By: Eugene Davidovich
SAN DIEGO – On Tuesday, September 28, 2010 in the second medical marijuana trial of Jovan Jackson, San Diego District Attorney (DA) Bonnie Dumanis, through her Deputy DA Chris Lindberg, was successful in manipulating the law as it is written to the point where all jurors in the Jackson case had no choice but to return a guilty verdict.
At 2pm on Tuesday, San Diego Americans for Safe Access received word from Lance Rogers, Jackson’s defense attorney that the jury had reached a decision. The word was quickly spread throughout the community and within minutes, Jackson’s supporters were in court ready to stand by him.
The courtroom quickly filled up with supporters, the media and at least ten representatives from the DA’s office, including Paul Levikow the DA’s public relations head. At least twelve bailiffs were also dispatched to the courtroom and spread throughout in a show of force and intimidation at the supporters, and to make sure when the verdict was read there would be no emotional outbursts of any kind.
At 3:30pm, all the Jurors were seated and the court called to order. The clerk was handed a stack of papers by the Judge and asked to read the verdict. “In the case of People v. Jovan Jackson, we find the defendant, Guilty,” the court’s clerk stated with no emotion.
As those words were uttered, the silence in the room was deafening and the two minutes that the clerk took to read all the forms, seemed to last a lifetime. Even the DA’s gathered in the room were speechless and sitting with jaws dropped, not knowing how to react.
The clerk proceeded to read the verdicts reached and as the word ‘guilty’ was repeated in each count tears could be seen in the eyes of the majority of the people gathered in the courtroom. Several people became so overwhelmed with emotion that they had to excuse themselves. Even several of the jurors could be seen wiping tears away as the verdict was being read.
The Deputy DA’s gathered to watch this injustice all sat quietly trying hard to conceal their joy and excitement at the decision. Mr. Levikow however, could not resist. He turned around in his seat with delight each time the word ‘guilty’ was uttered by the clerk and each time gave a smirk and a long and demeaning stare at the supporters.
After the verdict was read, Judge Shore told the jurors that their work had been completed and that they could now be excused. Before the jurors left however, Judge Shore added that the attorneys in the case had a few questions for them and asked them to stick around and a give a post verdict interview if they wished. The interview was conducted outside of the presence of the public with just about all of the jurors staying behind to talk to the attorneys.
Following the post verdict interview, the public found out that the jurors unanimously said “we wanted to find a way to let Jackson go, but could not”.
The jurors explained that the jury instructions they were given, contained no defense for possession for sale or sales; the very portion that was redacted away by the prosecutor and Judge Shore.
Aside from looking for a way to find Jackson not guilty, the jurors all said that although they did not agree with the law as it was given to them, that they still had to respect it, as Judge Shore ordered them to only consider the law that was written in the Jury Instructions.
So who convicted Jackson, a jury of twelve peers, Judge Howard Shore, or Bonnie Dumanis herself?
“In retrospect, after hearing the jury wanted to acquit him in this case, if one were to consider Dumanis' long history of erroneous convictions, and how much courthouse bullying Jovan's jury and supporters felt during this trial, it's very possible Judge Shore himself was in real fear of being the fifth judge to be boycotted by DA Dumanis had he not played along with all the prosecutors motions and ignored established state law” said Marcus Boyd of San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group. “It's hard to believe a Superior Court Judge would overtly railroad a defendant in such a way without genuine fear. Jovan's last judge, Judge Bashaunt, was sitting on her last Superior Court case and had nothing to fear from DA Dumanis, therefore Jovan was quickly and correctly acquitted of all marijuana charges”.
After the jury interviews were completed, the public was let back into the courtroom for a sentencing discussion.
As the judge took the bench and began to talk about sentencing, everyone in the courtroom was expecting the worse, that Jackson would be remanded into custody right then and there. Fortunately, and to the surprise of the prosecution, Judge Shore realized that Jackson had not missed a single court date and had every intention of coming to court for sentencing. In light of this, Jackson was allowed to stay out on his current bail pending the actually sentencing date of October 27, 2010, 9am when Judge Shore will impose a sentence.
Jackson along with his supporters walked out of the courtroom to face a flurry of reporters asking him for a statement.
Mr. Jackson agreed to speak with the media, and proceeded to give a very touching, heartfelt speech. Jackson thanked his friends, family, supporters, and Americans for Safe Access in their assistance and support in the case. He went on to talk about how important it is to stand up to the unjust ways of the San Diego District Attorney. Jackson expressed his disappointment at the verdict and vowed that he would continue to fight for his rights and appeal this case to a higher court. He also said he felt “pity and anger” for the prosecution pursuing criminal charges against medical marijuana defendants and continuing to harass legitimate medical marijuana providers and patients in San Diego.
"By refusing him a defense, the District Attorney and the court has railroaded Jackson and ensured his conviction," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who submitted the amicus 'friend of the court' brief in support of Jackson prior to his trial. "Jackson was denied a fair trial," Elford continued. "His conviction and the basis on which the court relied in refusing him a defense -- that sales are illegal under state law -- should absolutely be appealed."
Has the DA now found a road-map to conviction for all dispensaries?
