Bonnie Dumanis Continues Prosecution of Benjamin Gasper; Member of Legal Medical Marijuana Garden

By Terrie Best, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

Gasper's supporters in court. Picture courtesy of Adela Falk

With San Diego Americans for Safe Access (SDASA) board members and other patient advocates behind him, Benjamin Gasper was in court again on Thursday of last week, this time for a 995 motion hearing before Judge Howard Shore, a notoriously anti-medical marijuana Judge who happened to be filling in that day for another justice who typically presides over 995 hearing.

Benjamin’s struggles began in 2009 when, with two other seriously ill medical marijuana patients, he chose to collectively cultivate medicine for his personal needs, and fell victim to a questionable search and subsequent arrest.

A preliminary hearing took place some weeks ago at which time Benjamin was bound over for trial by Judge William H. Kronberger. Thursday’s 995 motion, a second bite of the apple, was filed to try to show another Judge that the original Judge’s decision to bind the case over for trial was erroneous.

At the 995 hearing defense attorney Melissa Bobrow contemplated introducing a challenge to Judge Shore and getting a different Judge assigned to the hearing in light of the fact that it was Shore who denied Jovan Jackson a medical marijuana defense ultimately leading to his conviction which is currently on appeal. While Judge Shore certainly has proven to be unfriendly to compassionate use and void of knowledge on these emerging laws, Ms. Bobrow wisely saved her one judicial challenge for a more strategic time and went ahead with the hearing.

In her arguments, Ms. Bobrow asserted that clearly the prosecution’s case, which includes possession for sale, is strictly about plant count and contains no convincing evidence to indicate sales. The 133 plants in and of themselves were not enough to charge her client with sales. She referred to testimony from the preliminary hearing in which John Joseph Tangredi, the officer who invaded Benjamin’s medical garden, admitted there were no scales, pay / owe sheets, or even a baggie to indicate intent to distribute.

Ms. Bobrow also pointed out testimony from the other patient members of Benjamin’s collective that the cannabis was intended to make medicine to be consumed in edible form, which requires more plant material. She further argued that Tangredi was not qualified to predict plant yields, evidenced by his preposterous statement that any one plant regularly yields up to two pounds. With this in mind, Ms. Bobrow argued, not enough evidence existed nor was presented to justify the preliminary hearing Judge to bind Benjamin over for trial.

Knowing how Judge Shore would rule in this matter ahead of time, DA Dumanis’ office decided not to even argue the case, their statement was short and consisted of a basic “yes there was enough evidence”, given by shaky-voiced intern Kate O’Reiley with the ever-tough Steve Walter (DA’s Chief Patient Eradicator) by her side.

Predictably, Judge Howard Shore sided with the prosecution in this case and denied Bejamin Gaper, a legal medical marijuana patient, his 995 motion hearing.

Benjamin faces a readiness conference at 8:30AM on August 18 in Department 31.

In a statement from Benjamin’s former attorney Bahar Ansari Miller, 995 hearings rarely go in favor of the defendant.

Ms. Ansari Miller was successful in getting Benjamin’s previous charges dropped last year in her own 995 argument because she was swift enough to point out a verbal error by the judge in procedure. Out of sheer bias San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ office re-filed charges in Benjamin's case and are prosecuting him again.

For information on SDASA court support efforts please visit our website at www.SafeAccessSD.org or contact Terrie Best, San Diego ASA Court Support Coordinator - ilegalsmile@hotmail.com

Further Information:
Original Story - May 2010
Cultivation Charges Dismissed - June 2010
Charges Re-filed - May 2011

Oceanside City Attorney Loses Temporary Restraining Order; North County Collective Allowed to Stay Open

By: Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access, Posted July 27, 2011, 11:29am

VISTA, CA – On Wednesday, July 27, 2011 in a courtroom filled with supporters of safe access, Judge Maas, denied the City of Oceanside’s attempt to obtain a temporary restraining order to shut down North County Collective (NCC), a legal medical marijuana dispensary located in Oceanside, CA.

Several weeks ago, when the Oceanside City Attorney’s Office began their eradication effort by sending threatening letters to NCC, demanding they shut down, the collective immediately opened a channel of communication with the city and in good faith, began discussions regarding possible relocation as well as other options.

During these discussions the city presented John, a director of the collective with a single option; sign a letter stating that he would immediately shut down the collective, leave Oceanside, and declare in writing that for the rest of his life he would never conduct business within the City. The letter amounted to a clear and direct attempt to violate his constitutional rights.

While in the process of these discussions and without any notification as required by law to NCC or NCC’s attorney’s with whom the discussions were taking place, on July 14th, the City Attorney’s office went to court, filed a 200 page document filled with unfounded, wild allegations, and demanded that a temporary restraining order against NCC be issued.

