Email from Mr. Naulls requesting court support:
Here are the details:
The government moved to dismiss all drug charges if I plead to /filing a
false tax return/, a felony under IRS guidelines. We both know that I
did not file a false return and used a CPA. However, since a mmj
dispensary is "illegal" under federal law all exemptions and write offs
that my CPA made were technically illegal under IRS guidelines.
In a nutshell my attorney said that they wanted to get a pound of flesh
and this is their hook line and sinker. Had I not filed at all with the
IRS, then I would be facing tax evasion charges. A perfect catch 22.
But I digress, they are dropping all mmj charges.
The support is needed because they still want to sentence me to */more
/*home confinement, even though I've already served 3 years in pre-trial
home confinement. They also want me to pay restitution and fines
amounting to over 15K, which I'm also trying to get relieved of because
of the assets and forfeiture taken during the raid should. This should
arguably /offset/ any sort of restitution or fines the government is
trying to impose upon me.
This will most likely be the last Federal mmj case ever prosecuted in
Riverside County. Filling the court seats to capacity sends a strong
message to the judge that I provided a /service /to the community and
also have the /support/ of the community. Community service and support
are a strong basis for downward departure.
U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California
Courtroom Judge Virginia Phillips
3470 Twelfth St
Riverside, CA 92501
August 2nd 9am.
I would be sincerely humbled and blessed to have not only your support
but attendance as well.
Thank you,
-Ronnie Naulls
Friday, July 30, 2010
Ronnie Naulls Sentencing
Federal Medical Marijuana Legal Challenge Bolstered by New Veterans Policy Directive
VA policy undermines federal position that "marijuana has no currently accepted medical use"
San Francisco, CA -- Medical marijuana patient advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed an important legal brief today in a Ninth Circuit case which aims to correct statements by the federal government that "marijuana has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." The ASA legal filing points to a policy directive issued last week by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), recognizing medical marijuana and distinguishing it from other illegal controlled substances. In its brief, ASA contends that the VHA directive bolsters advocates' arguments that marijuana does indeed have medical value.
"Recognition of marijuana's therapeutic benefits by a federal agency makes it more difficult for the government to argue against marijuana's medical value," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who filed the notice with the court. "The government's reasons for maintaining an outdated and harmful position on medical marijuana are running out." In the July 22nd policy directive, the VHA reversed its position that medical marijuana is no different than other banned controlled substances, and instructed VA physicians that "patients participating in state medical marijuana programs must not be denied VHA services."
The Department of Veterans Affairs Under Secretary for Health Dr. Robert Petzel also clarified in a July 6th letter to veteran advocate Michael Krawitz that, "If a veteran obtains and uses medical marijuana in a manner consistent with state law, testing positive for marijuana would not preclude the Veteran from receiving opioids for pain management." The letter further stated that, "Standard pain management agreements should draw a clear distinction between the use of illegal drugs, and legal medical marijuana." ASA has received numerous reports of veterans being denied pain medication for refusing to discontinue their use of medical marijuana. In many cases, the therapeutic use of marijuana has significantly diminished veterans' need for pharmaceutical medication.
ASA filed its lawsuit in February of 2007 in an attempt to correct the government's position on medical marijuana. After the challenge was denied by the U.S. District Court, ASA filed an appeal in April of 2008 and is still awaiting a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. ASA's lawsuit was preceded by an administrative petition filed in 2005 under the Data Quality Act, a law passed during the Clinton Administration to ensure that the government bases its policy decisions on sound science and not politics.
According to Krawitz's group, Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access, more than 100,000 veterans, or 27% of veterans treated by the VA, have been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Based on reports received by ASA, PTSD is one of the most common medical conditions that veterans treat using medical marijuana.
Further Information:
Veterans Health Administration policy directive issued on July 22nd: http://www1.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=2276
Letter from Department of Veterans Affairs to veteran advocate Michael Krawitz: www.drugsense.org/temp/Undersecretary-Jun6.pdf
Legal brief filed today by ASA: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/DQA_Rule28.pdf
Data Quality Act appeal filed by ASA: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/DQA_Appeal_Brief.pdf
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Federal Medical Marijuana Trial - James Stacy Hearing Moved to 1:30pm
Please come out and support Mr. Stacy in court tomorrow!
The hearing time was moved up to 1:30pm in Courtroom 15 (940 Front St. San Diego CA, 92101)
Get there early as the courtroom fills up fast!
On July 13th, 2010, U.S. District Court Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz denied a defense today for James Stacy, a San Diego-area medical marijuana provider raided in September 2009 by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Bonnie Dumanis' Narcotics Task Force. Stacy was raided by the DEA a month before the Justice Department issued a new policy on medical marijuana in October, deemphasizing federal enforcement in medical marijuana states. Despite the new policy, the Obama Administration is continuing its prosecution against Stacy, who will be tried on August 30th as the first such trial under under the new DOJ policy.
"It's far worse to then deny the accused a defense in federal court, all but guaranteeing a conviction in spite of the defendant's compliance with state law." Because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the federal government can effectively exclude any evidence of medical use or compliance with state medical marijuana laws.