Many argue that as a result of this verdict, Dumanis has now discovered a road map to follow in convicting all medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego. Under her “new and skewed” interpretation of the law, the only way patients qualify for a medical marijuana defense in state court is if they all with sleeves rolled up, plow the fields and grow the actual medicine that they are being dispensed. This results in a true absurdity and surely was not the intent of the voters when they passed Proposition 215.
Now, in order to avoid the possibility of criminal prosecution, wheelchair bound, sick, and disabled patients all will have to find a way to plow the fields together and cannot simply contribute financially to the effort by coming in and purchasing a small amount at their local dispensary.
This skewed and incorrect interpretation will not stand for long. The community is cautiously optimistic that the court of appeals will quickly take this case on and see to it that Judge Shore’s error in this case is reversed, and that true justice is served once and for all.
Further Information:
ASA Press Release about Jackson Verdict:
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6128
San Diego grand jury recommendations on medical marijuana:
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/grandjury/reports/2009-2010/MedicalMarijuanaReport.pdf
Amicus brief filed by ASA in support of Jovan Jackson:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Amicus_Jackson_Trial.pdf
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Safe Access Railroaded by DA Dumanis in San Diego
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
San Diego Medical Marijuana Dispensary Operator Convicted of Possession & Sales
Advocates argue trial was unfair and urge an appeal after medical marijuana defense is denied
San Diego, CA -- Local medical marijuana dispensary operator Jovan Jackson was convicted by a jury today on all three counts of possession and sales. However, the conviction came after San Diego Superior Court Judge Howard H. Shore refused to allow Jackson a medical defense at trial. The trial began last week, with the jury taking less than 24 hours to reach a verdict. Jackson is likely to appeal the conviction and his inability to use a medical defense. Leading medical marijuana patients' rights group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) had previously submitted a brief in Jackson's case supporting his right to a medical defense and is considering assisting with an appeal.
"By refusing him a defense, the District Attorney and the court has railroaded Jackson and ensured his conviction," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who submitted the amicus 'friend of the court' brief in support of Jackson prior to his trial. "Jackson was denied a fair trial," Elford continued. "His conviction and the basis on which the court relied in refusing him a defense -- that sales are illegal under state law -- should absolutely be appealed."
Jackson was the former operator of the San Diego medical marijuana dispensary Answerdam Alternative Care Collective. It was the second trial in less than a year for Jackson, who was arrested in a multi-agency law enforcement raid in September 2009. Jackson was acquitted by a jury in December of marijuana possession and distribution charges stemming from a 2008 arrest. This time, however, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis convinced Superior Court Judge Howard H. Shore to deny Jackson a medical marijuana defense, virtually assuring a conviction.
"After the embarrassment of losing the first trial against Jovan Jackson, District Attorney Dumanis was desperate for a conviction," said Eugene Davidovich, head of the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group. "Jackson should not have been denied a defense and should not be used as a scapegoat for the District Attorney's misguided position that medical marijuana sales are illegal." During jury selection last week, in an effort to keep medical marijuana out of the courtroom, Judge Shore went so far as to order Jackson's supporters to remove articles of clothing that displayed an Americans for Safe Access logo, including tote bags carried into the courtroom.
Today's verdict comes as both the San Diego City Council and County Board of Supervisors are developing local medical marijuana distribution laws that would regulate the same activity for which Jackson was convicted. A San Diego grand jury issued recommendations in June calling on city and county governments to implement the state's medical marijuana law. In particular, the grand jury called for the city and county to develop a "program for the licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of authorized collectives and cooperatives distributing medical marijuana."
As part of law enforcement's "Operation Green Rx," more than 60 people were arrested in several raids. Yet, of only two cases the District Attorney chose to take to trial, both had resulted in acquittals. In addition to Jackson's earlier acquittal, Davidovich was also acquitted of similar charges in March of this year.
Further information:
San Diego grand jury recommendations on medical marijuana: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/grandjury/reports/2009-2010/MedicalMarijuanaReport.pdf
VERDICT IS IN; WILL BE ANNOUNCED IN 30 MIN
The jurors have reached a verdict in the Jovan Jackson Second Medical Marijuana Trial. Will be announced in Department 15 in the next 30 minutes.
BREAKING NEWS: Update on Jury Deliberations
This morning the jury in Jovan Jackson’s second medical marijuana trial began their first full day of deliberations. With the day only being half way over, several interesting issues have already occurred during deliberations today.
First, we found out that one of the Jurors had come down with the flu. Juror #4 could no longer continue deliberations and requested to be dismissed from the case. Both the defense and prosecution agreed and replaced Juror#4 with an alternate.
Aside from one of the Jurors being replaced, today the remaining deliberating jurors requested to see transcripts from the testimony of the security guard who was working at Answerdam and had a personal connection with the undercover officer making the buy. One can only wonder what the Juror’s are thinking.
SUMMARY OF SECURIGTY GUARDS TESTIMONY from “Did Jackson Break the Law?” article published on 9/23/2010:
The only worthy and relevant part of that day, was when the security guard who was hired by Answerdam to watch over the facility and deter burglaries, got on the stand. His testimony was shocking. He revealed that when the undercover officer arrived at Answerdam during one of the buys, he recognized him. Not only did he know that this man was an undercover narcotics officer, but he also turned out to be a long time friend of the security guard. The security guard went on to say that he did not stop the undercover or say anything to anyone at the facility until the undercover left. After the detective was nowhere to be seen, the security guard told the other members inside, of the police visit, called Jackson, asked to urgently meet him, and quit on the spot.