The City Attorney claimed NCC was causing an urgent hazard and was a constant nuisance in the City. With the temporary restraining order in hand, that same day, a Sheriff along with a representative of the Oceanside City Attorney’s office quickly served NCC with the order and told everyone present, that unless they shut down immediately, they would all be arrested.

NCC shuttered its doors and began searching for additional representation.

At a monthly North County Americans for Safe Access meeting, John met and subsequently retained Lance Rogers, a local criminal and civil defense attorney who specializes in medical marijuana related litigation.

Mr. Rogers quickly organized an ex-parte hearing in front of Judge Maas and this morning was in court asking the Judge to lift the temporary restraining order. He argued that by not notifying NCC or their counsel, the city did not follow proper legal procedures in obtaining the temporary restraining order. He also argued the collective was not a nuisance nor was it posing any sort of hazard to the community. Judge Maas agreed.

In response to the City Attorney’s claims that NCC was not legal because they did not have a local business license, Judge Maas pointed out that there was no process to obtain one for the collective and that the City itself did not follow legal procedures when obtaining the restraining order.

The collective will re-open on Thursday of this week and is located at 913 South Coast Hwy, Oceanside, CA

Although the temporary order was denied the city continues to wage its eradication campaign by filing similar injunctions against the other collectives in Oceanside as well as preparing to waste more tax payers' dollars on litigation.

The next hearing for NCC is scheduled for August 12, 2011 at 1:30pm in Department 28 at the Vista courthouse when Judge Maas will hear arguments from both sides and decide whether the collective should be permanently shut down in accordance with the City’s demands or allowed to remain open.

Further Information:
North County Times Article about NCC Restraining Order

BREAKING NEWS: San Diego City Council Votes to Repeal Medicinal Marijuana Ordinances

BREAKING NEWS: San Diego City Council Votes to Repeal Medicinal Marijuana Ordinances


SAN DIEGO – After listening to almost two hours of public commentary, both in favor and against repealing the ordinances that attempted to regulate medicinal marijuana co-ops, the city council reluctantly voted 6 to 2 in favor of repeal.

The two repealed ordinances would have prohibited medicinal marijuana co-ops from operating in commercial zones, and within 600 ft of schools, parks, churches, day cares, and each other. Forcing San Diego County medicinal marijuana patients to travel to a few industrial zones in the city’s out skirts to obtain their medication.

Dozens of patients and co-op managers immediately mobilized when the council voted in favor of these ordinances in April. They successfully gathered more than 46,000 valid signatures to qualify a referendum that asked the council to repeal and return to the negotiating table, or let the voters decide whether to implement the ordinances.

While this may seem like a victory for marijuana advocates, the future of medicinal marijuana co-ops remains uncertain. With the exception of Councilman David Alvarez, all of the council members who voted in favor of repealing the ordinances, cautioned marijuana supporters that their referendum would have unintended consequences, and even alluded to supporting an outright ban in the near future.

“We worked hard on this issue, and the ordinances were the best solution available,” Councilwoman Sherri Lightner said. “I worry that this is less about safe access and more about a growing business that wants to operate unregulated. The only option I see moving forward is a ban.”

Lightner also stated that letting San Diegans vote on whether or not the ordinances should be implemented would not be helpful because people would vote against it if they felt it was too strict, and some would vote against the measure because it is not strict enough. Councilmembers Carl DeMaio, Lorrie Zapf, Kevin Faulconer, and Todd Gloria, all voiced similar concerns about a vote.

The entire council agreed that the cost of putting the measure on the ballot, estimated by the city clerk at $745,000 to $841,000, was too much to spend given the city’s dire finances. Despite the projected expense, Councilmembers Tony Young and Marti Emerald both felt that the issue was important enough to let voters decide, and that repeal would only put the council back at square one, which would further harm patients.

While many in the medicinal marijuana community who supported the referendum were hopeful that a repeal would lead to more favorable regulations, the council, again with the exception of Alvarez who called the referendum a shining example of democracy at work, expressed concerns about reaching an agreement in the future that would appease the medicinal marijuana community.

“It is discouraging to find ourselves in this position after working to craft a compromise for over two years,” Gloria said. “I have severe doubts that this council will be able to reach a compromise on the issue, and there will be unintended consequences to this referendum. I hope for a better result, but I am not optimistic that there will be one.”

For now, medicinal marijuana co-ops will remain unregulated, but open. For how long is anybody’s guess.