The denial of Stacy's medical marijuana defense in federal court has attracted the attention of some Members of Congress who are working to end this unfair practice. "Despite a new Justice Department policy on medical marijuana enforcement, James Stacy was still denied a defense in federal court," said Congressman Sam Farr (D-CA), author of HR3939, the Truth in Trials Act, legislation that would allow defendants like Stacy to use evidence of state law compliance in federal court. "The Truth in Trials Act would correct this aberration of justice and ensure that no one else will needlessly face years in prison without the means to defend themselves."
The Stacy trial and recent DEA raids come as the City and County of San Diego are both deliberating local regulations on distribution of medical marijuana. Advocates argue that federal actions in collaboration with local law enforcement aim to undermine efforts to regulate the same activity that's being criminalized. San Diego has historically been hostile to medical marijuana, filing a lawsuit against local advocates and the State of California to avoid implementing the state-mandated ID card system and conducting more than 50 DEA raids during the Bush Administration. Yet, patients and advocates have been supported by two San Diego Grand Juries that have issued strong recommendations to fully implement state law at the local level.
"Stacy's prosecution and denial of a defense underscores the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference," continued Woodson. "It's not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws."
Further Information:
Ruling by federal judge denying Stacy's defense: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Stacy_Ruling.pdf
October 2009 Justice Department policy directive on medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
VA Directive on Medical Marijuana; Vets using medical cannabis won’t be denied benefits
WASHINGTON DC - Today, in a historic move, the Under Secretary of Health at the Department of Veterans affairs, Robert E. Pezel, M.D., issued Directive 2010-035, providing clarification and guidance on access to and the use of medical marijuana by Veteran patients.
The directive states; “patients participating in state medical marijuana programs must not be denied VHA services.”
Although the directive prohibits VA doctors from actually recommending or prescribing the use of medical marijuana, Veteran patients now can, participate in the department’s substance abuse programs, pain control programs, and other clinical programs where the use of marijuana may be considered inconsistent with treatment goals, without the fear of being denied services.
The directive follows a letter sent to Michael Kravitz of Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access (VMMA), in which Dr. Petzel wrote, “lf a veteran obtains and uses medical marijuana in a manner consistent with state law, testing positive for marijuana would not preclude the Veteran from receiving opioids for pain management in a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility. The Veteran would need to inform his provider of the use of medical marijuana, and of any other non-VA prescribed medications he or she is taking to ensure that all medications, including opioids, are prescribed in a safe manner”.
Michael Kravitz is the executive director of Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access (VMMA) an advocacy group “committed to protecting the rights of veteran patients and health care professionals by advocating for safe and legal access to marijuana (cannabis) for all appropriate therapeutic uses and to encourage research on marijuana as a treatment alternative” www.veteransformedicalmarijuana.org
Mr. Kravitz has been at the forefront of the struggle for veterans’ access to medical marijuana and has requested numerous times, clarification from the Veteran’s Health Administration (VHA) on their policy regarding the practice of prescribing opioid therapy for pain management for veterans who provide documentation of the use of medical marijuana in accordance with state law.
This directive signals a first step that may lead to a serious and lasting change in our federal medical marijuana policy, one that actually protects patient’s rights and ensures safe access.
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.safeaccesssd.org | www.safeaccessnow.org
Sunday, July 25, 2010
COURT SUPPORT FOR JAMES STACY – 7/28 – 2pm
WHEN: Wednesday, July 28 from 2:00 pm to 4:30 pm - COURTROOM 15
WHERE: 940 Front St. San Diego CA, 92101
Please come out and show your support. This is a status hearing where the Judge will hear arguments about his recent ruling denying Mr. Stacy a defense in court and barring him from telling the truth in his trial regarding medical marijuana.
The Stacy trial and recent DEA raids come as the City and County of San Diego are both deliberating local regulations on distribution of medical marijuana. Advocates argue that federal actions in collaboration with local law enforcement aim to undermine efforts to regulate the same activity that's being criminalized. San Diego has historically been hostile to medical marijuana, filing a lawsuit against local advocates and the State of California to avoid implementing the state-mandated ID card system and conducting more than 50 DEA raids during the Bush Administration. Yet, patients and advocates have been supported by two San Diego Grand Juries that have issued strong recommendations to fully implement state law at the local level.
"Stacy's prosecution and denial of a defense underscores the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference," continued Woodson. "It's not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws."
Get Involved, Get Active, Make a difference!
www.safeaccesssd.org
Join ASA www.safeaccessnow.org
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Veterans Administration to Allow Medical Marijuana Use
Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access
Over the last few years there have been a large number of veterans coming home from foreign wars with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, serious injuries, and a slew of other ailments. A lot of them have chosen to use medical marijuana to alleviate many of their symptoms and have found it to be a very effective treatment.
Veterans, who settle in states where cannabis is a legal medicine have ran into serious hurdles with their Veterans Administration (VA) doctors including being denied pain medication in cases where they use cannabis and tell their doctor’s about it.