Aside from telling this shocking story of a personal connection with the undercover officer who legally bought medicine at Answerdam, the security guard also testified that only qualified patients and members were allowed into the collective and that his job specifically was to act as an additional layer of security and to check members paperwork outside the facility before even letting them into the dispensary.
Many thousands of concerned citizens and patients across the state and nation are carefully watching this case and believe that future raids and prosecutions of medical marijuana dispensaries and patients in San Diego could very well rest on the decisions these jurors make.
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
Monday, September 27, 2010
Jackson Second Medical Marijuana Trial Day 4 - Morning Update
By: Eugene Davidovich
On Monday, September 27 at 1:30pm in Department 15, Lance Rogers, the defense attorney will begin his closing arguments in Jovan Jackson’s second medical marijuana trial. The case is expected to be wrapped up today, and the jury will be in deliberations this afternoon.
After being tried and acquitted by a jury of twelve peers on similar charges a few months ago, he is now facing a second trial stemming from a second raid on the Answerdam collective; same prosecutor, same investigators, same evidence, different Judge, and now a different jury instructions, one that is severely limiting his ability to have a fair trial.
The Judge in Jackson’s second case has removed the portion of the law that talk about collectives and cooperatives, and has presented a redacted instruction to the Jury.
This morning the proceedings began with a final witness from the prosecution, a DEA agent that help participate in the raid on Jackson’s home. Agent Turpy testified that he did in fact help search the house, that all marijuana is illegal in his opinion, and he tried as hard as the court would allow in helping the prosecution and being very cooperative on the stand.
When the defense began questioning him, he immediately changed his demeanor, began not recalling anything, and displayed a clear frustration with and anger at the defense.
Following the DEA Agent, Dr. Donald Clark took the stand. Dr. Clark recommended cannabis to not only Mr. Jackson, but also to the undercover officer in this case who purchased the marijuana from Answerdam. Dr. Clark testified about the examination he conducted, about his history and practice in medicine. He discussed his experience as an anesthesiologist for over twenty years, and then why he decided to refocus his practice n medical marijuana.
The DA tried desperately to discredit Dr. Clark and make him look bad on the stand by asking him argumentative questions and insinuating that he wasn’t a good doctor. All of the prosecutor’s attempts were met with professional and accurate statements from Dr. Clark who presented himself as a legitimate doctor. The DA however came across as mean-spirited, vindictive, and bias.
Following Dr. Clark’s testimony, the Jurors were read the jury instructions from which glaringly was missing the Collective / Cooperative cultivation portion. After the jury instructions were read, the court broke for lunch and the proceedings are expected to resume at 1:30pm when both side will present the closing arguments.
Many people following this trial believe that future raids and prosecutions of medical marijuana dispensaries and patients in San Diego could very well rest on the decisions jurors make in this case.
Concerned citizens, patients, and advocates from across the state are calling on San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis to stop this egregious violation of civil rights, and the bias driven persecution.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Did Jackson break the law?
By: Eugene Davidovich
SAN DIEGO – Wednesday of this week marked the third day of arguments in the second medical marijuana trial of Jovan Jackson a founding members of the Answerdam collective, patient, and US Navy Veteran.
The second trial, just as the first is being held in state court. Both have drawn lots of local media attention, outrage and questions from patients, and have stirred up controversy and concern in the medical marijuana community across the state.
Some not familiar with the case, seem to assume Jackson violated the law. There are theories circling the community that he is charged with selling medicine to someone without a valid recommendation or that a patient with an expired recommendation got into the facility and bought medicine making that sale illegal. The second trial has baffled many, and as a result people are simply assuming the worse, that there has to be something that justifies two raids and two trials.
The maddening reality is that both arrests and trials of Jovan Jackson have yet to be justified.
In both the first and second trial Jackson has not been charged, accused nor has there been any evidence brought forth that he violated Prop 215, SB420, or any other state or local law with regards to medical marijuana.
Jackson helped form the Answerdam Alternative Care Collective formerly located in Kearney Mesa, a commercial area of San Diego. This facility as all others in the state, helped facilitate transactions between members and qualified medical marijuana patients. This means, it was a dispensing collective, commonly referred to as a “dispensary”.
In a commercial office park, in a very clean and inviting setting, patients who grew their own medicine and had extra, could bring it in and be reimbursed for their expenses and cost of the cultivation. Other members, who could not grow their own, bought the marijuana grown by other members.
Every single member of Answerdam was a qualified patient. All 1600 were screened, verified, and required to fill out the proper paperwork prior to joining.
Does that process sound familiar? It is to every medical marijuana patient in the state.
This is the same manner in which just about every dispensary in California operates. Some may have different forms, a nicer TV in the reception area, but overall the idea, theory, operation, business practice, interpretation of the law, or whatever you want to call it, is the same.
So how are they able to prosecute Jackson?
Well, in Jackson’s first trial, an undercover officer went to a local doctor, lied about his symptoms and condition, obtained a legitimate medical marijuana card and joined Answerdam. The undercover bought a small amount of medicine, paid in cash, and left.
