The Effects of Marijuana Legalization

"How can we are the cause of precisely what is perhaps just about the most dramatic legal disparities in medical cannabis thus far? The issue of non-profit ""sale"" of medical cannabis to qualified patients via collectives and cooperatives. There's nothing else like this dispute. What do professionals say about this anyway?

Steve Cooley, The Los Angeles District Attorney, disagrees with Jerry Brown, the California State Attorney General.

How could two prominent state-employed attorneys arrived at wholly different conclusions about the answer? First the Los Angeles District Attorney claims ""all sales are illegal"". The California State Attorney General was sure enough to create in the guidelines that ""storefront collectives could possibly be legal under state law"". How could this be? After all, each attorney is looking in the same thing, right?

So precisely what is the answer? What does regulations say?

COMPASSIONATE-USE ACT 1996

Proposition 215 that has been approved by a most Californians in 1996 and it became referred to as Compassionate-Use Act. The statute itself won't say anything about ""sales"" but it does speak about ""possession"", ""cultivating"", obtaining medical cannabis, about affordability and ""distribution"".

It does point out that qualified patients along with their primary caregivers are not victim to criminal issues:

""(B) To ensure that patients as well as their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the advice of an physician aren't subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.""

And what's more, it pushes governments to help you ensure ""safe and affordable access"" to medical cannabis for ""all qualified patients"".

""(C) To encourage the federal and state governments to implement an agenda for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to everyone patients in medical need of marijuana.""

The Los Angeles District Attorney, Steve Cooley, had State and Federal police officers agents raid a medical cannabis collective and arrest at the very least 3 people, the week before Christmas. He insists ""all sales are illegal"". This seems to be up against the letter and spirit of legislation, not the mention the spirit of the season.

Also if all ""sales"" are illegal, why does the Compassionate-Use Act say ""affordable""? If the patients are financially responsible for that cannabis, what makes Cooley expect the currency to become exchanged? What's wrong with incremental reimbursements?

MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM OF 2004

The Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) arrived to law in 2004 through the legislative approval of Senate Bill 420. It was the state's attempt ""to implement an agenda for your safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to any or all patients in medical need of marijuana,"" because Compassionate-Use Act of 1996 (Prop 215) encourages the State and Federal government to complete.

The MMP improves access to medical cannabis for qualified patients by approving collectives and cooperatives.

""(3) Enhance the access of patients and caregivers to medical marijuana through collective, cooperative cultivation projects.""

What Steve Cooley doesn't manage to understand is non-profit storefront Medical Cannabis Dispensing Collectives/Cooperatives would be the distribution element of ""cultivation projects"". Just like a collective cultivation farm wouldn't have customers arrive at the farm to have their tomatoes, they'd have to have their collective tomatoes at the farmer's market or distribution location-- that's how medical cannabis collective cultivations occur. Grown in a place for safety along with other reasons, then distributed at another location.

The MMP goes on to mention each of the criminal statutes that qualified patients and primary caregivers are exempt from. In section 11362.765, it says: ""shall not be subject, on that sole basis, to criminal liability under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570.""

Let's look at each of these one by one:

11357: [possession],

11358: [cultivation],

11359: [possession for sale],

11360: [""transports, imports into this state, sells, furnishes, administers, or gives away""- or offers to or attempts to complete any of those],

11366: [Every individual that opens or maintains anywhere to the purpose of unlawfully selling, offering, or using any controlled substance]

11366.5 [Managing an area manufacture, storage and/or the distribution of the controlled substance]

11570 [Every building or place used to the intent behind unlawfully selling, serving, storing, keeping, manufacturing, or giving out any controlled substance, precursor, or analog per this division, every building or place wherein or upon which those acts happen, can be a nuisance which shall be enjoined, abated, and prevented, and for which damages could be recovered, whether it can be a public or private nuisance.]

The Health and Safety Code section 11360 specifically says ""sells"". Not only that, additionally, it says: ""gives away"" and ""furnishes"". How come the LA District Attorney's office says ""all sales are illegal"" and non-profit storefront medical cannabis dispensing collectives/cooperatives are banned?

In that same bill,

""11362.775. Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, as well as the designated primary caregivers of qualified patients and persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California as a way collectively or cooperatively growing marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely for the basis of that fact be susceptible to state criminal sanctions under Section 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11366, 11366.5, or 11570.""

Again, it says that patients can collectively cultivate cannabis and distribute it amongst themselves for non-profit. Again, the distribution of medical cannabis is separate from the cultivation just as the manufacturing of my vicodin is situated separate from my pharmacy.

The Medical Marijuana Act also calls on the State Attorney General to deliver guidelines related to medical cannabis:

""The bill would need the Attorney General to build up and adopt guidelines to ensure the security and non-diversion of marijuana grown for medical use, as specified.""

And that precisely what State Attorney General, Jerry Brown did inside late summer of 2008.

GUIDELINES FOR THE SECURITY AND NON-DIVERSION OF MARIJUANA GROWN FOR MEDICAL USE August 2008

To fulfill his mandate, the State Attorney General release these guidelines to assist law enforcements do their jobs according to State law and to aid patients understand those laws.

The guidelines state non-profit storefront Medical Cannabis Dispensing Collectives and Cooperatives could be legal under state law should they followed the rules and also the above laws.

""It is the opinion of the Office which a properly organized and operated collective or cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana via a storefront could be lawful under California law""

The State Attorney General confirms what legislation says. The Attorney General could be the highest-ranking legal employee with the State of California. His office also taken care of immediately the problems raised in Los Angeles by City Attorney's office.

According to the New York Times on October 17: Christine Gasparac, a spokeswoman for State Attorney General Jerry Brown, said that after Mr. Trutanich's comments in Los Angeles, police officers officials and advocates from throughout the state had called seeking clarity on medicinal marijuana laws.

Mr. Brown has issued guidelines that provide nonprofit sales of medical marijuana, she said. But, she added, with laws being interpreted differently, ""the final answer may ultimately come from the courts.""

So exactly what do the courts say?

PEOPLE v. MENTCH

The District Attorney's office would have you believe that the Mentch decision outlaws non-profit storefront Medical Cannabis Dispensing Collectives/Cooperatives and makes ""all sales illegal"" but that decision has to complete while using definition of ""primary caregiver"" not sales.

Mentch had 82 marijuana plants growing in his home and the man sold the medicine to 5 individuals who came to his home while using primary function of buying cannabis. The tastes the plants in Mentch's home belonged to him while he testified. Their operations was not a collective or a cooperative nor a storefront. Mentch owned Hemporium, a for-profit care giving and consultancy business, not just a non-profit collective or a cooperative.

Based off of the evidence the courts concluded that Mentch's operation was primarily a for-profit commercial venture and the man has not been a primary caregiver for anyone he supplied medical cannabis to from his work from home business. I've written about it detailed here.

So there you might have just what the courts say, exactly what the State Attorney says, and what the laws say; all confirm non-profit storefront dispensing of medical cannabis may be legal under State law.

Now the Los Angeles District Attorney must obey regulations and also the will with the non medication depression treatment san carlos people which will help prevent wasting time and resources to hurt medical cannabis patients especially ahead of Christmas. Especially when there are over 7,000 untested rape kits that the District Attorney says he will donrrrt you have the resources to deal with.

"