Mr. Kravitz has been at the forefront of the struggle for veterans’ access to medical marijuana and has requested numerous times, clarification from the Veteran’s Health Administration (VHA) on their policy regarding the practice of prescribing opioid therapy for pain management for veterans who provide documentation of the use of medical marijuana in accordance with state law.
Michael Kravitz is the executive director of Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access (VMMA) an advocacy group “committed to protecting the rights of veteran patients and health care professionals by advocating for safe and legal access to marijuana (cannabis) for all appropriate therapeutic uses and to encourage research on marijuana as a treatment alternative” www.veteransformedicalmarijuana.org
On July 6, 2010, Dr. Robert A. Petzel of the VHA finally responded to the many letters and calls for clarification from Mr. Kravitz. For the first time in decades, the VHA seems to be shifting their policy from zero tolerance for medical cannabis towards supporting using cannabis as a medicine in states where it is legal.
Mr. Petzel wrote “lf a veteran obtains and uses medical marijuana in a manner consistent with state law, testing positive for marijuana would not preclude the Veteran from receiving opioids for pain management in a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility. The Veteran would need to inform his provider of the use of medical marijuana, and of any other non-VA prescribed medications he or she is taking to ensure that all medications, including opioids, are prescribed in a safe manner”.
In a New York Times Article titled “V.A. Easing Rules for Users of Medical Marijuana”, Dan Frosch wrote that a VA “department directive, expected to take effect next week, resolves the conflict in veterans facilities between federal law, which outlaws marijuana, and the 14 states that allow medicinal use of the drug, effectively deferring to the states”.
In the same article, Mr. Frosch quoted Dr. Robert Jesse the principal deputy under secretary for health in the veterans department as saying “when states start legalizing marijuana we are put in a bit of a unique position because as a federal agency, we are beholden to federal law…we didn’t want patients who were legally using marijuana to be administratively denied access to pain management programs, the policy will not permit department doctors to prescribe marijuana. But it will address the concern of many patients who use the drug that they could lose access to their prescription pain medication if caught”.
Eugene Davidovich of San Diego Americans for Safe Access, a veteran and medical marijuana patient said “this is a pivotal moment veterans, through the hard work of folks like Michael Kravitz, veterans who have in some cases paid very dearly for their country, will not have to hide and conceal the fact that cannabis helps them, they should now be able to openly discuss their conditions and treatments with their doctors. We are hoping that this is one of the first steps in creating a serious and lasting change in our federal medical marijuana policy, one that actually protects patient’s rights and ensures access”.
###
Letter from the VA: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/Undersecretary-Jun6.pdf
For more information on VMMA visit: www.veteransformedicalmarijuana.org
NY Times Article: V.A. Easing Rules for Users of Medical Marijuana
Join ASA www.safeaccessnow.org
San Diego ASA – www.safeaccesssd.org
Jurors Rights Education Campaign
There are currently between two and three dozen medical cannabis patients and caregivers facing defenseless federal trials in California alone. Prosecutors fight hard to keep any information about medical cannabis out of courtrooms to make sure that they get their conviction.
If the same Californian voters who supported Proposition 215 knew that they may be unwittingly convicting a medical cannabis provider and knew their rights as a juror, there would be a greater chance of a jury issuing a NOT GUILTY verdict.
I. Juror's Rights Information
Jurors have the Power: The trial jury protected under our Constitution is a judicial body with more power than Congress, the President, or even the Supreme Court. Judges say the "issue of law" is for them to determine, and instruct the jury to rule only on the fact of whether or not a defendant broke the law. Actually, a jury has the power to decide the issues of law under which the defendant is charged, as well as the facts. In our system of checks and balances, the jury is our final arbiter for justice.
Jurors have the right to acquit: This power is referred to as jury "discretion." Just as police use discretion on whether to enforce the law; and prosecutors use discretion when charging someone with a violation of the law; and judges use discretion in deciding whether to dismiss those charges; jurors also have the power to use discretion in applying the law.
Jurors can question the Law: In an American courtroom there are in a sense twelve judges in attendance, not just one. As the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Maryland ruled, "If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic of passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision." (US vs Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006 (1969).
Jurors "Know your Rights": You must know your rights because, once selected for jury duty, nobody will inform you of your power to judge both law and fact. The judge's instructions to the jury may be to the contrary. YOU, as a juror armed with the knowledge of your real rights, powers, and duties, can with your single vote of not guilty "hang" a jury. Although it won't be an acquittal, at least the defendant will not be convicted of violating an unjust or unconstitutional law. This is how the average citizen can help keep in check the power of government and bring to a halt the enforcement of faulty acts of the legislature.
II. Ways to Educate Potential Jurors:
* Letters to the editor: LTEs are great ways to spread the word. Consider writing letters during a key trial, and make sure to highlight the fact that federal medical cannabis defendants cannot invoke a medical defense.
* Educate your friends and family: Any citizen could be a juror at some point so bring up jurors' rights whenever you discuss your advocacy work.