A few months later in August of 2008, Jackson was raided, arrested and charged with sales and possession of marijuana for sale in connection with the Answerdam dispensary. Jackson refused to take a plea deal and as a result, his case dragged on for months, while Answerdam remained open to its membership.
A year after the arrest, on September 8, 2009 while out on bail and in court for yet another hearing on charges related to the first raid, Jackson was suddenly taken into custody. Judge Laceter ordered the incarceration, claiming that Jackson needed to go through a psychiatric evaluation after he insisted on dismissing his public defender and representing himself. The next day, on September 9, 2009 Answerdam was raided for a second time by the same detectives that raided the place a year prior.
Jackson passed his psychiatric evaluation, was held for an additional two weeks and then finally released, at which point he brought onboard Lance Rogers, a private criminal defense attorney, to represent him.
The DA filed the second raid under a new case, set it aside, and focused on prosecuting Jackson for the first raid.
In December of 2009, the jury for Jackson’s first trial was selected, evidence presented on both sides, and testimony heard from witnesses including the undercover detective who made the buy.
Less than four hours after beginning deliberations, the jury returned a unanimous not guilty verdict on all marijuana related counts including sales, possession for sales, etc.
This loss caused serious damage to the DA;s reputation and putt a kink in her plans to raid the rest of the facilities. San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis vowed not to give up the persecution and went after Jackson again. Hoping to find through this case, a means she could use to shut every dispensary in San Diego down.
In the second case, it must be that that the DA finally found something on Jackson, evidence of sales to non patients, lots of cash, or something else along those lines, right?
Wrong again. No evidence of the sort has been presented to date. No evidence of profit, no evidence of sales outside the closed circuit, and no evidence of cash or large sums of money. The prosecution keeps singing their same song, that “all dispensaries are illegal”.
Their theory in both cases has been that sales of marijuana in any way shape or form are criminal. Unless all patients actually participate in growing the marijuana, the operators, employees as well as members of the facility, are criminally liable and are aiding and abetting criminal activity.
In the first Jackson trial, Judge Bashant allowed the jury instruction that discusses collective/cooperative cultivation to be read to the jurors. As a result, Jackson was acquitted. When the jury saw the actual law in its entirety, they found Jackson to be in compliance and not guilty of the crimes charged.
A similar situation occurred in the Davidovich case in the same courthouse a few months after Jackson’s first trial. In his case, jurors also saw the law in its entirety. The collective/cooperative jury instruction was read and Davidovich was found not guilty of the crimes charged just as Jackson was a few months prior.
Jurors in both cases stated after the trials that the current state of the law in California is such that as long as the patient is valid and is a bona-fide member of the dispensary, the transactions between those patients are legal.
Even after having their ‘group farm’ theory debunked twice by jurors in the San Diego courts, the DA’s stance and policy still continues unchanged.
So without changing the actual law itself, how could Dumanis win?
They can’t. This is why the DA decided to take a different approach. In Jackson’s second trial, they simply manipulated the law that the jury gets to see and base their decisions on. Judge Shore in Jackson’s second trial, decided to outright exclude the collective/cooperative cultivation portion of the law from being read to the jurors.
In the second trial of Jovan Jackson the portion of the law under which he was acquitted in the first trial, was simply deleted.
The Judge’s reasoning for this modification of the law was driven by the prosecution’s theory that all 1600 members of the dispensary, wheelchair bound or otherwise, did not roll their sleeves up and plow the same field together.
Even though evidence was presented before the trial through Jovan’s own testimony, that he along with other members of the collective grew cannabis, according to Judge Shore, because all 1600 members did not participate in that effort together, the collective/cooperative defense did not apply, and had to be removed from the jury instructions.
Aside from successfully eliminating the defense at Jackson’s second trial, the prosecutor also attempted to physically have Jackson’s supporters removed from the courtroom.
On Monday of this week, the first day of opening statements, Chris Linbergh the prosecutor, had the Judge order a large metal detector and sign be erected in the hallway outside of the courtroom and all supporters wearing an Americans for Safe Access (ASA) shirt or displaying any political messages, to stay at least 25 feet away from the Jurors.
That day, all the supporters sitting in the courtroom were handed a sheet of paper warning them that the penalties for jury tampering could be severe. The bailiffs that day also forced the supporters to remove any articles of clothing including purses that displayed the ASA logo.
Following the intimidation tactics employed by the district attorney’s office on the first day of arguments, on the second day, the numbers of people sitting behind the defense side continued to increase, and it appeared that no one was scared away.
The proceedings on the second day began with chief investigator Detective Mark Andrew Carlson taking the stand and testifying about the second raid he led on Answerdam. Prior to Carlson taking the stand, the fact that the first raid occurred and that Jackson was acquitted in the first trial, was ruled irrelevant by the Judge and ordered not be mentioned in front of the Jurors.
Carlson while on the stand, described in nauseating detail the nine jars seized from the dispensary, the steps he took the day of the raid, the surveillance he conducted, etc. He was on the stand for hours and seemed to simply be placed there to waste the courts, jurors, and the defendant’s time, shockingly the Judge allowed this to go on with no interruption.
The circus continued, with the DA calling to the stand a detective who simply at one point in the case was asked to transport the marijuana seized from Answerdam to another location. The purpose of his testimony was to supposedly show that the marijuana was properly handled when moved from one place to another, and that it was in fact him that moved the evidence.