Republished from www.nugmag.com - Original article available here: http://nugmag.com/2011/07/breaking-news-city-council-votes-to-repeal-medicinal-marijuana-ordinances/

Council repeals San Diego medical marijuana rules

Medical marijuana shops in legal limbo after ordinance repealed
By Jen Lebron Kuhney, published on signonsandiego.com updated 7:35 p.m., July 25, 2011

Medical marijuana dispensaries within San Diego city limits are once again in legal limbo after the City Council voted Monday to repeal regulations that created — ever so briefly — a path to legitimacy for those businesses.

The council opted to rescind the rules they adopted four months ago rather than pay as much as $1 million on a public vote, a decision that was forced when a coalition of medical marijuana advocates collected enough signatures from registered voters to place a repeal on a future ballot.

The 6-2 council vote puts the contentious issue right back where it was when civic debate began two years ago: Medical marijuana collectives in San Diego are illegal. But, as before, it is unclear whether the city will take any action to shutter them.

This is the second time this year that the City Council has been forced to repeal legislation following a signature drive. In February, the panel reversed an ordinance that would have required an economic impact study for proposed supercenters after Walmart objected and quickly amassed signatures to trigger a public vote.

The city approved comprehensive — but heavily debated — rules on medical marijuana businesses in the spring that would have forced the city’s roughly 160 dispensaries to shut down and apply for operating permits. Cooperative owners and medical marijuana patients decried the rules for being too strict while some community leaders said anything short of an outright ban didn’t go far enough.

People on both sides of the debate urged the council on Monday to simply repeal the restrictions and avoid a costly election.

The repealed regulations dictated specific operating procedures for the collectives and required a 600-foot buffer zone between one another, as well as from schools, playgrounds, libraries, child-care and youth facilities, parks and churches.

Citizens for Patients Rights, a coalition of patients and providers submitted more than 46,000 signatures to the city in May to require a public vote on the new rules. That left the City Council with a choice: Repeal the ordinance or pay to put it on a ballot.

County Registrar of Voters Deborah Seiler estimated the election costs would be as much as $1 million — a price tag most council members said was too high for a measure that had strong opposition from such a wide spectrum of groups.

“Some people would vote against it because in their minds the ordinance went too far and was too permissive, others would vote against it because the ordinance didn’t go far enough and we would be back at square one,” Councilwoman Sherri Lightner said. “Given the cost of the election, it would be like sending close to a million dollars up in smoke.”

The decision leaves the city with no comprehensive policies regarding where or how a collective can operate legally.

Rachel Laing, a spokeswoman for Mayor Jerry Sanders, said it will be up to code compliance officers to investigate complaints against collectives and tell the owners what they need to do to address any problems.

Medical marijuana dispensaries are not a permitted use under current codes. The only way a dispensary could comply with city rules would be for it to shut its doors.

Whether the city enforces that law is another matter. Such code violations generally weren’t pursued before the ordinance was passed.

Eugene Davidovich, the local chapter coordinator for Americans for Safe Access, said he hopes to see medical marijuana advocates propose a new ordinance to the City Council or try to create new regulations through the city’s Planning Commission.

Davidovich said the new ordinance would likely be more in line with what an advisory marijuana task force recommended when the issue was being debated last summer. Those rules would differ from the repealed measure by allowing dispensaries in a wider variety of commercial and industrial zones, which medical marijuana advocates say are necessary to make sure the sickest patients have access to their medicine.

But the task force’s recommendations are far too broad for those who hope San Diego will follow the lead of a dozen California counties in banning dispensaries.

Councilman Carl DeMaio originally voted against the ordinance because he believed it did not go far enough. “There is a very difficult policy process that now we have to follow and ... one potential outcome would be no law with enforcement actions taken without any sort of regulation or potentially a very clear law that enacts a moratorium or ban,” he said.

Council members Marti Emerald and Tony Young voted against the repeal, saying the public should make the decision about whether the previously adopted rules were appropriate.

Kenneth Cole, the owner of One on One, a collective just blocks away from City Hall in downtown, said he hopes the repeal of the ordinance does not result in sweeping store closures.

“I think there are going to be unintended consequences for both sides, but I hope this doesn’t mean raids and a return to the wild, wild west,” Cole said. “These patients deserve to be treated with respect.”

The repeal vote came on the same day backers of a new statewide ballot initiative to decriminalize marijuana began collecting signatures.

In 2010, a ballot measure to legalize the recreational use of pot failed with 53 percent of Californians and San Diegans voting against it.