* Hold public forums: Utilize an already organized population, such as a church or university, to hold public forums on jurors' rights.
* Leaflet court houses: Do juror education outside courthouses often. Remember the tips below. . .
III. The Dos and Don'ts of Juror Education near Courthouses
WARNING: The courts see a very fine line between Jury Education and Jury Tampering. Use the guidelines below to keep on the right side of the law!
While Doing Juror Education, Don't:
* Give out information on a specific defendant.
* Ask people if they are jurors.
* Target only specific trials.
* Enter the courtroom and see the jury.
While Doing Juror Education, Do:
* Keep medical cannabis subject matter and jury education separate.
* Educate everyone.
* Keep a consistent schedule at courthouses.
Download this Flier and Get Started Now!
Thursday, July 22, 2010
COURT SUPPORT - TODAY 7/23 - 8:30pm - Dpt 23
Marijuana is not just medicine in states that have Medical Marijuana laws. Medical marijuana patients are getting arrested, going to trial, and going to jail all over the country. As advocates, it is our job to highlight these injustices both in state and federal courts.
Federal laws make it difficult for patients and caregivers to speak out about medical marijuana because of fear of harassment, arrest, and imprisonment. That is why supporting someone whose use is already in the public eye is a good way to bring this crisis to our community's attention.
Hundreds of Californian medical marijuana patients went to jail before the law changed in 1996. Several of these patients and caregivers stood up in the public eye and pointed out the injustices facing them, which helped define medical marijuana's place in California politics. (Courtesy of ASA)
Your support is needed in court today at 1:15pm in Department 11 for two Legitimate medical marijuana patients (Laura and Tim from Encinitas) that are being victimized by the bias driven Bonnie Dumanis prosecutorial machine for attemting to cultivate their own medicine in their own home.
WHAT: Court Support for Laura and Tim
WHEN: Today – July 22, 2010 - 1:15pm
WHERE: San Diego Superior Court – 220 W. Broadway, San Diego CA 92101 – Department 11
Eugene Davidovich
T: 619-621-8446
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Medical Marijuana Advocates Protest Recent DEA Raids in Michigan & California
On July 6th, the DEA raided John Roberts and Stephanie Whisman, two licensed medical marijuana caregivers from Thomas Township, MI. Then, the next day, on July 7th, the DEA raided the Covelo, CA home of Joy Greenfield, the first collective to apply for the Mendocino County Sheriff's cultivation permit program. Greenfield even had county-issued "zip-ties" on her plants designating their legality under state and local law. Then, on July 9th, the DEA conducted multiple raids on medical marijuana dispensaries in the San Diego area, arresting 12 people. Among other items seized in the raids, the DEA took money, medical marijuana and cultivation equipment, as well as financial and private patient records.
"Patients are fed up with platitudes and half promises from the Obama Administration," said Eugene Davidovich of the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access. "We're here at the federal courthouse to vocally oppose continued attempts to subvert state law, and to push for a federal policy that actually protects patients in this country."
John Roberts, who was well below the legal limit as a caregiver in Michigan, produced oil-based medical marijuana that was used by seriously ill patients, including a 6-year-old girl with brain cancer. The young girl, who because of the DEA raid will now go without her medication, successfully used the oil to treat her headaches, to help her sleep, and as an appetite stimulant. Roberts had held a protest less than a week before the July 6th DEA raid to bring attention to ongoing law enforcement harassment of patients in the Saginaw area.
The most recent federal raids and subsequent protests come as Acting DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart is preparing to be confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Leonhart is a Bush Administration appointee who was Deputy Administrator under then-DEA Administrator Karen Tandy. Both were responsible for more than 200 raids in California and other medical marijuana states during the Bush Presidency. In her capacity as Acting Administrator, Leonhart also moved to block medical marijuana research in January of this year by refusing to grant an application that would have expanded therapeutic studies in the U.S.
San Diego DEA Raids Protest
Help us protest the DEA raids and the continued bias driven effort by local and federal authorities to subvert state law. Patients are fed up with platitudes and half promises from the Obama Administration. Stop raiding patients, and let the state courts resolve state issues!
Come out today at noon to vocally oppose continued attempts to subvert state law, and to push for a federal policy that actually protects patients in this country.
WHAT: Protest Against DEA Raids
WHEN: Wednesday, July 21 noon
WHERE: Federal Courthouse – 940 Front St. San Diego CA
Eugene Davidovich
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Monday, July 19, 2010
Anaheim Court Decision Postponed
"A decision was expected Monday – and eagerly awaited by attorneys and both sides. But the court posted on its website just after 1 p.m. that the written ruling is now set to be released Aug. 18".
Marijuana dispensary ruling a 'cliffhanger'
By ERIC CARPENTER, THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
ANAHEIM – A major ruling on whether cities have the right to ban medical-marijuana dispensaries will have to wait until next month.
The California 4th District Court of Appeal is considering an appeal of Anaheim's ordinance that prohibits such dispensaries and makes it a crime to operate them.
The case could have wide-reaching impact: Dozens of cities are looking to Anaheim's case to establish whether municipalities can legally prohibit medical-marijuana dispensaries within their borders.
