients’ rights in Ross v. Ragingwire (2008), a decision called one of the worst of the year by Attorney Gerald Uelman in the September issue of California Lawyer.

Schwarzenegger said he does not want to interfere in employment decisions where medical cannabis is concerned. It is more likely, however, that powerful law enforcement and employer lobbyists exercised their usual influence over the Governor in stopping this reasonable and common sense measure. Both groups tried unsuccessfully to kill AB 2279 at committee hearings and on the floors of the Assembly and Senate.

It is unreasonable for the Governor to assume that California voters intended to legalize medical cannabis in 1996, but did not intend that qualified patients would enjoy basic protections from discrimination. In vetoing AB 2279, Schwarzenegger has effectively disenfranchised hundreds of thousands of law-abiding medical cannabis patients and rejected the endorsement of powerful labor organizations, including SEIU and AFSCME, representing over one million workers in the state.

Since February, I have met with dozens of Assemblymembers and Senators in an effort to build support for AB 2279. We succeeded in winning enough support to get the bill to the Governor’s desk. We also learned a lot about the intricacies of Sacramento politics and the perception of medical cannabis among our lawmakers. During more than twenty separate trips to the Capitol this year, I only rarely heard objections to the actual provisions of AB 2279. More commonly, lawmakers expressed concern about the perceptions surrounding medical cannabis – especially the perception of abuse. We are going to have to do a much better job answering these concerns and talking about how Proposition 215 is working for legitimate patients when we rejoin the fight for employment rights next year.

AB 2279 landed on the Schwarzenegger’s desk in the middle of an unprecedented constitutional battle between the Governor and lawmakers. The Governor vetoed a record number of bills this year in retaliation for the Legislature’s rejection of his budget proposal. It is impossible to know if this bill – and hundreds of others that were summarily dismissed – might have fared better absent this power struggle.

This was a tough year for medical cannabis in Sacramento, but we need not be discouraged by this delay. We are still fighting to protect and expand patients’ rights in California. Patients and advocates can be sure we will be back next year with a new bill and the same grassroots momentum that took us so far this year. In the meantime, we are still winning in California, with court victories like those in Garden Grove and San Diego, progress on local implementation, and growing resistance to federal interference and intimidation. The Governor may not get it, but our courts, local representatives, and the vast majority of Californians do!

ShareThis

After Years of Waiting, Police Return Medicine to Huntington Beach Patient

After three years of waiting Jim Spray, a former client of ASA’s who had his medical cannabis wrongly confiscated by Huntington Beach Police, had his cannabis and growing equipment returned to him under court order earlier this week.  The order from Orange County Superior Court Judge Thomas Borris came nearly nine months after the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled in Garden Grove v. Superior Court that qualified patients who have their medication wrongly seized by police have the right to get it back..

Spray, who was represented by ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford in his case (in which the court reached the same ruling) is the second patient in Huntington Beach, to have had medication returned that was seized by police. According to officials, Huntington Beach Police don’t have a policy on dealing with medical cannabis.

To read a detailed account of Spray’s case, take a look at Joe Elford’s blog post about this story.

Santa Barbara Dispensaries Close Their Doors, After Feds Threaten Landlords

According to Dale Gieringer of California NORML, this week several Santa Barbara dispensaries closed their doors, in the face of threats by the federal government against their landlords. In early August, officials from the United States Justice Department had met with the landlords and admonished them to evict their dispensary tenants or risk asset forfeiture.

Hundreds of dispensary landlords throughout the state have received letters from the DEA advising them of their tenants’ activities and telling them that they risked asset forfeiture. However, neither the DEA nor the DOJ had ever followed up on these letters, except during these meetings in Santa Barbara.

Though this situation appears to be isolated, it is a huge loss for Santa Barbara patients and the surrounding communities. Since the only other central coast dispensary, run by Charles Lynch who was recently convicted in a federal court, was shut down last year, safe access in the area is now in danger. Patients will either be forced to drive long distances to procure their medicine or may have to resort to the illicit market.

For more information, please see Dale Gieringer’s full press release.

Area Medical Cannabis Dispensaries Urge Los Angeles City Council to Move Forward with Regulations

Representatives from a number of local medical cannabis dispensing collectives spoke before the Los Angeles City Council last Friday to ask that the council move quickly on adopting regulations and creating an ordinance governing medical cannabis dispensaries. Council members were attentive and interested in the concerns brought forth, a noticeable change from past meetings.