Original Article Available here: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jul/25/san-diego-medical-marijuana-ordinance-smoke/

Patient Advocates Appeal Federal Decision to Deny Medical Marijuana to Millions of Americans

Notice of appeal filed in D.C. Circuit challenges recent denial to reschedule marijuana for medical use

Washington, DC -- The country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group, Americans for Safe Access (ASA), with the Coalition for Rescheduling Cannabis (CRC), today appealed a recent decision by the federal government to keep marijuana classified as a dangerous drug with no medical value. The appeal to the D.C. Circuit comes just two weeks after the Obama Administration denied a 2002 petition to reschedule marijuana filed by a coalition of patients and advocacy groups. ASA will argue in a forthcoming appeal brief to be filed in the next few weeks that the federal government erred by keeping marijuana out of reach for millions of patients throughout the United States.

"By ignoring the wealth of scientific evidence that clearly shows the therapeutic value of marijuana, the Obama Administration is playing politics at the expense of sick and dying Americans," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who filed the notice of appeal today. "For the first time in more than 15 years we will be able to present evidence in court to challenge the government's flawed position on medical marijuana." Although two other rescheduling petitions have been filed since the establishment of the Controlled Substances Act in 1970, the merits of medical efficacy was reviewed only once by the courts in 1994.

Patient advocates argue that by failing to reclassify marijuana, the federal government has stifled meaningful research into a wide array of therapeutic uses, such as pain relief, appetite stimulation, nausea suppression, and spasticity control among many other benefits. In 1988, the government ignored the ruling of its own Administrative Law Judge Francis Young who said that, "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man."

Since the CRC petition was filed, even more studies have been published that show the medical benefits of marijuana for illnesses such as neuropathic pain, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's. Recent studies even show that marijuana may inhibit the growth of cancer cells. Earlier this year, the National Cancer Institute, a division of the federal Department of Health and Human Services, added cannabis (marijuana) to its list of Complementary Alternative Medicines, pointing out that it's been therapeutically used for millennia.

Ironically, in December of 2010 the Obama Administration issued a memorandum on "the preservation and promotion of scientific integrity" of the executive branch. Yet, the application of such integrity appears to be applied selectively and not with regard to medical marijuana. "With science on our side, we will put an end to the government's political posturing," continued Elford, "and force the Obama Administration to adhere to its own stated policy of emphasizing science over politics."

When the latest petition was filed by the CRC in 2002, eight states had adopted laws recognizing and decriminalizing the medical use of marijuana. Today, sixteen states and the nation's capitol have passed medical marijuana laws with many more states currently considering proposals to implement similar laws.

Further information:
ASA notice of appeal filed today:http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/CRC_Appeal_Notice.pdf
DEA answer to CRC petition:http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/CRC_Petition_DEA_Answer.pdf
CRC rescheduling petition: http://www.drugscience.org/PDF/Petition_Final_2002.pdf
White House scientific integrity memo:http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/scientific-integrity-memo-12172010.pdf

Election and Ethics Complaints Filed Against Scott Chipman and Others Involved in Anti Marijuana Campaign and Other Political Committees

SAN DIEGO – Formal complaints against principal officers of Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana (CALM CA) and ‘Safe Beaches San Diego Yes on D’ have been submitted to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ Public Integrity Unit, and the City of San Diego Ethics Commission.

The complaints document a multitude of election related violations committed by Scott Chipman, William Lowe, and other members of these campaigns. The violations include failure to disclose payments for mass campaign literature, failure to disclose payments made by an agent, use of illegal political slush fund, as well as failure to register as a lobbyist.

Eugene Davidovich a San Diego resident, Navy Veteran and medical marijuana advocate mailed the 70 page complaints last week to the FPPC, a state agency that oversees election campaign rules and regulations. The complaint asks the agency to launch a formal investigation into the political practices of Chipman et al.

CALM CA was founded by Scott Chipman and William Lowe in March of 2010 to Oppose Proposition 19 and Safe Beaches San Diego was a committee founded to help enact an alcohol ban on the beaches in San Diego.

If the FPPC and San Diego Ethics Commission find Chipman in violation, he could face thousands of dollars in fines.

Since Chipman’s involvement with the Yes on D and CALM CA, he along with long time San Diego prohibitionist and Bonnie Dumanis supporter Marcy Beckett formed San Diegans for Safe Neighborhoods which they are using to lobby against safe access to medical marijuana for legitimate patients in San Diego. As part of Beckett’s eradication efforts, she was responsible for filing as many as one hundred police complaints against medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego.

“Mr. Chipman has a lengthy and significant history of involvement in San Diego politics throughout which he failed to disclose various campaign activities and appears to have created an illegal political slush fund” said Davidovich. “It is imperative that Mr. Chipman disclose and that the general public be informed of his activities so that they may make intelligent voting and donating decisions”.

