Medical Marijuana - ID Cards > Rexroad.com

There is an issue coming before the county regarding the implementation of SB 420 (Vasconcellos). This bill requires counties to implement some kind of a plan regarding identification.

You can read more about SB 420 here.

I've never smoked (or inhaled) marijuana but personally have real doubts about making it illegal while we allow alcohol and tabacco to be used freely. We have to draw a line somewhere but I am not sure that the current line can be justified.

In preparing for this issue that will come before the board I was provided with this document prepared by the Riverside County District Attorney's Office.

You can read it here.

The legal brief prepared by the Riverside DA is pretty compelling to me. Please let me know what you think.

Comments

By Billy Bob @ Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:03 AM

No matter how this bill is written, if the county adopts this, they are still in Violation of Federal Law! The United States does not recognize the Dope Law that passed here some years ago. I think its great when the feds (DEA) get board and need something to do, they go knock down some doors on these so called "Pot Houses". Its a proven fact, that the establishment of these commpassion centers increase crime in the area. I know of two that operate in a N. CA county and they sell opiates, meth and are just a bad idea. I am all for the DEA doing what there doing, they go in, they take their weed, it gets tied up in court under the state law and the weed is off the street so your son or daughter is not getting it at school! Because if you think that these commpassion centers are just selling to really sick people, think again, there is a community of so called doctors in Marine, Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties that prescribe this to whom ever. If your knee hurts, you get it, if you have head ache's, you get....This is not a joke, this is how it works. Wake Up Voters!
aka.Billy Bob.

By yolovoter @ Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:59 PM

^^ Whoa...people like they above actually exist? I feel like I've seen a ghost...Err, wait. A demon.

I'd like to argue with him/her, but it wouldn't be possible...total waste of time. But thank the good lord very few people in California think like that. One of the reasons I live here!

By Billy Bob @ Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:48 PM

Here is a great story you can read, there will be plenty more to come! GOD I LOVE THE DEA! If this so LEGAL for California, WHY is the United States Department of Justice, spending MILLIONS of dollars to take down these compassion centers? There ILLEGAL!
Federal law, Gonzales V. Rich 03-1454
I guess there are more GHOST"S than you thought!

12/13/2006

Two Arrests at Hayward Marijuana Distribution Center

Law Enforcement Arrests the Owner and the Manager of Local Patients Cooperative

Seizes Inert Grenades, Sophisticated Indoor Marijuana Grows, Hundreds of Marijuana Plants, Marijuana Baked Goods, High Value Vehicles and U.S Currency

HAYWARD, Calif. - Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Special Agent in Charge Javier F. Peña, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Special Agent in Charge Roger L. Wirth and United States Attorney Kevin V. Ryan, announced that DEA and IRS Special Agents arrested the owner and manager of the Local Patients Cooperative in Hayward today. Shon Matthew SQUIER, 34, and Valerie Lynn HERSCHEL, 23, both of Hayward, California, were arrested on charges of conspiracy to distribute marijuana and the distribution of marijuana. In addition to the arrests, special agents executed five federal search warrants, including the Local Patients Cooperative facility located on Foothill Blvd., two associated residences in Hayward, and two cars.

As a result of today's search, law enforcement seized indoor marijuana grows, hundreds of marijuana plants, marijuana laced cookies, brownies, popcorn, pies, candy, two inert grenades, U.S. Currency and several high value vehicles to include Mercedes, Hummer, Cadillac Escalade, Volvo, Dodge Truck, Harley Davidson and Ducati Motorcycles.

"We will continue to enforce federal drug laws and seize the profits that go hand in hand with these illicit sales," stated DEA Special Agent in Charge Javier F. Peña.

According to the criminal complaint, the Hayward Local Patents Cooperative attempts to disguise the breadth of its criminal activity by claiming that it caters exclusively to persons suffering from medical illnesses, when in fact persons without any medical condition can purchase marijuana at the retail establishment. During a recent inspection by Hayward Police Department, officers saw over 200 pounds of marijuana at the location as well as numerous marijuana plants.