A decision was expected Monday – and eagerly awaited by attorneys and both sides. But the court posted on its website just after 1 p.m. that the written ruling is now set to be released Aug. 18.
No reason was immediately given by the court for the delay. Read More...
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL MARIJUANA – SORRY IT ISN’T LEGAL
- There is federal law that makes ALL marijuana illegal for ANY purpose in ANY state;
- There is a California statute that says – well it’s still illegal, but we are not going to prosecute this group of people when they use it under a doctor’s recommendation;
- This loophole gives Californians state protection, if they are in compliance with the state and local laws;
- Even if you are in full compliance with state law, you may still be arrested for possessing and/or cultivating marijuana, but you do have an affirmative defense in court.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Rx Cannabis Raid Relief Concert and Expo
Aug. 14th 2010 - 4:30pm - 9:30pm
Mark your calendars and get ready to have a great time, get involved and make a real difference against this fierce fight on patients in San Diego.
This is a historic event in San Diego that will help raise funds for James Stacy and his Federal Medical Marijuana fight, as well as other defendants fighting against these illegal raids and persecutions of legitimate medical marijuana patients attempting to follow the law.
Admission is free! There are over 50 exhibitor spaces available!
The RX Cannabis Raid Relief Benefit Concert and Expo will feature and exciting evening of exhibitors, speakers, and bands at the world famous Balboa Bark Club Ball Room.
Meet with medical cannabis activist groups, medical collectives and alternative health care professionals from all over San Diego County and around the state. Listen to great speakers and learn the latest in medical cannabis law, regulations, as well as our strategy for Safe Access in San Diego.
For years now the Narcotics Task Force combined with the District Attorney’s office has been terrorizing patients in San Diego through vindictive, bias driven prosecutions, raids, and outright harassment. You can help the victims of this Reefer Madness Propaganda and Dumanis’ Fierce Fight against patients stand up for their rights.
By supporting this event, and helping raise money for the victims, you are helping put a stop to the cycle of plea bargains and we can begin to hold the responsible parties in our government accountable for their actions of waste, fraud, and abuse of power.
James Stacy and Laura R. are two of the many individuals that are currently being prosecuted and persecuted for providing safe access within the State law. This benefit goes directly to their defense fund to help them continue fighting without accepting a plea. Come support our heroes and learn more about the movement.
Sponsorship opportunities include: Food, Exhibitor Tables for Collectives, Law Offices, Pain Management, Chiropractors, Doctors, Jewelry, Clothing, as well as other advertising and promotional opportunities.
Contact James Dean Stacy for Details! 760-758-8500 – movementinaction@gmail.com
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
San Diego Medical Marijuana Provider Denied a Defense in Federal Court
San Diego, CA -- U.S. District Court Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz denied a defense today for James Stacy, a San Diego-area medical marijuana provider raided in September 2009 by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Stacy was raided by the DEA a month before the Justice Department issued a new policy on medical marijuana in October, deemphasizing federal enforcement in medical marijuana states. Despite the new policy, the Obama Administration is continuing its prosecution against Stacy, who will be tried on August 30th as the first such trial under under the new DOJ policy.
"It's unconscionable for the federal government to continue prosecuting these cases and ruining people's lives," said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs at Americans for Safe Access, the leading medical marijuana advocacy group in the U.S. "It's far worse to then deny the accused a defense in federal court, all but guaranteeing a conviction in spite of the defendant's compliance with state law." Because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the federal government can effectively exclude any evidence of medical use or compliance with state medical marijuana laws.
The denial of Stacy's medical marijuana defense in federal court has attracted the attention of some Members of Congress who are working to end this unfair practice. "Despite a new Justice Department policy on medical marijuana enforcement, James Stacy was still denied a defense in federal court," said Congressman Sam Farr (D-CA), author of HR3939, the Truth in Trials Act, legislation that would allow defendants like Stacy to use evidence of state law compliance in federal court. "The Truth in Trials Act would correct this aberration of justice and ensure that no one else will needlessly face years in prison without the means to defend themselves."
Eugene Davidovich, head of the San Diego chapter of ASA and another provider who was raided last September in the multi-agency operation said that, "If the federal government's going to obstruct evidence that would exonerate Stacy and others like him, then these cases should be tried in state court where medical marijuana can be used as a defense." Davidovich was tried and acquitted by jury in state court, indicating that authorities do not have sufficient evidence to gain convictions. This has not deterred local officials such as San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis to authorize aggressive SWAT-style multi-agency raids like those that happened at three dispensaries last Friday, resulting in the arrest of 12 people.
The Stacy trial and recent DEA raids come as the City and County of San Diego are both deliberating local regulations on distribution of medical marijuana. Advocates argue that federal actions in collaboration with local law enforcement aim to undermine efforts to regulate the same activity that's being criminalized. San Diego has historically been hostile to medical marijuana, filing a lawsuit against local advocates and the State of California to avoid implementing the state-mandated ID card system and conducting more than 50 DEA raids during the Bush Administration. Yet, patients and advocates have been supported by two San Diego Grand Juries that have issued strong recommendations to fully implement state law at the local level.