The complaints come as Chipman is actively lobbying against medical marijuana patients through his ‘San Diegans for Safe Neighborhoods’ campaign as well as working with San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ mayoral campaign. Chipman has also contributed money to Council member Lorie Zapf’s election campaign and other anti medical marijuana candidates.

Further Information:
FPPC Complaint
San Diego Ethics Commission Complaint

San Diego City Council to Consider Repeal of Medical Marijuana Ordinance on July 25 – 2pm

By: Eugene Davidovich, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

On April 12, 2011 the San Diego City Council passed an ordinance that would have forced all currently operating medical cannabis dispensing centers in the city to shutter their doors. Only a small handful would have been allowed to open after they came into compliance with one of the most restrictive ordinance in the state, and the most restrictive zoning and operational requirements imposed on any organization/business in the City of San Diego.

If left as passed, the ordinance would have hurt the most vulnerable members of our community, those with seriously ill and debilitating conditions who use therapeutically use cannabis by leaving them without safe and reliable access in their neighborhoods.

Before the ordinance took effect as law, medical marijuana advocates headed by the Patient Care Association (www.pcaca.org) successfully gathered enough signatures to force a referendum on the ordinance. The signatures were submitted to the City Clerk for verification almost two months ago, and on Wednesday of this week, the community received confirmation that the signatures were valid.

The referendum successfully stops the current ordinance from taking effect and now gives the City Council an opportunity to consider either repealing the ordinance or putting it up for a vote of the people on the June 2012 primary election. According to the Union Tribune, to place this issue on the ballot could cost the city close to $1 million.

Within ten day of being presented the valid signatures, the City is required to place the issue on the agenda.

At the 2pm City Council meeting on July 25, the item is expected to be added to the agenda for discussion and vote.

Please come out and voice your support for reasonable and safe regulations, and urge the City Council to bring the ordinance back in line with the recommendations of the City’s Medical Marijuana Task Force rather than the politically driven ban passed by the council in April.

WHAT: San Diego City Council to Consider Repeal of Medical Marijuana Ordinance
WHEN: July 25, 2011
WHERE: San Diego City Hall - 202 C Street San Diego CA – 12th Floor

Visit www.safeaccesssd.org for the latest information on the struggle for patient’s rights here in San Diego.

Verified Petition Signatures Effectively Block City Ban on Collectives Patient Care Association Urges Rescission

Source: Patient Care Association of California (PCA)


Media Contact: Stephen McCamman, mccamman@gmail.com, 619-246-5564 or Cynara Velazquez, cynara@pcaca.org, 619-208-0567
Date: July 13th, 2011

SAN DIEGO, CA The Citizens for Patient’s Rights (CPR) and the Patient Care Association of California (PCA) are proud to announce that San Diego’s City Clerk has verified the required 31, 029 signatures on CPR's petition referendum, effectively blocking the land use ordinance that banned medical cannabis collectives. The City Council now has ten days to either rescind the ordinance or schedule an election.

In order to avoid the prohibitive costs of an election, the CPR and the PCA respectfully urge the San Diego City Council to rescind the March 2011 land use ordinance. If rescinded, the City Council has a second chance to not only create a new land use ordinance that respects the rights of patients to safe access but also work with the city's medical cannabis collectives to provide clear guidance fifteen years after the passage of the Compassionate Use Act. The PCA looks forward to the day when patients' rights are protected and the collectives can operate in a clearly defined regulatory environment.

ABOUT: The Citizens for Patient Rights (CPR) was founded in 2011 to address the Land Use ordinances passed by the City of San Diego. The Patient Care Association is a coalition of patients, caregivers, and collective directors, representing over 60 collectives and tens of thousands of patients and caregivers.

There's Still Time to Double Your Impact

Dear ASA Members and Friends,

The response to Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps’ matching gift has been amazing – thank you to everyone who has donated so far. However, time is not up if you haven’t had the chance to donate yet.
Dr. Bronner’s is matching all online donations through Friday at midnight. Don’t miss this opportunity to double the impact of your donation.

Dr. Bronner’s matching gift comes at a crucial time. The Obama Administration has recently made clear its intolerance of medical cannabis. In the same week, the DEA rejected a petition to reschedule cannabis, stating it has no medical value in the U.S., and the Department of Justice issued a memo stating that it will continue to raid and arrest providers, even if they are in compliance with local laws. Now is the time to rise up in opposition to the federal government and its abuse of authority.

ASA is poised to respond to this federal interference, but we need your support to make our response effective and long-lasting. Can you donate $50, $100, $300, or whatever you can afford, to help us fight? Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps has generously offered to match every online donation ASA receives through July 15, so your donation today will really help out.

