How can we account for what is perhaps one of the most dramatic legal disparities in medical cannabis to date? 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 the experts 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 come to wholly different
conclusions on the answer? First the Los Angeles District Attorney claims
"all sales are illegal". The California State Attorney General was
sure enough to write in his guidelines that "storefront collectives may be
legal under state law". How could this be? After all, each attorney is
looking at the same thing, right? Marijuana
So
what is the answer? What does the law say?
COMPASSIONATE-USE ACT 1996
Proposition
215 which was approved by a majority of Californians in 1996 and it became
known as the Compassionate-Use Act. The statute itself does not say anything
about "sales" but it does talk about "possession",
"cultivating", obtaining medical cannabis, about affordability and
"distribution". Marijuana
Dispensary
It
does say that qualified patients and their primary caregivers will not be
victim to criminal issues:
"(B)
To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use
marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not
subject to criminal prosecution or sanction." Marijuana
Dispensary News
And
it also pushes governments to help ensure "safe and affordable
access" to medical cannabis for "all qualified patients".
"(C)
To encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan for the safe
and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of
marijuana."
The
Los Angeles District Attorney, Steve Cooley, had State and Federal law
enforcement agents raid a medical cannabis collective and arrest at least 3
people, the week before Christmas. He insists "all sales are
illegal". This seems to be against the letter and spirit of the law, not
the mention the spirit of the season. Marijuana
Edibles
Also
if all "sales" are illegal, why does the Compassionate-Use Act say
"affordable"? If the patients are financially responsible for the
cannabis, how does Cooley expect the currency to be exchanged? What's wrong
with incremental reimbursements? Marijuana
Effects
MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM OF 2004
The
Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) came into law in 2004 through the legislative
approval of Senate Bill 420. It was the state's attempt "to implement a
plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in
medical need of marijuana," as the Compassionate-Use Act of 1996 (Prop
215) encourages the State and Federal government to do.
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." Marijuana
Medical
What
Steve Cooley doesn't seem to understand is non-profit storefront Medical
Cannabis Dispensing Collectives/Cooperatives are the distribution aspect of
"cultivation projects". Just like a collective cultivation farm
wouldn't have customers come to the farm to get their tomatoes, they would have
to get their collective tomatoes at a farmer's market or distribution
location-- that's how medical cannabis collective cultivations occur. Grown in
one location for safety and other reasons, then distributed at another
location. Marijuana
Vaporizer
The
MMP goes on to talk about all 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 do any of those],
11366:
[Every person who opens or maintains any place for the purpose of unlawfully
selling, giving away, or using any controlled substance]
11366.5
[Managing a place for manufacture, storage and/or the distribution of a
controlled substance]
11570
[Every building or place used for the purpose of unlawfully selling, serving,
storing, keeping, manufacturing, or giving away any controlled substance,
precursor, or analog specified in this division, and every building or place
wherein or upon which those acts take place, is a nuisance which shall be
enjoined, abated, and prevented, and for which damages may be recovered,
whether it is a public or private nuisance.] Medical Marijuana
The
Health and Safety Code section 11360 specifically says "sells". Not
only that, it also 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? Quality
Marijuana
In
that same bill,
"11362.775.
Qualified patients, persons with valid identification cards, and the designated
primary caregivers of qualified patients
and
persons with identification cards, who associate within the State of California
in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical
purposes, shall not solely on the basis of that fact be subject 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 like the manufacturing of my vicodin is
located separate from my pharmacy. Recreational
Cannabis Store
The
Medical Marijuana Act also calls on the State Attorney General to provide
guidelines related to medical cannabis:
"The
bill would require the Attorney General to develop and adopt guidelines to
ensure the security and non-diversion of marijuana grown for medical use, as
specified."
And
that exactly what State Attorney General, Jerry Brown did in the 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
help law enforcements do their jobs according to State law and to help patients
understand those laws.
The
guidelines state non-profit storefront Medical Cannabis Dispensing Collectives
and Cooperatives could be legal under state law if they followed the guidelines
and the above laws. Recreational
Marijuana
"It
is the opinion of this Office that a properly organized and operated collective
or cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be
lawful under California law"
The
State Attorney General confirms what the law says. The Attorney General is the
highest-ranking legal employee of the State of California. His office also
responded to the issues 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, law enforcement officials and advocates from around the state had
called seeking clarity on medical marijuana laws.
Mr.
Brown has issued legal guidelines that allow for nonprofit sales of medical
marijuana, she said. But, she added, with laws being interpreted differently,
"the final answer will eventually come from the courts."
So
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 do with the definition of "primary caregiver" not
sales.
Mentch
had 82 marijuana plants growing in his home and he sold the medicine to 5
people who came to his home with the primary purpose of buying cannabis. The
majority of the plants in Mentch's home belonged to him as 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 a non-profit
collective or a cooperative.
Based
off the evidence the courts concluded that Mentch's operation was primarily a
for-profit commercial venture and that he was not a primary caregiver for those
he supplied medical cannabis to from his home business. I've written about this
in depth here. Weed
So
there you have what the courts say, what the State Attorney says, and what the
laws say; all confirm non-profit storefront dispensing of medical cannabis can
be legal under State law.
Now
the Los Angeles District Attorney must obey the law and the will of the people
and stop wasting time and resources to hurt medical cannabis patients
especially just before Christmas. Especially when there are over 7,000 untested
rape kits that the District Attorney claims to not have the resources to
handle.
No comments:
Post a Comment