The meetings came partly in response to the recent dispensary guidelines issued by Attorney General Jerry Brown, in which Brown asserted that nonprofit dispensing collectives and cooperatives are legal under California law.  The medical cannabis community requested that the council provide them with guidelines and regulations in order to engage in best practices and to better serve the community.  To date, Los Angeles has issued no such regulations.

ShareThis

In November of 2003, medical marijuana patients James Spray has his medical marijuana seized after members of the Huntington Beach Police came to his home in response to an “erroneous 911 call.” The officers seized approximately five ounces of marijuana, twelve immature plants, and jar of concentrated cannabis and marijuana cultivation equipment.

Spray, then, filed a motion in the Superior Court, but the motion was denied, with the judge claiming that there was no authority for this under California law. What made the case most interesting to me was that it occurred in Orange County. This was the hotbed for return of medical marijuana cases because that’s where the only published case occurred. In Chavez v. Superior Court, the court held that Marvin Chavez was not entitled to the return of his more than ten pounds of medical marijuana because he admitted that it was not all for his personal medical use. Courts and prosecutors throughout the state relied on this case for the proposition that no medical marijuana patient can have his marijuana returned even when legally possessed under California law. The Chavez case did not say this, and we had been fighting this in a number of cases; however, because one can only appeal the denial of a motion for return of property through a procedure known as a writ, the appellate courts could elect to ignore us altogether, which is what they did.

By the end of the day, I had filed a half dozen writs, and trust me, they are burdensome. But the most promising one involved Felix Kha, who was granted his motion for return of property and the City, for a change, had to file the writ after we threatened it with contempt for refusing to return his marijuana. that was in October of 2005. The case, then, just sat there for months and there was nothing we could do to get it going — until Jim Spray’s case came along. With the filing of the writ in his case, I could remind the court of appeal that the Garden Grove case was pending and that this was an issue that needed to be resolved. I had become frustrated and James Spray’s case was a vehicle to push the issue along. It did.

Soon after we filed the writ in Jim Spray’s case, the Garden Grove case got moving again. Eventually, both cases were consolidated for oral argument and, in bizarre fashion, I argued consecutively — first, as the Real Party in Interest on one side of the court in Garden Grove; then, moving my briefcase three feet over, as the Petitioner in Spray. All of the Justices cracked a smile on this one. That’s some lawyer humor for you.

Three months later, decisions were entered in favor of our side in both cases, as you probably all know by know. Garden Grove v. Superior Court (Kha). was published. Spray was not, but both resulted in orders for the return of medicine. Still, the difficulties continued.

For reasons still unknown to me, the Superior Court refused to issue a written order for the return of Spray’s property, despite being directed by the court of appeal to do so. This required a lot of persistence on Jim’s part, as well as some work by mine. Finally, after I sent the court a letter with the order and the opinion attached the trial court signed the order.

Jim was delighted when I gave him the news and, two days ago, he took the order to the Huntington Beach Police Department to get his medicine and equipment back. Although much of the cultivation equipment had been mysteriously destroyed and the dried marijuana and marijuana plants were unusable, one jar contained several grams of concentrated cannabis that Jim may still use. I never thought I’d see the day.

ShareThis

1. Fresno County Approves Patient ID Cards

This week, after months of persistent pressure from the Fresno ASA chapter, the Fresno County Supervisors finally approved the state mandated medical cannabis ID card program, becoming the 41st county in California to do so. Fresno County citizens who use cannabis for medical reasons will now be able to get a county-issued ID card to show police in law enforcement encounter.

Fresno supervisors had been opposed and dismissive of the program, stalling and postponing the issue on the county agenda for months.   However, the Fresno ASA chapter and MPP’s Aaron Smith never let up on county officials, attending every meeting and demanding to be heard.  Tragically, it took the passing of a dedicated and passionate ASA member, Dawn Nolan, for the county to realize that their stalling may literally have cost patients their lives.

In addition to Fresno, Tulare, Merced, and Kern counties in the San Joaquin Valley also issued cards to medical-cannabis users this year. Because of the hard work of Dawn and others, one of the strongest opposed counties has implemented the program, creating a model for any other holdouts.

The identification card mandate was passed by the state legislature in 2003to protect patients from being arrested and to make cannabis-related encounters easier on law enforcement, though some counties have refused to implement the program.  San Diego and San Bernardino counties lost twice in state court, aggressively refusing  to provide patients with simple ID cards so they won’t mistakenly be arrested.  Despite the losses, boards of supervisors of both counties recently voted to appeal to the CA Supreme Court. Hopefully, the action of Fresno supervisors will influence other hold-out counties.