"Stacy's prosecution and denial of a defense underscores the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference," continued Woodson. "It's not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws."
Further Information:
Ruling by federal judge denying Stacy's defense: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Stacy_Ruling.pdf
October 2009 Justice Department policy directive on medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
Medical Marijuana Defense Denied in Stacy Federal Case
Today Judge Moskowitz issued a ruling denying Mr. Stacy’s motion to present the entrapment by estoppels defense, as well as a medical marijuana defense in his Federal Medical Marijuana Trial.
Please take a moment to send out a letter of support for HR 3939, which is congressional legislation that would allow Mr. Stacy if passed to present a defense during trial.
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=69
Join us tonight at the San Diego Americans for Safe Access Meeting for more details about the Judge’s ruling and Mr. Stacy’s trial.
WHEN: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7pm - 9pm
WHERE: La Jolla Brew House Restaurant - 7536 Fay Avenue La Jolla, CA 92037
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Monday, July 12, 2010
SD ASA Meeting - Jul 13 - 7-9pm
WHAT: San Diego Monthly Americans for Safe Access Meeting
WHEN: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7pm - 9pm
WHERE: La Jolla Brew House Restaurant - 7536 Fay Avenue La Jolla, CA 92037
Get Involved and help make a difference!
This event is open to the public and will feature both speakers and information about; San Diego County Ordinance and the City of San Diego draft regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries, update on the federal raid of 3 dispensaries in San Diego last week, Security Precautions to prevent robberies in dispensaries, and much more!
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Friday, July 9, 2010
Patient Advocates Condemn Federal DEA Raids in San Diego
San Diego, CA -- Federal agents raided at least three San Diego-area medical marijuana dispensaries today in the early morning hours. Sources say that Green Kross, Unified Collective, and Kush Lounge were all served federal search warrants and were subjected to aggressive SWAT-style raids which resulted in the arrest of as many as 12 people and the seizure of money, medical marijuana and patient records. These raids come as the City of San Diego is deliberating an ordinance to regulate the local distribution of medical marijuana.
"The patient community is outraged by these actions and demands answers," said Eugene Davidovich of the local San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group. "Why is the federal government attempting to undermine our local efforts to regulate?" A recent San Diego Gran Jury encouraged local governments to follow through on implementing state law by regulating medical marijuana distribution facilities that provide needed medicine to patients throughout the county. Both the City and County of San Diego are on the verge of approving regulatory ordinances.
Several federal raids have occurred in San Diego over the past few years, typically with the cooperation of local law enforcement and District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis. The latest raids happened in September 2009 under the multi-agency effort called "Operation Green Rx." Despite the confidence of Dumanis in prosecuting state cases against local dispensary operators, one of them being Davidovich, they have only resulted in jury acquittals. "Despite a failure to win convictions in state court, Dumanis continues to aggressively enforce and prosecute groundless medical marijuana cases," continued Davidovich.
In October 2009, one month after raids were conducted on more than a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego, the Justice Department issued a new policy aimed at deemphasizing federal enforcement in medical marijuana states. Nonetheless, the Justice Department has continued to take action in California and other medical marijuana states, with San Diego dispensaries being the latest targets. In addition, the first federal trial of a medical marijuana provider under the Obama Administration is due to take place in the next few weeks. San Diego dispensary operator James Stacy was raided in the same September 2009 raid, but is being federally prosecuted. He is currently trying to mount an entrapment and medical use defense, something routinely denied federal medical marijuana defendants due to court rules that favor the prosecution.
"These raids underscore the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference," said ASA Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson. "It is not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws."
Further Information:
October 2009 Justice Department policy directive on medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Appellate Court Grants Temporary Stay Barring Closure of Lake Forest Medical Marijuana Dispensary
From: Dale Gieringer, CA NORML
HOWARD NASSIRI Represents Lake Forest Wellness Center and Collective - Only Dispensary Allowed to Remain Open During Appeal
ORANGE COUNTY, CA - The Court of Appeal for the 4th District (Santa Ana) granted a temporary stay of an Orange County Superior Court's injunction order requiring all medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Lake Forest to close down. The stay applies only to appellant Lake Forest Wellness Center and Collective (LFWCC), the only medical marijuana dispensary willing to challenge the City of Lake Forest, which is seeking to close all dispensaries within that community.
Damian Nassiri, a partner with the consumer advocacy law firm HOWARD NASSIRI, represented LFWCC in its successful application for the temporary stay, which also vacated an upcoming contempt of court hearing. The result is that LFWCC is the only dispensary allowed to remain open during the appeal without risking arrests or fines.
"This stay is great news for our clients in Lake Forest, and for medical marijuana patients across the State of California," said Mr. Nassiri.
"Cities have no right to ban dispensaries, which are legal businesses in the State of California."