This colossal waste of time was followed by the testimony of a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) chemist, who testified that the marijuana seized from Answerdam was scientifically tested using gas chromatography and was found to actually be marijuana. What a surprise!
The only worthy and relevant part of that day, was when the security guard who was hired by Answerdam to watch over the facility and deter burglaries, got on the stand.
His testimony was shocking.
He revealed that when the undercover officer arrived at Answerdam during one of the buys, he recognized him. Not only did he know that this man was an undercover narcotics officer, but he also turned out to be a long time friend of the security guard.
The security guard went on to say that he did not stop the undercover or say anything to anyone at the facility until the undercover left. After the detective was nowhere to be seen, he told the other members inside of the police visit, called Jackson, asked to urgently meet him, and quit on the spot.
Aside from telling this shocking story of a personal connection with the undercover officer who legally bought medicine at Answerdam, the security guard also testified that only qualified patients and members were allowed into the collective and that his job specifically was to act as an additional layer of security and to check members paperwork outside the facility before even letting them into the dispensary.
The next day on Wednesday, the undercover officer that made the buy at Answerdam took the stand and with his testimony confirmed for the jurors and everyone in the courtroom that his recommendation was in fact valid when he visited Answerdam. The detective even described how he obtained the recommendation. He said he lied about a serious back injury and as a result, the CA licensed physician he went to see issued him a recommendation to use marijuana in treating the back pain.
When describing his encounter with Answerdam, he talked about completing all the paperwork along with providing his medical marijuana recommendation to the members there before making the purchase.
Towards the end of his testimony, he was asked about his relationship with the security guard and whether he recognized him upon entering Answerdam. The detective hesitantly admitted that he did.
Realizing that his testimony was only helping Jackson, the detective stated that his interpretation of the law was that all dispensaries are illegal and that the three that he had visited as an undercover, were all the same, illegal. The detective wanted to make sure everyone understood his stance on the issue.
Following the detective’s testimony, the jury was excused and a discussion about the portions of the jury instructions not gutted by the Judge took place in the courtroom.
The prosecution, defense, and Judge agreed to continue the proceeding on Monday, September 27, 2010 in Department 15, when Lance Rogers, the defense attorney will begin his opening statements and case in chief. The case is expected to be wrapped up that day, and the jury could be in deliberations as soon as Tuesday.
Many people following this trial believe that future raids and prosecutions of medical marijuana dispensaries and patients in San Diego could very well rest on the decisions jurors make in this case.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Jury Education Week in San Diego
San Diego Americans for Safe Access is looking for volunteers to pass out Juror Rights Education information next Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday (9/27,28 and 29) for 30 minutes from 8:30-9:00am
If you would like to volunteer or participate in this effort, please contact sandiegoasa@gmail.com or reply to this email.
Jury Education Week in San Diego! (September 27 – October 1)
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.
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Monday, September 20, 2010
Opening Statements Begin, Security Measures Upgraded at Jackson Medical Marijuana Trial
By: Eugene Davidovich
SAN DIEGO - If you thought intimidation couldn’t get any worse in the San Diego State Courts, think again. This morning Department 15 as per the new demands of the San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, was outfitted with additional security measures. While walking up to the courtroom this morning a congregation of bailiffs could be seen outside and a giant walk through metal detector erected along with a 3’x4’ sign displaying the warning “ALL PERSONS SUBJECT TO SEARCH”.
“This monstrosity is clearly over the top”, Terrie Best member of San Diego Americans for Safe Access stated this morning while outside of court. “It is nothing more than then prosecutor’s Jury Intimidation Machine”.
The proceedings began this morning with Judge Shore instructing the jurors on rules of the court. The Judge focused special attention on admonishing the Jurors to immediately report to the court all attempts made by anyone to influence or talk to them. The Judge even focused his attention on the public and stated that it was a crime to tamper with the Jury and that anyone caught attempting to do so, would be severely punished.
While this order was being read, Paul Levikow, Dumanis’ head of Public Relations who was sitting in the front row behind the prosecution, turned around in his chair, and also focused his attention on the supporters. He began to nod his head as the Judge was speaking and continued to give the supporters a long and intimidating stare, clearly trying to instill fear and discourage the public from attending the trial.
Following this clear show of force and intimidation, Chris Lindbergh began his opening statements, in which he claimed that Mr. Jackson was operating a store that would sell marijuana to anyone that came in. A claim completely false and against the evidence that shows that all 1600 members of the Answerdam collective were legitimate patients.
After the DA’s opening statements, the Jury was asked to step into the courtroom next door (a second courtroom commissioned specifically for this trial) while a 402 hearing could be held to determine if Detective Carlson, the investigating officer in the case, was qualified to testify during the trial.
After the Jurors left the courtroom, Detective Mark Andrew Carlson got on the stand, and claimed to be an expert in the medical use of cannabis. He testified that an eight hour narcotics class administered by the California Narcotic Officers Association about how marijuana was not a medicine, made him a medical expert in the field.
The Judge agreed and to the objections of the defense, Carlson was qualified as an expert and allowed to testify in front of the Jury.
The Jurors were let back into the courtroom, and Carlson took the stand as a medical expert. Among many misleading and false statements that Carlson made on the stand, Carlson claimed that the marijuana found at Answerdam was definitely not in compliance with state law and was clearly not for medical use.