The DEA and IRS began this investigation approximately one year ago. Throughout the investigation agents learned that SQUIER was allegedly the owner of the marijuana distribution center, while HERSCHEL allegedly acted as a manager. Furthermore, agents received information that Local Patients Cooperative allegedly operated a sophisticated indoor marijuana grow with multiple grow rooms and had hundreds of pounds of processed marijuana on hand. The facility also had a variety of marijuana for sale and also offered miscellaneous items such as edibles, hash, kief, cookies, brownies and oils. Court documents un-sealed today revealed that on multiple occasions, law enforcement observed between 20-30 males, approximately 20-40 years of age, enter the distribution center and depart, individually, with a small white bags displaying the word "Prescription". The complaint also alleges that the men entered the establishment unassisted and appeared to be healthy. Furthermore, agents had observed individuals, believed to be uniformed security personnel, protecting the perimeter and entrance of the building.

Both SQUIER and HERSCHEL are charged with the following violations: Title 21 United States Code ("U.S.C."), Section 846-Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana, Section 841(a)(1)-Distribution of Marijuana and Section 856(a)(1)- Maintaining a drug-involved premises. The maximum statutory penalty for Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana and the Distribution of Marijuana charges are a maximum term of imprisonment of twenty years, a $1,000,000 fine, a 3 year term of supervised release and a $100 special assessment. The maximum statutory penalty for Maintaining a Drug Involved Premises is a maximum term of imprisonment of twenty years, a $500,000 dollar fine, a 3 year term of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment.

SQUIER and HERSCHEL will make their initial appearance in U.S. District Court in Oakland on December 13, 2006, at 10 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil.

Today's enforcement operation was conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration, Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, with the assistance of the Hayward Police Department, South Alameda County Narcotics Enforcement Team ("SACNET") and the Livermore Police Department.

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Shashi Kewalramani with the assistance of Legal Assistant Cynthia Daniel. The charges are only allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Humint, aka Billy Bob.

By Charlie in Japan @ Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:48 PM

Yolovoter...There you go again...Insulting people you don’t agree with...This time it is a "ghost...Err, wait. A demon"...That is just so arrogant!!! The fact is Billy Bob is correct. The Federal law does trump the California Proposition (the Feds had not enfored it yet..but they will soon....and have started to in some cases).

I could say something nasty about your continuing blog comments degrading others...but I will not lower myself... Your continuing comments speak for them self.

(In my humble opinion, Charlie-san)

By Aaron_Smith @ Friday, February 23, 2007 8:54 PM

Honorable Supervisor Rexroad-

I am writing in regards to your inclination to base your support for implementation of California's medical marijuana statutes in Yolo County on the opinion of the Riverside County District Attorney:

The Riverside County District Attorney is one rogue official in a county nearly 500 miles from your district. I think it would also be prudent to take into account the opinion of the CA Attorney General and especially, the courts when deciding this issue.

I want to take this opportunity to explain that while any use of marijuana is against federal law, issuance of the ID cards by county staff does not amount to a federal crime. Please refer to the following cites, these are only the most recent cases affecting the issue:

- In 2002, the US Supreme Court decided in the case of Conant v. Walters that doctors have a First Amendment right to recommend marijuana to their patients. The issuance of documentation (e.g. the state ID cards) which merely records the existence of the recommendation is an action even further removed than the recommendation itself. It is more than reasonable to say there is no possibility the MMIC program violates either state or federal law.

- In 2005, the US Supreme Court decided in the case of Raich v. Gonzalez that Federal officers do have the authority to enforce federal drug laws--even in state's, such as California, where medical marijuana has been legalized. The court did NOT rule that our state
law was in any way preempted by federal law, only that the two conflicting laws can coexist under a federalist system.
This ruling concerned the California Dept. of Health Services (CDHS), who were in the process of developing the MMIC program at the time, <a href:"http://www.aaronsmith.org/AG_opinion_MMIC.pdf">however the State Attorney General concluded that the MMIC program did not violate federal law. </a> AG's in ten other medical marijuana states also issued similar opinions.