The Lawsuit and Cross-Complaint In December 2009, the City of Lake Forest filed suit in Orange County Superior Court seeking an injunction to close all of the medical marijuana collectives operating in that City. That injunction was granted by Superior Court Judge David Chaffee on May 28, 2010. Mr. Nassiri filed an appeal of the injunction on behalf of LFWCC based on violations of LFWCC's constitutional rights. LFWCC refused to shut its doors to its patients. The City then asked the court to hold LFWCC in contempt of court, subjecting its members to arrest, and to fines. In the face of the contempt action, and in light of its pending suit against the City for violation of its constitutional rights, Mr. Nassiri asked the Court of Appeal to intercede to bar the Superior Court from issuing a contempt of court citation while the critical constitutional questions are being resolved. The Court of Appeal agreed, and granted the writ of supersedes sought by LFWCC.
About HOWARD NASSIRI: HOWARD NASSIRI is a national law firm representing plaintiffs and consumers in many complex and high-profile litigation matters. The firms practice areas include criminal defense, immigration, loan modifications, predatory lending, labor and employment, bankruptcy, and personal injury.
Dale Gieringer - dale@canorml.org
California NORML, NEW ADDRESS: 2261 Market St.
#278A, San Francisco CA 94114 -(415) 563- 5858 -
www.canorml.org
Five Gunmen Storm Marijuana Dispensary in San Diego
San Diego Union Tribune
SAN DIEGO — Five men armed with handguns stole about $20,000 worth of marijuana from a Normal Heights dispensary Tuesday.
The robbers walked into the SuperCanna medical marijuana office on Adams Avenue near 32nd Street and ordered the lone employee to the ground, San Diego police Lt. Andra Brown said. They told him if he did not cooperate they would hurt his mother, Brown said.
The employee called police at 11:35 a.m. and said he waited about 15 minutes before notifying authorities because he was afraid the men would come back.
In addition to the marijuana, cash, a cell phone and a 12-gauge pump shotgun were taken, Brown said.
The employee was only able to describe one of thieves. He said he was Latino, 30 years old, 6 feet tall and chubby, wearing a blue shirt, jeans and a navy blue Padres cap, Brown said.
No vehicle was seen.
--------------------------------------------
CW6
SAN DIEGO - Five gunmen stormed a medical marijuana dispensary in Normal Heights Tuesday and made off with a large amount of cash and marijuana.The owner says the gunmen threatened to kill him if he didn't cooperate.
It happened shortly after 11 a.m. at The Gift of Green dispensary in the 3200 block of Adams Avenue.
San Diego police are looking for five suspects. All are believed to have been carrying guns when the dispensary was robbed.
A shotgun was also taken from the dispensary during the robbery.
See original article HERE
------------------------------------------------------
KGTV 10 News
5 Armed Thieves Rob Medical Pot Dispensary
SAN DIEGO -- Five gun-wielding thieves robbed a Normal Heights medical-marijuana dispensary Tuesday, making off with money, valuables and about $20,000 worth of cannabis.
The holdup at SuperCanna, 3200 Adams Ave., was reported about 11:30 a.m., according to San Diego police.
The bandits stole personal property, including a cell phone and cash, from a clerk before fleeing with marijuana and a 12-gauge shotgun belonging to the shop's proprietor.
The robbers left the area in an unknown direction, SDPD Detective Gary Hassen said.
-----------------------------------------------------
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Imperial Beach refuses to implement recommendations of the Grand Jury
By: Eugene Davidovich, Marcus Boyd (San Diego Americans for Safe Access)
In 1996 California voters passed proposition 215 which legalized marijuana for medical use in the state. Back then, our county officials vowed to fight against medical marijuana, and fourteen years later, in the County of San Diego this fight is still in full swing.
Legitimate state card carrying patients are still arrested for possessing and cultivating small amounts of their own medicine. The San Diego District Attorney’s office is still prosecuting cases where patients are clearly following state law, and council members in cities like Imperial Beach are thumbing their noses at patients and most recently at the County Grand Jury.
On June 7, 2010 the San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report calling on all municipalities within the County of San Diego to move forward with regulating, licensing, and monitoring a limited number of medical marijuana dispensaries.
It did not take long for the City of Imperial Beach to respond. In less than 30 days Gary Brown, the City Manager wrote his recommendations to the Imperial Beach City Council urging them to disagree with the report and call the Grand Jury’s recommendations unreasonable and not to be respected.
Mr. Brown writes, “the recommendation is unreasonable for the City to implement at present because: (1) the Anaheim case is still pending; (2) the initiative to legalize marijuana is still pending; and (3) any ordinance could require Coastal Commission approval and possibly voter approval.
Mr. Brown’s logic and reasoning here is clearly fundamentally flawed. Regarding the Anaheim case, it is apparent that Mr. Brown has not been paying any attention to the case or even the San Diego County own counsel who just this week said that the Anaheim case would more than likely determine that cities could not ban dispensaries.
Regarding the November Initiative, in his report Mr. Brown writes, “In November voters will decide whether marijuana should be legalized for medical and non-medical purposes”, and this in his opinion will somehow have an effect on medical patients. This couldn’t be farther from the truth, as the November initiative will not legalize medical marijuana. Proposition 215 and Senate Bill 420 already did that, and the November initiative does not affect the current medical marijuana laws in California.