At noon, the court took its lunch recess with the proceedings resuming at 1:30 in the afternoon when Carlson is expected to be back on the stand for defense cross examination.
“They will not scare the public away. We will continue to support Mr. Jackson and his fight for our rights” stated Terrie Best while leaving the courthouse for the lunch recess.
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.safeaccesssd.org
Get Involved, Get Active, Make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Opening Statements in Jackson Second Medical Marijuana Trial to Begin Monday
By: Eugene Davidovich
Defense denied, supporters restricted, unfair trial continues
SAN DIEGO – Monday, September 20, 2010 opening statements in the second medical marijuana trial of Jovan Jackson are expected to begin at 9:00 am in Department 15.
Pre trial motions have been argued, the jury has been selected, and the community continues to be outraged at the waste of taxpayer’s dollars on this vindictive and bias driven prosecution by San Diego District Attorney (DA) Bonnie Dumanis.
Although Mr. Jackson has been tried and acquitted by a jury of twelve peers on similar charges a few months ago, he is now facing a second trial stemming from a second raid on the Answerdam collective; same prosecutor, same investigators, same evidence, different Judge.
After suffering two recent high profile losses in similar cases one of which included Mr. Jackson’s first trial, the DA realized that the law is clearly on the defendants’ side and the only way she could succeed in court is to deny patients from telling the entire truth at their trials.
For Mr. Jackson’s second trial, Dumanis teamed up with Judge Shore, a historically bias judge on the issue (see People v. Konow), and has successfully prevented Mr. Jackson from presenting to the jury the fact that Answerdam was a collective that only allowed qualified patients to become members, and that Mr. Jackson himself is a qualified medical marijuana patient.
Judge Shore’s reasoning for not allowing the defense was that all 1600 members of Answerdam did not roll up their sleeves in the garden together.
According to Judge Shore, it wasn’t enough that Mr. Jackson testified to cultivating the medicine with other patients and members of the collective. Unless all 1600 patients, wheelchair bound or otherwise plowed the fields together, Answerdam was not a legal collective Judge Shore maintained.
The Judge took it upon himself to decide on the legality of the collective rather than let the jurors see all the evidence and decide for themselves as is normally done in these cases in California.
The DA and Judge, did not stop there, on Thursday of last week Chris Linbergh the assistant DA prosecuting Jackson, came into court with a laundry list of reasons why Jackson’s supporters should be banned from the courthouse.
After some back and forth on the record, the Judge granted only a part of Linbergh’s demands, ruling that although supporters would be allowed inside the courtroom, any shirts with the Americans for Safe Access (ASA) logo on them would not be allowed inside.
The following morning on Friday, five Jackson supporters, were peacefully and quietly standing outside department 15 along with at least 40 potential jurors that were waiting to be let into court. The supporters were wearing their ASA t-shirts outside of the courtroom, in full compliance with the Judge’s ruling from the previous day. Less than fifteen minutes after the proceedings began, the head of Dumanis’ PR team, Paul Levikow was seen scurrying down the hall. Cheeks red with frustration, he rushed passed the supporters and into the courtroom. Minutes later he emerged, along with the courthouse’s Chief Bailiff and eight deputies, surrounded the supporters and escorted them away from the potential jurors.
The supporters were told that Judge Shore issued a new order mandating that ASA shirts were not allowed even outside of the courtroom in the public hallways of the courthouse. The five supporters were forced to turn their shirts and ASA tote bags inside out and hide everything displaying the ASA logo.
After the demoralizing demands were satisfied, with shirts and tote bags inside out, supporters resumed their posts quietly standing outside of the courtroom doors. The gross censorship could not have gone unnoticed by the waiting jurors.
For a second time, the bailiffs came out and approached the supporters this time telling them even the inside out shirts were banned. Again, the supporters complied with bailiffs’ demands and promptly removed their ASA shirts.
Finally as the potential jurors were being let inside the courtroom, the supporters were stopped short again, and told that yet another ruling had just come out of Judge Shore. The bailiffs said that this time the Judge decided the public would not be allowed in at all that day.
Concerned citizens, patients, and advocates from across the state are calling on Dumanis to stop this egregious violation of civil rights, and the bias driven persecution of legitimate patients in San Diego County. Mr. Jackson’s second trial is expected to last two weeks with the public tentatively allowed to attend each day.
Further Information:
ASA Press Release about Denial of Medical Marijuana Defense:
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6086
Amicus brief filed by ASA in support of Jovan Jackson:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Amicus_Jackson_Trial.pdf
Jovan Jackson Jury speaks out after first trial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO-je9vvn-o
US CONGRESSIONAL 52ND DISTRICT DEBATE!
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Protest Unfair Trial of Jovan Jackson
WHEN: 8:30 - 9:30am Friday, September 17th 2010
WHERE: 220 W Broadway, San Diego CA 92101
SAN DIEGO - Mr. Jackson is facing a second trial, less than a year after being acquitted by a jury of all medical marijuana related charges just a few months ago. In State court where medical marijuana is legal, Jackson has been denied the right to a fair trial by being denied the opportunity to present the medical marijuana defense to the jury even though Jackson is a legitimate patient.