- In 2006, the federal government challenged Oregon's assisted suicide law based on the fact that it allows doctors to directly violate the
US Controlled Substances Act by administering overdoses to patients under certain circumstances. The US Supreme Court found in Gonzales v. Oregon that Oregon's law was not preempted by federal law. This affects medical marijuana laws because it clearly shows the Court's position on a state's right set its own drug/medical policies, even
when they conflict with federal law. It would be unreasonable to expect the courts to reject a state's right to allow therapeutic use of marijuana while allowing doctors to assist in suicides.

- Most recently, in December 2006, the San Diego Superior Court reaffirmed the fact that the MMIC program does not violate federal law
and that counties would in fact be violating state law by not implementing the MMIC program. This decision was a result of the
County of San Diego v. CalNORML, State of California, et al.
The counties of San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced attempted to escape their statutory obligation to administer the MMIC program by filing the futile lawsuit. This ruling should serve as further clarification of the established law for counties across the state.

I hope these facts help you to make an informed decision on Tuesday. Not implementing the program in Yolo County would do nothing to clarify our decade-old medical marijuana law and would only leave
patients and law enforcement officers in further legal limbo.

Implementation, would provide much needed direction to law enforcement, fulfill the county's statutory obligation and save the
sick and dying from unnecessary arrest for cases that cannot even be prosecuted.

Thank you for your time. Feel free to contact me at any time to discuss this further.

Sincerely,

Aaron Smith
---
Aaron Smith, Statewide Coordinator
Safe Access Now
Ph: (866) 287-6792
Fx: (866) 204-1341
safeaccessnow@gmail.com
www.safeaccessnow.com

By Aaron_Smith @ Friday, February 23, 2007 8:56 PM

I'm sorry I posted the HTML for my link incorrectly. Here is a the copy of the AG opinion on the MMIC:

http://www.aaronsmith.org/AG_opinion_MMIC.pdf

Thanks- Aaron S

By duane750 @ Sunday, February 25, 2007 7:32 AM

I applaud your effort for the sick, however, until federal law is changed, I don't see Resig and Prieto supporting the violation of federal law. When a public official is sworn in, he/she must "promise to defend the laws of the State of California and the United States, uphold Constitution" going against them would violate their oath of office.

By Aaron_Smith @ Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:23 PM

Officials working for the state, including its cities and counties are sworn to uphold both the State and Federal Constitutions. The US Constitution leaves issues such as medical marijuana to the states (Amend. 9 & 10).

The California Constitution specifically orders state law be upheld, even when it conflicts with federal law. See below:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SEC. 3.5. An administrative agency, including an administrative agency created by the Constitution or an initiative statute, has no power:

(c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce a statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibit the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made a determination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited by federal law or federal regulations.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_3

By Billy Bob @ Sunday, February 25, 2007 7:57 PM

So, what your saying is that the United States Federal Law has NO STANDING in California? Then why is the DEA raiding all these so called compassion centers? Under what authority do they do this? So, you are saying these men and woman are in violation of the law? I would suggest you call your local AG's office and tell them the DEA is violating the law and they are not enforceing the state law, because it has more power over the United States of America! yea that will work...LOL....let me know how that turns out.
Humint..aka Billy Bob

By Charlie in Japan @ Monday, February 26, 2007 2:24 AM

Billy Bob...relax...All the above is a bunch of leagal 'GobblyGook'... The bottom line is the 'Back Yard' Pot gardens are mostly being used by 'Pot Heads' and not medical patients. If the State ran the program under strick control and issuance of the product...then they would have a leg to stand on... But the Prop was written to allow pot heads to grow pot... and Medical use was just a cover... I have always been aginst this poorly written law...and always will be. (My humble Opinion)...Charlie-san

By Aaron_Smith @ Monday, February 26, 2007 9:04 AM

<< So, what your saying is that the United States Federal Law has NO STANDING in California? >>

This is not what I am saying. The DEA has the legal authority to enforce federal drug laws, which deem all marijuana illegal <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassionate_Investigational_New_Drug_program#Compassionate_IND_today">(with the exception of the 5 patients that are lucky enough to get their medical marijuana from the feds.) .</a>
State officers have an obligation to enforce California law, even when it conflicts with state law (see above from CA Constitution).