His third and final reason for why the Grand Jury recommendations should not be respected and are unreasonable is that adopting any kind of regulation may require a vote from the people and approval from the coastal commission. Either Mr. Brown truly has a passionate hate against medical marijuana or he is extremely misinformed.
There are multiple cities and counties in the State of California who have successfully adopted regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries. These cities and counties did not need approval from the coastal commissions or any more votes from their citizens to provide a safe place for patients to obtain their medicine. In Oakland for example, there has even been a decrease in crime in the neighborhoods where regulated facilities exist.
The most shocking and draconian part of Mr. Brown’s letter was the following; “The Grand Jury report did not indicate that it interviewed any person specifically in Imperial Beach, did not indicate that it ascertained that anyone in Imperial Beach is a legitimately qualified medical marijuana patient, and did not demonstrate
that anyone in Imperial Beach who had a medical need for marijuana was unable to obtain it. Additionally, Imperial Beach residents could likely obtain medical marijuana in other locations”.
His assertion that in order for Imperial Beach to regulate the dispensaries, the Grand Jury would have had to prove to them that there are legitimate patients in the city is absurd.
There are hundreds of legitimate medical marijuana patients in the City of Imperial Beach, and a number of them have in the past lobbied the council on this issue. Mr. Brown’s suggestion that patients should go somewhere else to get their medicine is insulting, especially to the patients who cannot travel outside of their home to obtain the medicine and cannot find a caregiver to grow it for them.
This shows the true intent of the Imperial Beach City Council; eradicate access for patients to their medicine rather than adopt regulations helping those in need obtain it.
Clearly the Imperial Beach City Council and City Manager need to be thoroughly educated on the issue. We cannot allow our own government to thumb their noses at the Grand Jury and legitimate medical marijuana patients.
All concerned citizens, patients, and those who want to see this reefer madness mentality changed please come out on July 7th at 6pm to 825 Imperial Beach Blvd to the Imperial Beach City Council Meeting and help us urge the council members to move forward on a fair and sensible regulation for patients, rather than continue to stonewall, stall, or outright ban dispensaries in Imperial Beach.
In the meantime please feel free to call, and email the Imperial Beach City Council with your thoughts on how they are moving forward on this issue.
Imperial Beach Government
Jim Janney, Mayor - jjanney@cityofib.org
Lorie Bragg - loriebraggib@aol.com
Patricia McCoy - mccoy4ib@aol.com
Jim King - jimkingforib@gmail.com
Diane Rose - rose4ib@aol.com
Gary Brown, City Manager - ibcmanager@cityofib.org
Thursday, July 1, 2010
De-Facto Ban in San Diego County - KUSI News Coverage
KUSI Channel 9, ran a story last night about the San Diego County Board of Supervisors vote to enact a de-facto ban on medical marijuana collective facilities in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County. (this ordinance does not apply to the City of San Diego)
This new measure applies to unincorporated part of San Diego County, places like Borrego Springs, Lakeside, and Spring Valley. The ordinance is drawing fire from both sides: both opponents and supporters of medical pot say they’re not that happy.
Some say they need the pot for medicine. Others say the dispensaries for marijuana only bring more problems to the community.
“You can regulate them all you want,” argues Barbara Gordon, “but you will not stop the crime that is associated with selling marijuana.”
Fourteen years after California voters passed proposition 215, allowing the use of medical marijuana, San Diego’s Board of Supervisors approved the first set of regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries in the unincorporated parts of the county. The new ordinance restricts dispensaries to industrial zones and requires a buffer of at least one thousand feet from homes, schools, and other areas where children gather.
Some citizens were disappointed the board did not impose a blanket ban on all dispensaries.
“Purchasing marijuana in a retail setting is saying that it’s normal and harmless to youth. And marijuana is not harmless” adds Gordon.
“We have seen in San Diego” begins Scott Chipman “weak regulation and virtually nonexistent enforcement that has resulted in over one-hundred and twenty stores selling marijuana illegally and more are opening every week.
The county’s planning department identified ten possible sites for dispensaries, but advocates for medical marijuana say the county has acted in bad faith. They say the requirements here are so restrictive that no dispensaries will be able to operate.
“The ordinance that was passed today completely bans all dispensaries” claims Kate Valentine, a member of Americans for Safe Access, “it’s a de facto ban.”
Proponents of medical marijuana claim the county planner who crafted the ordinance was given specific orders.
“He told us that he was under the instruction to create this ordinance as restrictive as possible, yet still be able to defend it in court. This is yet another attempt to eradicate medical cannabis from patients that need it.” explains Eugene Davidovich.
Those advocates with a group called Americans for Safe Access say the county suggested areas including a cement quarry and some spots that are so inaccessible they don’t even have roads. On the other hand another group called Community Against Substance Abuse and short of an outright band, they say they are pleased with the ordinance.
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Posts