2. Alameda County Supervisors Reject Edible Ban For some time, the Sheriff of Alameda County has been waging an attempt to impose stringent regulations on dispensaries, the most recent being a proposed ban on the sale of cannabis based edibles.  Although edibles are legal under California law as well as under recent guidelines released by the Attorney General, and are critical treatment for patients who are unable to inhale cannabis or for whom ingesting is more effective treatment, the sheriff has nonetheless been a convincing voice to County Supervisors.  The attempted ban that would be effective for all of unincorporated Alameda County, has been ongoing for months, and hearings have led to confusing testimony from the Sheriff.  Those present noted that the Sheriff was inexplicably aggressive and insulting to county supervisors, while the reasons for his virulent opposition to edible medication for seriously ill California patients remain unclear.  Supervisors were to meet on Monday to vote on the edible ban.

In response to the Sheriff, ASA filed a letter to Alameda Supervisors explaining the value of edibles to patients and suggesting the possibility of litigation if Alameda banned edible sales by dispensaries.  ASA also referenced the recently issued Attorney General guidelines to be sure officials were up-to-date with the status of California law.  As a result, the Board of Supervisors tabled the vote until at least the end of October, to give them time to review and educate themselves on the law, and for the time being, edible sales will continue.

ShareThis

This guest post is written by Michael Martin, a medical cannabis edible provider who was raided by the DEA and recently sentenced in federal court. You can find out more about Martin’s saga and contribute to his defense fund at www.freetainted.com.

Imagine waking up one morning to realize that you are locked in a battle with justice, morality, and the United States government.  Talk about a scary realization. When we set out on this battle to fight for our freedoms, in all honesty we felt pretty doomed, but vowed to not give up our beliefs in medical cannabis and our confidence in the community. Our organization understood from the beginning that we were making more than food products.  We always felt that we were changing the world, one candy bar at a time.

For Tainted Compassion, being actively involved in the community was imperative. We saw it as our duty and honor to serve patient needs where others would not, and defend the honor of the medical marijuana movement at all costs.  You might say we began preparing for this experience throughout the years, as we built our company with patient safety and community awareness being the cornerstones of our efforts. We strived to be more than just confectioners. Our efforts were driven by our beliefs in cannabis therapies and the need for social change. Instilling these beliefs in everyone involved with the company was a daily task, and we worked tirelessly to provide the cleanest and safest medications in the marketplace, in which patients could be confident of quality and effectiveness.  Our daily operations kept us focused on being a part of a larger community, and from the beginning of our battle for justice our business practices made a difference in the way we were perceived, treated, and prosecuted by the government. My best advice to people in the movement is to not wait until something happens to begin preparing for it. Look around and see what could be done better now and make improvements where needed.

I can remember getting home from court the day I surrendered to authorities, looking around my ransacked house and just taking in the magnitude of what I was up against.  I looked at the broken doors, the cracked safe, the piles of paperwork scattered about and understood clearly that this was a war I was entrenched in with an armed and well-funded militant group that used failed policies and flawed logic to invade my home and businesses. Overwhelming is an understatement. I was outraged by the senseless actions of the government and I was worried for my family. My wife assured me that she had confidence in me and supported my efforts to create awareness for the cause through our family’s toughest moments. My wife understood I was not just some pothead who had taken things too far, but a medical patient and a person who had strong convictions about the rights of people to use cannabis as a medicine. Having this support at home allowed me to focus more clearly on the task at hand, and gave me confidence to carry on in the face of danger. I would strongly encourage for people to surround themselves with people who understand their beliefs and support their actions.

The next hurdle to overcome was to begin changing public perception surrounding our case. We counted on the staff at ASA to work with the media and other outlets to change the climate of the dialogue surrounding our case. They worked tirelessly to help make people understand that we did not just make “pot candy” that was a danger to children, but that we made edible forms of cannabis medicines that were only distributed to qualified patients in California.  I remember spending weeks on end combatting false perception on different websites and blogs that had slandered our intentions and bought in to the DEA’s ruthless interpretation of our case.  It can drive one crazy, as the internet allows for anyone anywhere to publish anything, and often this form of media is dangerously inaccurate. I can recall having to simply stop wasting my energy fighting with people who had no idea of who I was and did not understand our situation. It had become maddening.

A week after I had turned myself in I was honored to be invited to speak with ASA in Los Angeles at a rally in front of the governor’s office. I remember speaking to the crowd of some 300 medical cannabis activists and was energized by the experience. It was a much needed outlet for my frustrations, and a rallying cry for the movement to get moving. That night the Arts District healing Center was raided and I was on the front lines protesting the DEA’s actions. I remember being very angry, as I saw firsthand the injustices our community faced, as armed gunmen forcibly removed property from the building. We stood in solidarity that night and vowed to continue fighting these injustices.