Don’t miss this chance to have your donation go twice as far!

In Solidarity,
Steph Sherer

DA Bonnie Dumanis Pushes on with Prosecution of Legal San Diego Medical Marijuana Collective

By: Terrie Best, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

Legal cannabis patient Dexter Padilla was in court last week in front of Judge Albert T. Hartunian III as he and his attorney, Michael J. McCabe, of the Davidovich victory, fought it out with Prosecutor Ramin Tohidi over whether there was enough prosecutorial evidence to bind the case over for trial.

The Preliminary Examination of the evidence on one count of cannabis cultivation and one count of possession with intent to distribute came after a series of exhaustive disclosure meetings between attorneys for defense and prosecution where, the defense’ witness, Mark Wuerfel, Esq. Dexter’s civil attorney, laid open Dexter’s books, Articles of Incorporation papers, Bylaws and every other piece of evidence to show Dexter’s lawfulness in his cultivation and possession of medical cannabis.

The disclosure meetings proved both unusual and ultimately unsuccessful, based on the fact that Bonnie Dumanis’ office stubbornly refuses to drop this case against a shinning example of a patient citizen’s efforts to navigate the murky medical marijuana laws and her refusal to interpret the law in a manner that is fiscally responsible and logical.

Preliminary exam proceedings began with the prosecution’s first witness, Detective Paul Paxton of the San Diego Police Department. Paxton, cross-sworn as a DEA Agent and part of Dumanis’ expensive and politically conceived Narcotics Task Force (NTF), testified to having 12 years as a narcotics officer with training from various drug enforcement entities as well as “what he’s seen on TV” about drug enforcement.

Paxton denied training in medical marijuana but went on to explain his interpretation of plant yields. An interpretation which defense held him accountable for on cross as Mr. McCabe wrangled with Paxton to admit un-rooted cuttings have only a 30% survival rate and other contrived opinions about yields from Paxton’s testimony.

Mr. McCabe, in his cross also examined the details of the investigation which led to the search warrant and raid of Dexter Padilla’s legally grown cannabis. Of note is that Paxton’s surveillance, which took but one day, included the knowledge that Dexter was involved in a legitimate medical cannabis co-op and was in fact providing medicine to patients. Paxton, instead of attempting to verify the co-op, or contact it’s directors, went ahead and obtained the search warrant and raided the warehouse where Dexter grew for his patients, destroying the medicine which was intended to provide relief for those patients.

Mr. McCabe put forth a number of exhibits in defense of Dexter’s co-op, including, Articles of Incorporation with language about the Compassionate Use Act (CUA) and signed by the Secretary of State, the co-op’s financials, prepared by a CPA, Bylaws and minutes from the Board of Directors meetings as well as patient and grower contracts, the latter of which included language for oversight of each grow as well as legal doctors’ cannabis recommendations for each grower.

In a fastidious but prickly move, Tohidi demanded the doctor recommendations be removed from each grower contract packet as he questioned the validity of the recommendations.

Arguments for the defense brought Mr. Wuerfel to the stand, who not only served as Dexter’s civil attorney but the Custodian of Records for the co-op. Tohidi fretted, in his attempt to eliminate Mr. Wuerfel as a witness, that he would opine on law and maneuver to school the judge. However, the judge allowed Mr. Wuerfel to take the stand.

Mr. Wuerfel a former federal law clerk, attorney of 33 years, law professor and founder of Redwood Law Group, testified to the lengths he advised Dexter to go to demonstrate lawfulness in his co-op and the methods of disclosure he recommended.

Among the advice Dexter followed were processes for board of director oversight, source/cultivation documentation, financial considerations and tax oversight, methods of facilitating the examination of these documents by co-op members and law enforcement and host of other mechanisms meant to exceed the most stringent view of the Attorney General Guidelines for Medical Marijuana. It was on Mr. Wuerfel’s recommendation that Dexter re-file his current Articles of Incorporation papers to include the CUA language.

In final argument Mr. McCabe referred to a number of cases including People v. Konow 2004, a case McCabe himself won, in which a patient/defendant may suggest that the court dismiss a case ” in the interest of justice”, and the court has the power to do so.

However, while Judge Hartunian admitted the prosecution had not proven unlawfulness, he, never-the-less, bound Dexter Padilla over for trial so his case could go before a jury.

I had the opportunity to speak with Dexter and Mr. Wuerfel about the climate of medical cannabis law in California, Mr. Wuerfel, who has had his own struggles with federal agents in defense of legal medical cannabis law, stated that often in these cases the procedure is the punishment but expressed confidence that Dexter had conducted his co-op with his i’s dotted and t’s crossed and it would likely not escape jury notice.