Today the prosecutor Chris Linbergh spent the morning arguing with the Judge as to why ALL of Mr. Jackson’s supporters should be excluded from the courtroom. Linbergh requested that specifically the ASA shirts not be allowed in the courtroom or the courthouse, that Eugene Davidovich, San Diego ASA Coordinator be banned from being present inside the courtroom, as well as that the retired / disabled Navy veteran, a friend of Jovan's who has come to Jovan’s hearings in the past and wore his NAVY dress blues, not be allowed to wear the uniform.
The Judge dismissed these requests as being ridiculous and some in violation of the first amendment. Judge Shore did however allow Linbergh to keep the ASA shirts out of the courtroom.
Today following the arguments to limit Mr. Jackson’s support, Jury Selection began. It is expected that Jury Selection will be finished today, with the opening statements in the trial to start on Friday morning at 9:00am in Department 15.
Please come out tomorrow to the courthouse at 8:30am and help us send a strong message that we will not tolerate this unfair persecution of legitimate patients and are outraged at the attempt to keep the community out of the courtroom.
Dumanis’ office is not just waging a fierce fight against patients, they are also actively breaking the law and attempting to keep this case as quiet as possible. Please help spread the word about the case, the protest and this injustice.
Bring a friend and come to the protest tomorrow. Everyone who attends the protest will receive a free ASA shirt, sponsored by Marcus Boyd. Although the shirts cannot be worn in the actual courtroom, outside in the hallways, the are allowed.
Your support is critical for this trial!
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
September Americans for Safe Access Meeting
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Dumanis’ Raids on Dispensaries One Year Later - Still Through the ‘Barrel of a Gun’
By: Eugene Davidovich
SAN DIEGO - On September 9, 2009 the San Diego Cross Jurisdictional Narcotics Task Force (NTF) launched an all day assault on medical marijuana in the county. Swat style raids on over fourteen medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives were conducted and over 30 medical marijuana patients were arrested that day alone.
The combined state/federal action was part of Operation Green Rx, a continuous effort by District Attorney (DA) Bonnie Dumanis to eradicate all dispensaries from San Diego. This specific operation has included three rounds of raids on dispensaries in less than two years; August of 2008, February of 2009, and September of 2009. The last round most commonly referred to as the “9/9/9” raids has raised the most questions about how far Dumanis will go to reach a conviction and subvert state law.
Dumanis justifies these actions and her continued waste of resources by claiming that all dispensaries are illegal because not all the members are actually participating in growing the plant ‘collectively or cooperatively’. According to Dumanis, only a group farm/community garden type of setup is a legal way to distribute medicine, where disabled patients from convalescent homes and hospitals have to roll up their sleeves and plow the fields, in order to continue their treatment.
The raids and her skewed interpretation of the law drew outrage from concerned citizens from around the state. Patient rights organizations quickly condemned the action and advocates from around the nation protested that medical regulations should not be at the barrel of a gun and that the raids hurt patients who depend on medical marijuana.
“Very little has been achieved by the local-federal operation to shut down dispensaries and hinder safe access in the San Diego area,” said Kris Hermes Director of Media Relations with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. “DA Dumanis has failed to achieve convictions stemming from these raids and, given the weakness of her claims, any further investigations should be better conducted, and certainly no raids, arrests and prosecutions should occur unless Dumanis is certain there is evidence of state law violations. So far, she has been unable to provide sufficient evidence of state law violations.”
A year later, the only two cases that went to trial out of all the Operation Green Rx arrests in state court resulted in acquittals; Jovan Jackson won his case related to the August 2008 raid and the author of this article was acquitted of all the charges related to a raid in February of 2009. In both cases, jurors complained that the DA’s interpretation of the law was not correct, that the defendants were not guilty, and that the cases should not have been brought to trial.
After the two high profile losses, the DA instead of reconsidering her approach, decided to ramp-up her efforts. It appears she has now allotted more funds for investigations, has refused to work with the San Diego City Council on a sensible regulation, and is proceeding with prosecuting Jackson again.
Of the 30 plus people arrested on 9/9/9 and over fourteen facilities raided, only two individuals have since been charged in State Court; Mr. Dawson and Mr. Jackson, both African-American and both members of the Answerdam collective.
Mr. Dawson after spending more than 80 consecutive days locked up was pressured into accepting a plea deal to one count of sales.
Mr. Jackson is facing a second trial for charges related to the 9/9/9 raid even though that day he was in custody in connection with the first raid on August of 2008.
Regardless of the fact that Jackson was already resolving the issue of whether Answerdam was a legal collective in court, the DA still decided to charge him for the September 9th raid, and since his acquittal of the charges related to the August 2008 raid, has not dropped the case, rather focused her efforts on preventing Jackson from presenting a medical marijuana defense.
After suffering two losses, Dumanis realized that the law is clearly on the defendants side and the only way she could possibly win a case of this nature, is if she somehow succeeds in denying Jackson a defense in state court. Where Jackson, would be prevented from presenting to the jury the entire truth including the fact that he was a medical marijuana patient and that Answerdam was a collective that only allowed qualified patients to become members.
To ensure that a denial of a defense would be possible in Jackson’s case, Dumanis teamed up with one of the staunchest opponents of medical marijuana in the San Diego Superior Courthouse, former 16 year veteran prosecutor, Judge Shore whose decisions on this issue have previously been overturned in the People v Konow case, a landmark medical marijuana ruling in which Judge Shore was told by the appellate courts that he overstepped his authority.