A week later I found myself face to face with the same agents that had raided my house, as a dispensary in Hayward was in the progress of being raided.  I pleaded with the agents to think about their actions. I screamed for them to stop the senseless invasions on our community and focus their efforts on finding real criminals. I begged them to research the efficacies of medical cannabis and listen to science and medical professionals. They were not listening.  They laughed at me. I understood clearly that there was no reasoning with them.

I organized a protest at the Oakland Federal Building, to be followed by a bake sale. I showed up in a Santa suit carrying a large uncle Sam head that I had painted that simply stated “LIAR.” Several activists joined me, as we sang Christmas carols and protested the violent raids in our community. I spent the better part of a day making a large Christmas card for the DEA, which some thirty activists signed and we delivered to the security staff at the federal building. My wife clearly thought I was insane, but I felt compelled to make some sort of a stand to combat the injustices of the situation. It was a moral victory, if nothing else.

But it may have served as a practical victory, as well.  The prosecutor acknowledged his awareness of the protests and offered us a very generous plea bargain, considering that he could have fought to have me incarcerated for a decade. I had come to a fork in the road. The decision was clear. I could put my future in the hands of a jury that would have no background on the medicinal intentions of our products, or I could accept the government’s offer and make my plea to the sentencing judge to have leniency when considering the unique circumstances of our case. After a lot of soul searching and discussions with my family and friends, I reluctantly accepted the lesser of two evils, and spared my family and many others involved with our organization the grueling process of a grand jury indictment and full blown investigation into every corner of my life.  It saddened me to have to admit guilt when I believed I was doing the right thing, but I could not gamble with my family’s future and risk spending ten plus years behind bars on principle alone.

At this point we were faced with a new set of challenges. We shifted our focus to making the probation office, the judge, and the prosecution aware of the difficulties facing the medical cannabis community and the reasoning that had lead us to become providers of medical cannabis.  We began reaching out for support from patients, activists, and people close to us in hopes that through the words of many the voice of reason would prevail. We began a letter writing campaign that we hoped would help others to understand that we did not stand alone in our beliefs of cannabis therapeutics. We gathered these letters through community events, partnerships with several medical cannabis organizations and their outlets, and through an online forum for submitting letters of support. We ended up with about a hundred statements of support addressed to the judge, ranging from very personal encounters from those who know and love us, to abstract letters that affirmed the support of our cause. The culmination of these efforts were invaluable, as the judge at sentencing acknowledged her awareness of our support through the many letters she had received. It took a lot of persistent work to gather and submit these many different statements, but I truly believe that it was this community support that made a real difference in the eventual outcome of us not being incarcerated for our efforts. I cannot thank everyone enough who took time out of their lives to help us out.

I began writing about my experiences early on in the process at freetainted.com, as I found it a good release for my energy and it helped me to create understanding for our cause. I remember wondering if anyone besides my mother ever read my work, as I would occasionally post it to activist lists and forums throughout the community. Every once in a while someone would respond in support, but I did not think that there were many people listening. I was wrong. I began receiving calls and letters of support and inquiries from publications about using my writings. People became interested and involved, as I allowed them to be a part of the process by sharing my deepest thoughts and most intimate feelings about my future. This is not always easy, as you worry how much is too much information and you often can feel as if you are whining too much about your situation.  You wonder if people really care and worry about burdening others with your personal plight. I continued to press on with my writing though, as it simply made me feel better.

What began as a simple outlet for my frustrations and thoughts about our case, also became one of the most valuable resources in our fight for justice. Our blog was not only read by active members of the medical cannabis community, but also read by attorneys and officers of the court. It provided a much deeper background into our views and beliefs and created understanding in places that often cannot see clearly the views of the medical cannabis movement. It created a dialogue of knowledge that people who were interested could access and make more informed decisions about who we were and what we stood for. I was told by many that came out to support us that they had followed my writings and were motivated to advocate on our behalf. It was inspiring. I was honored that my ramblings had served a purpose and that people felt like they knew me before they had ever met me. I was astonished by the truly caring nature of these folks that had been following along in cyberspace, and it was touching to see people who were glad to stand by us in our most trying moment.

On our day of sentencing we were surrounded by supporters from far and wide.  People had travelled from long distances, taken time off work, and were passionate about helping us find a more just path.  I recall turning around before our press conference and seeing fifty plus people holding signs in support of medical cannabis. True activism was taking place on this otherwise regular Wednesday afternoon and I knew at that moment that our months of hard work and efforts had paid off. I knew that no matter what happened in that courtroom that we had accomplished bringing together a large constituency of supporters to be witness to history. Friends I had not seen in a decade came from out of town to stand by my side and to comfort my family. People continually thanked me for my efforts and I was surrounded by a wonderful group of community activists that vowed to keep fighting for the rights of patients and providers.