Dexter will be arraigned on July 28, 2011 in Department 11.

City Council Approves Ban on Patients Growing Medicine in Private Homes in Imperial Beach

Imperial Beach City Council approves ban in violation of State Law on patients growing medicine in their own homes; patients and advocates are outraged and ready to turn to the voters in 2012 

By: Terrie Best, San Diego Americans for Safe Access

Imperial Beach, CA – On July 7th, 2011, with a 4 to 1 vote, the Imperial Beach (IB) City Council approved an ordinance banning collective cultivation of medical marijuana within city limits including in the private homes of qualified patients.

This latest move by the council against California’s medical marijuana laws goes above and beyond banning dispensaries or large scale cultivation of marijuana in Imperial Beach. The law actually prohibits patients from growing small numbers of plants together in their homes. The ordinance now stands in direct contradiction to state law, which explicitly allow patients to “associate in order to collectively or cooperatively cultivate medical marijuana”. (CA H&S 11362.775)

"It's not our job to sit up here and say who does and who does not need medical marijuana." said Councilmember Bilbray just prior casting the only vote in opposition to the ban.

The ban comes two years after the IB City Council enacted a moratorium committing them to creating reasonable regulations and over the most unprecedented opposition the Council has ever seen on this issue. Throughout the months leading up to the final vote, over 700 hundred residents and local supporters of safe access wrote letters to city officials urging them to create reasonable regulations protecting the most vulnerable members of their community.

In response to pleas from constituents and patients, city officials offered claims of crime as the reason for the ban and decided to enact an ordinance that is in direct violation of state law.

The day of the final vote, a number of speakers from the community came out to urge the council not to enact the ban including Brianna Bilbray, Councilmember Bilbray’s sister.

In a moving speech Ms. Bilbray, a medical cannabis patient and cancer survivor herself, shared her experience treating nausea and fatigue caused by the chemotherapy she underwent using cannabis therapeutics. She focused on the fact that driving across the county to obtain medication to relieve the side-effects of chemotherapy was not something sick and dying patients should have to endure.

No one from the public that night spoke in favor of the ban.

"If you vote to approve this ban tonight, you will be doing so against the will of your own constituents who you purport to represent," said Marcus Boyd, Vice Chair of San Diego Americans for Safe Access, the local chapter of the nation’s largest medical cannabis patient’s rights advocacy group. "Although you may think you are putting this issue to rest tonight, I can assure you, by taking these steps you are guaranteeing that this issue will stay front and center leading right into 2012."

Boyd also spoke directly to the Mayor and each Councilmember, to Mayor Janny Boyd said, "I specifically recall Mayor, you instructing staff to keep politics out of this process. You have not kept your promise. You have allowed this bias and reefer madness propaganda to drive your decisions rather than facts and findings."

Marcus went on to tell Councilmember Spriggs, "I'm surprised you Councilmember, of all people, allowed anyone to pollute your thoughts on this issue with misinformation, you are a chancellor at UCSD’s Medical Center, the very same medical center that was contracted and funded by the State of California to study only harm related to the use of marijuana as a pharmaceutical. And as you know, and can testify with authority, no HARM was found, in fact weren’t major benefits found?"

It appeared the Council members who voted to approve the ban already had their minds made up and nothing, including compelling patient testimonials, science, or actual crime statistics would change their minds. Each of them simply reiterated their weak positions before taking a vote against the most vulnerable members of their community and the objections of the community at large.

“I am very disappointed in the City Council vote” Said Eugene Davidovich, Chair of San Diego Americans for Safe Access, “the only next logical step is to place an initiative on the ballot, one that protects the needs of patients in Imperial Beach as well as addresses the concerns brought forward by the City Council, IB will have safe access, it is just a matter of time”.

Further Information:

• Imperial Beach City Council Shifts Course on Dispensaries from Regulation to Eradication
• Advocates Issue ‘Enhanced’ Red Alert Specifically to Imperial Beach Supporters of Medical Marijuana
• Imperial Beach to Ban Collective Cultivation; City Council Refuses to Implement State’s Medical Marijuana Laws

Help Protect Safe Access in CA!

Dear ASA Members & Friends,

There are two problematic medical cannabis bills in the state legislature right now, and Americans for Safe Access (ASA) needs your help today to stop them. Can you take a minute to send two emails to help protect safe access in California?

Senator Lou Correa’s (D-Santa Ana) SB 847 will require patients’ cooperatives and collectives to be located at least 600 feet from residential zones or uses statewide. This would severely limit – or even eliminate – opportunities for legal access in many cities. Tell your state Assemblymember to vote NO on SB 847.