Instead of recusing himself from this case in light of the clear conflict and personal bias, Judge Shore decided to go against the California Attorney General interpretation of the law, as well as the rulings of many other Judges across the state including two in the same courthouse.
CBS8 News Coverage of Jovan Jackson being denied his defense:
“The raids and subsequent prosecutions clearly prove the District Attorney is on a personal and biased crusade against the states medical marijuana laws. Dumanis' form of justice is now as clear as day. Out of 30 plus individuals arrested, two were 'black males' and only the 'back males' were prosecuted in her court,” said Marcus Boyd of San Diego Americans for Safe Access. “The healing process for patients is complicated with the constant anxiety and fear of prosecution while working collectively to obtain and provide safe access to medical marijuana. Moreover, the continuing fear of raids is still preventing safe access to patients in convalescent care facilities and hospitals who are the very patients Prop 215 was intended to help. Raids have never been the answer. The answer has always been simply to work with the counties and City Councils' in providing reasonable regulations for safe access, as required by law and supported by the most recent San Diego County Grand Jury report.”
“Whenever patients are threatened or intimidated such as this, there is harm perpetrated on the patient community. Furthermore, if access is hindered or cut off as it has been in years past in San Diego, then patients are directly impacted by having to find other sources of medication, some of them illicit, or simply go without the treatment their entitled to. DA Dumanis should abandon her campaign against the implementation of medical marijuana laws in San Diego. Instead, Dumanis should assist the San Diego City Council and County Board of Supervisors in crafting regulations that will both serve patients and protect all members of the community”, added Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access.
Concerned citizens from across the county are calling on Dumanis for an immediate cease and desist to her waste of our precious resources through these vindictive prosecutions and to end the abuse of legitimate medical marijuana patients in San Diego County.
Jackson is due back in court on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 in Courtroom 15, at 9am. That day Judge Shore intends to rule on the details of how he and the Deputy DA Chris Linbergh intend on making sure the defense makes no mention of medical marijuana during trial, as well as begin the jury selection process.
Further Information:
ASA Press Release about Denial of Medical Marijuana Defense:
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6086
Amicus brief filed today by ASA in support of Jovan Jackson:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Amicus_Jackson_Trial.pdf
Interview with the Jurors after Mr. Jackson’s first trial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO-je9vvn-o
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Federal Agents Raid At Least Five Las Vegas Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
For Immediate Release: September 8, 2010
Federal Agents Raid At Least Five Las Vegas Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
Advocates underscore need for dispensary regulations, end to federal enforcement
Las Vegas, NV -- The federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) conducted raids earlier today on at least five medical marijuana dispensaries in Las Vegas, Nevada, and reportedly seized patient and financial records, but made no arrests. According to the Associated Press, Natalie Collins, spokeswoman for the local U.S. Attorney's office said that the federal search warrants and "supporting affidavits stemming from what she called 'an ongoing law enforcement operation' were sealed by federal court order." The dispensaries raided today by federal agents and local police included: Happiness Consultant, Salvation Haven, Nature's Way, Organic Releaf, & Holistic Solutions.
The federal raids come nearly a year after an October 2009 Justice Department directive issued to U.S. Attorneys in medical marijuana states, deprioritizing enforcement against medical marijuana patients and providers. The Las Vegas raids occurred less than two months after another spate of federal raids in July against state-compliant patients in California and Michigan. "The federal government should never be called on to enforce local or state medical marijuana laws," said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. "The federal DEA must abide by the Justice Department policy and stay out of the enforcement of local and state medical marijuana laws."
In July, Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman stated publicly on local television that allowing dispensaries was "a very legitimate goal," and that, "If doctors say that it does a patient some good and gives relief to somebody that has a dire need for it, I'm all for it." Nevada failed to consider the issue of distribution at the time of adopting its medical marijuana law in 2000. Although the state allows "Designated Primary Caregivers" to supply medical marijuana to patients, the qualifications are stringent and require "significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a person diagnosed with a chronic or debilitating medical condition."
Nevada's effort to address the need of sick patients to access local distribution of medical marijuana mirrors the efforts in other states like California, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon and Washington. Both Maine and Rhode Island have amended their laws to include state-licensed distribution similar to the medical marijuana laws of New Mexico. The trend to ensure safe access to medical marijuana by establishing licensed distribution facilities has even extended to states currently deliberating new medical marijuana laws, such as Iowa, Kansas, Maryland and Wisconsin.
"A failure to regulate the much-needed distribution of medical marijuana by states such as Nevada should not be seen as a green light by the feds to conduct raids," continued Woodson. ASA has and will continue to work with both federal officials in the Obama Administration as well as local and state officials in Nevada to address the safe distribution of medical marijuana as a public health issue.
The DEA is currently being directed by Bush-appointee Michele Leonhart, who served as deputy under DEA Administrator Karen Tandy; both were responsible for more than 200 federal raids in California and other medical marijuana states during the Bush Administration. Against objections from medical marijuana advocates, President Obama nominated Leonhart to head the DEA under his Justice Department, but her Senate confirmation has yet to be scheduled.
Further Information:
Justice Department memorandum from October 2009 regarding medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
Posts