While the DEA has gone after large scale providers of medical cannabis, they have left individual patients alone. The also have never asserted that the ID program violates federal law, even in Oregon where a program has existed since 1999.

This may be legal 'GobblyGook' to some folks, but it is pretty important to have our facts straight while making decisions about legal issues.

Any state official who does not like the law can work to change it, but it is their duty to uphold existing law, not bury their heads in the sand to pretend the law does not exist.

Isn't that what law enfocement has always said: "we don't make the laws, we just enforce them." and "if you don't like the laws, change 'em."

Well, we did change them and it's time to start enforcing them.

Aaron S

By duane750 @ Monday, February 26, 2007 9:23 AM

"Any state official who does not like the law can work to change it, but it is their duty to uphold existing law, not bury their heads in the sand to pretend the law does not exist"
You said, they need to enforce the current laws of the United States of America!

By Aaron_Smith @ Monday, February 26, 2007 11:28 AM

Perhaps you missed this section of the state constitution:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SEC. 3.5. An administrative agency, including an administrative agency created by the Constitution or an initiative statute, has no power:

(c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce a statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibit the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made a determination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited by federal law or federal regulations.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_3

---
We could abolish states and abandon federalism, however it would take an overhaul of our country's law.
If you want to spearhead a crusade to expand the power of the federal government, at the expense of the state's and their taxpayers, go right ahead. You might have a couple of extreme liberal democrats on your side, but no true conservative would support this.

I, for one, love this country for it's federalist system and think that the power of state's to make their policy decisions is crucial to our success.

Aaron

By Nathan @ Monday, February 26, 2007 12:39 PM

Thanks for the explanation Aaron. Every city, county and state official should be aware that their authority comes ONLY from the state, not at all from the federal government. This has been ruled upon by both the California Supreme Court, AND the Supreme Court of the United States.

If anyone doesn't understand this, please refer to the League of California Cities document titled "The Powers and Limitations of a City" (it applies to Counties as well); here is the link: http://www.cacities.org/resource_files/3241.Cities%20powers%20and%20limitations%20.doc

The document starts off with this section:
"1. Cities may enact any local police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations that are not in conflict with general law of the state."

I understand that some people are clearly biased against medical marijuana patients, but the voters of California and the laws of California are on our side. And our public officials should set a good example by following the law regardless of their own perosnal biases.

Nathan Sands
Yolo County Resident
Area Representative for The Compassionate Coalition
www.CompassionateCoalition.org

By Charlie in Japan @ Monday, February 26, 2007 5:54 PM

So...to read all the legal 'GobblyGook' above...We need to again fight the Civil War again and form a Confederacy for 'States Rights' so that any state can do anything it wants and to heck with the 'United States...One Nation'(?) I don't think so! The medical Pot Prop as always been a cover to try to legalize Pot Gardens. I do wish there was a real law for real patients to get what they need under the FDA...But that is not what we have here... I STAND WITH THE UNION! (In my humble opinion, Charlie-san)

By YoloCalVet @ Saturday, March 10, 2007 6:12 PM

Teens at California school getting high on medical marijuana

Steven Luke, KNSD-TV, San Diego, California 3/9/2007

SAN DIEGO — Officials at the Grossmont Union High School District have sent letters home to parents, notifying them that a number of students have been caught on campus with medical marijuana cards.

District official Catherine Martin said they are concerned over the growing trend and the "apparent ease" with which teens are able to obtain the cards.

In the letters, parents, students and faculty are reminded that even if the cards are valid, it is against the law to have marijuana on school property.

Recently two East County teenagers were suspended for showing up at school high, with a medical marijuana card as their excuse, NBC 7/39 reported.

During a series of recent undercover sting operations, district attorney investigators identified four or five local doctors who are issuing cards or prescriptions without proper exams or follow up medical care.

Mission Valley is one location where officials said illegal drug trafficking has taken place.

San Diego District Attorney Narcotic Chief Damon Mosler told NBC 7/39 a bogus symptom and some cash is all a teenager needs to obtain a medical marijuana card.

You must be logged in to post a comment. You can login here