It was an anxious afternoon, as I stood amidst the wooden backdrop of the federal courtroom patiently awaiting the decision that would affect my life for years to come. I had mentally prepared to deal with the ramifications of being incarcerated and I was ready for the worst. I was amazed when the Judge began inquiring into the rationale of the legal parameters concerning medical cannabis, as this was unlike any of the experiences I had witnessed or read about in other cases involving medical marijuana. It seemed as if somewhere along the lines the judge had understood that there was a difference between cannabis and medical cannabis and that she felt it was worth exploring further. My attorneys did a fine job of trying to explain in detail the ever changing climate in the battle between state rights and federal justice. I recall thinking that our movement had come a long way, as a federal judge was now interested in learning more about more than whether or not a law was simply broken, but also why that law had been broken. There was a recognition of our community’s beliefs and it was comforting to feel somewhat validated by the experience.

At the end of the day I was still a convicted felon.  I was still sentenced to two years of confinement, split between home confinement and a halfway house, and will be monitored for five years. I had still lost everything in the process of it all, but I still felt as if I had won a small victory by avoiding a long period of incarceration and loss of time with my family.  When you begin a process feeling as if you are doomed and will be imprisoned for many years of your life, it is invigorating when you are spared a long trip to prison in favor of a lesser alternative.  Of course I regret that we had to overcome these odds and that we are still branded as criminals, but I am grateful for the compassion that was shown in not taking us away from our loved ones.  I regret that my co-workers were thrust into these positions, as they did not deserve to lose their liberties over medical cannabis foods. They performed wonderfully in the face of aggression and I was proud to have had such a great and well-informed staff. They will forever hold a special place in my heart and can stand proud as valuable examples of courage and valor we should all expect from those we work with in this movement for change.

The many different components that worked in our favor to help secure a more just outcome renews my faith in community support and involvement. I cannot express enough the gratitude I had when the entire courtroom stood in solidarity behind me. It proved firsthand that a small group of dedicated citizens working together CAN create real change and continue to chip away at the obstacles that stand in the way of safe access.

If you have not done so already, reach out to the many others facing imprisonment and show support for the movement by writing letters on their behalf. Take time to go to court, reach out and talk to public officials, and by all means vote. Often times our movement does not move very rapidly, but we continue to see progress. We will continue to see progress, as we get more people involved with direct action and roles of support.  I encourage everyone to do your part and when you are done with that find a friend and teach them how to do their part. Through persistence, we will continue to knock down barriers and eventually safe access WILL be a reality in our society.

ShareThis

A bill sponsored by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) to protect medical cannabis patients from workplace discrimination will soon arrive on the desk of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Whether the Governor signs Assemblymember Mark Leno’s (D-SF) AB 2279 or vetoes this important legislation depends, in large part, on what he hears from medical cannabis supporters like you in the next few days.

You may have already seen an email or flyer from ASA asking you to call the Governor. Have you done it yet? Now is the time… call Governor Schwarzenegger today!

You will not be alone when you speak up in support of AB 2279. The bill is endorsed by Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), who represent over one million California workers. The National Lawyers Guild and numerous health care advocacy organizations are also on board.

ASA sponsored AB 2279 and worked hard to get it passed in both houses of the California legislature in response to a California Supreme Court decision in February that upheld the termination of a legal medical cannabis patient, based solely on the fact that he used medical cannabis! We have had dozens of reports of employment discrimination and hundreds of calls from worried employees since then. We need the Governor’s signature to be sure that legal patients can stay in the workforce and be productive members of society.

ASA Members and allies have mobilized a tremendous grassroots campaign to get AB 2279 this far. We need everyone to pitch in one more time right now to let the Governor know how his constituents feel about this bill. Please take a moment right now to ask Governor Schwarzenegger to sign AB 2279.

ASA staff has met with Governor Schwarzenegger’s staff on three occasions since last October to talk about his role in protecting medical cannabis patients in California, including AB 2279. This is his first chance to take concrete action by signing the bill.

There is no time to lose. The Governor will beginning signing and vetoing bills as soon as the current budget impasse is resolved. He is already hearing from lobbyists representing law enforcement and employers, who oppose AB 2279. Now, he needs to hear from patients and medical cannabis advocates en masse. Please act again today to protect patients’ rights!

ShareThis