Assemblymember Bob Blumenfield’s (D-Van Nuys) AB 1300 will authorize cities and counties to ban medical cannabis cooperatives and collectives. This may provoke a rash of new bans on safe access all over the state. Tell your state Senator to vote NO on AB 1300, so that state and local government can cooperate on sensible regulations.

Your participation matters. If lawmakers do not hear from you, they will only be listening to our opponents. ASA's Online Action Center makes it easy to find your Representative and send messages right now.

ASA is your voice in Sacramento. Our successful advocacy, media, and legal campaigns have resulted in important court precedents, return of confiscated medicine, and more compassionate community guidelines. We need your support to keep fighting. If you make a contribution to support ASA’s work before Friday, July 15, our friends at Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soap will match your donation! Take advantage of this generous offer and help support ASA today!

Thank you,

Don Duncan
California Director

P.S. – Download a copy of the July newsletter to read and share.

SIGN THE PETITION & PLEDGE TO NOT VOTE OR SUPPORT BONNIE DUMANIS for Mayor in 2012

San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis has persecuted sick and dying medical marijuana patients and has made numerous bad decision in charging innocent people with felonies. Dumanis has failed her constituents and does not use due diligence in researching cases that she takes to trial.

Dumanis has a bad habit of protecting her rich friends and cronies but not doing anything else for the rest of the people in San Diego. She is not qualified or ethically-equipped to even consider running for Mayor of San Diego. Please become enlightened and JUST SAY NO TO DUMANIS!


Sign petition to pledge your opposition here

Patients' Lawsuit Forces Federal Gov't to Answer 9-Year-Old Medical Marijuana Rescheduling Petition

Petition's denial maintains status quo, gives advocates chance to appeal and argue marijuana's therapeutic value

Washington, DC -- Less than two months after patient advocates filed a lawsuit compelling the federal government to answer a 9-year-old petition to reschedule medical marijuana, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) today made official its denial of the petition in the Federal Register. The Coalition for Rescheduling Cannabis (CRC), which includes patient advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA), filed the petition in 2002 seeking to reclassify marijuana from its current status as a dangerous drug with no medical value, but never heard from the federal government until it received the denial.

In its denial of the CRC petition, the government concluded that "marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no accepted medical use in the United States, and lacks an acceptable level of safety for use even under medical supervision," recommending that marijuana remain in Schedule I. "Although this superficially looks like a defeat for the medical marijuana community," said Joe Elford, ASA Chief Counsel and lead counsel in the recent lawsuit. "It simply maintains the status quo," Elford continued. "More importantly, however, we have foiled the government's strategy of delay and we can now go head-to-head on the merits, that marijuana really does have therapeutic value." ASA intends to appeal the government's denial of the petition to the D.C. Circuit as soon as possible.

Notably, the petition denial was sent to legal counsel in the pending lawsuit on June 30th, one day after the Justice Department issued a memorandum to U.S. Attorneys upholding federal threats of criminal prosecution against local and state officials for attempting to pass and implement their own medical marijuana laws. "The federal government is making no bones about its aggressive policy to undermine medical marijuana," said ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer, "And we're prepared to take the Obama Administration to court over it."

The denial also comes the same week as the International Cannabinoid Research Society (ICRS) is holding its 21st annual symposium in St. Charles, Illinois, just outside of Chicago. The symposium is sponsored in part by an array of pharmaceutical companies, the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), and ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., the federal government's only licensed source of research-grade cannabis (marijuana) used in therapeutic studies. Currently, several pharmaceutical companies are asking the government to reschedule organically produced THC, the primary compound found in the marijuana plant, so they can sell a generic version of Marinol®, which is now made synthetically.

"The government cannot have it both ways, marijuana is either a medicine or it's not." continued Sherer. "If the government is going to sponsor a conference on medical marijuana, it should show the same deference to the millions of patients across America who simply want access to it." ASA and its grassroots patient base has been urging President Obama since he took office to develop a comprehensive federal policy that would address medical marijuana as a public health issue.

Over the past few years since the CRC petition was filed, the two largest physician groups in the country -- the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians -- both urged the federal government to review marijuana's status as a Schedule I substance. In addition to new scientific discoveries occurring on a regular basis, numerous polls have shown that medical marijuana has the support of up to 80% of Americans.

Further information:
DEA answer to CRC petition: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/CRC_Petition_DEA_Answer.pdf
Lawsuit compelling government to answer CRC petition: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/CRC_Writ.pdf
ASA backgrounder on rescheduling: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Rescheduling_Backgrounder.pdf
CRC rescheduling petition: http://www.drugscience.org/PDF/Petition_Final_2002.pdf