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!
Joine ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Showing posts with label Medical Marijana. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Medical Marijana. Show all posts
Monday, September 20, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
TWO PATIENTS NEED YOUR SUPPOR - WEDNESDAY - June 9, 2010
COURT SUPPORT AT 8:30am (Heather Larney) & 10:30am (James Stacy) in FEDERAL COURT
Thursday, April 15, 2010
James Stacy Federal San Diego Medical MarijuanaTrial Update
Last year an undercover detective came in to the collective pretending to be a legitimate patient. The detective presented a current and authentic medical marijuana letter of recommendation as well as a CA drivers license. After completing all the required membership agreements and going through the member screening process, he joined the collective and purchased a small amount of medicine.
According to the police reports, while in the collective, the detective asked whether he could contribute to the effort in other ways besides financially reimbursing the collective for the medicine. James explained to him that he could work at the collective, help out, and contribute in other ways.
In a recent San Diego City Beat Article, Dave Maas wrote that “Stacy says he did the due diligence: He researched the prosecutorial policies articulated by Holder, hired a lawyer to walk him through the process and corresponded with the California Secretary of State’s (SOS) office on how to file for “public benefit” status, the technical term for a California nonprofit. The SOS even provided him with a copy of the state Attorney General’s guidelines for running a collective. Unlike many of the other collectives where the San Diego Regional Narcotics Task Force ran stings, Stacy opted for a low-profile model because, he says, “I didn’t want people who didn’t need to know to have it in their face.”
Less than 2 months later on 9/9/9, the San Diego NTF, raided James’ collective, arrested him, and charged him with sales, cultivation, and manufacturing of cannabis, during the raid, at the collective the NTF detectives found a registered firearm and have charged James with possession of the firearm in connection with running an “illegal operation”.
The collective was operating in full compliance with state law, and the US Attorney office has suggested that they agree with that fact. Kasha Kastillo the federal public defender representing James in this case, has filed numerous motions attempting to get the case dismissed or at the least sent to state court, with no prevail.
Although James suffers from daily chronic pain, he has complied with all requirements of his federal indictment including not using medical cannabis, which has taken a negative toll on his life. In a recent hearing James’ attorney asked the court to allow James to medicate. San Diego ASA was at the hearing to hear the prosecution's demand that as a result of this request James be drug tested weekly.
The Judge explained to both sides that he could not give authorization for James to medicate as this was Federal Court and marijuana was still considered an illegal substance but at the same time refused to implement the drug testing requirements.
James next hearing is April 21, 2010 at 3:00pm in Courtroom 15. Come out to the San Diego Federal Courthouse at 940 Front St. San Diego CA, 92101 to support James Stacy in court.
This hearing is critical to the case as it is when the Judge will decide whether to allow James to use his medical marijuana defense at trial.
James Stacy’s trial is currently scheduled to begin on April 26, 2010 in San Diego Federal Court, 940 Front St San Diego CA 92101. Today James told San Diego ASA that his attorney tells him the trial might be postponed till August. We will continue to keep a close eye on James’ case and update the community if the dates change.
How you can help James Stacy Today:
1. Help HR 3939 Pass! This is new Federal Legislation known as the “Truth in Trials” act, which would allow Federal defendants to present the medical marijuana defense in federal court. One in four Americans now lives in a state with laws governing medical marijuana. Unfortunately, law-abiding citizens can still be prosecuted on federal marijuana-related charges as Mr. Stacy is being prosecuted in San Diego. Even with the Obama Administration’s new guidelines, federal prosecutors can still block defendants from showing that they were in compliance with state law.
The “Truth in Trials” Act, H.R. 3939, would end this injustice by ensuring that federal defendants could present evidence showing that they were following state law. Introduced by US Representative Sam Farr, this important legislation would give law-abiding citizens the ability to defend themselves in federal court. Urge your Member of Congress to cosponsor "Truth in Trials" today by completing and submitting the following online form CLICK HERE TO URGE CONGRESS TO PASS HR 3939
2. Send James an email of support letting him know that the community is behind him 100% in this difficult time, that we will be there in court to support him throughout the trial, that his fight is our fight and that we admire, appreciate, and support James standing up for our rights against this injustice! James can be reached at movementinaction@gmail.com
3. Donate to James, to help him and his family get through this nightmare. Visit his website and click on the DONATE link! http://movementinaction.org/donte/
To find out more about James’ case please visit www.movementinaction.org
Eugene Davidovich
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get Involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Monday, March 8, 2010
People V. Davidovich – Day 2 of Trial - Court Support
By: Eugene Davidovich
On March 9, 2010 at 9am in Department 55 at the San Diego Superior Courthouse, day 2 of my trial will begin. District attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ office has filed a mountain of motions in limine with the court, all of which will be heard on the 9th in front of Judge So. Motions in limine are requests made by both sides to the Judge before the start of a trial that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced to the jury.
The heap of in limine motions includes three that I believe are most troubling. The first is a request by the DA that the Judge not to allow me to use the medical marijuana defense, even though an official subpoena from the doctor who recommended the use of medical cannabis to me, was received and accepted into the record by the court at my preliminary hearing months ago. These records clearly prove to the court that I am a qualified patient, which even prompted the Judge at my prelim to say “there is evidence here that Mr. Davidovich is a qualified patient”, yet nothing fazes the prosecutor’s fierce fight.
The second troubling request is to ban the Jury from hearing any details about my four years of honorable military service with the United States Navy, including a request for a complete ban on mentioning that I was in the military at all. After my arrest in February of 2009, the DA’s office had no problem mentioning my military service in the Operation Endless Summer news coverage. Since then, it would seem that she changed her tune and now wants to conceal the fact that I was in the Navy.
Finally, the DA filed motions to exclude two character witnesses from testifying at my trial. These two individuals have known me for over fifteen years and are prepared and willing to testify about their opinions of my truthfulness and character. Theresa Pham the prosecuting DA cited in her filings that to hear from the character witnesses would be an unnecessary burden on the courts time. The DA wants to ensure that nothing positive is said about me and that only their side of the story is heard.
In addition to the disingenuous in limine motions, it would seem that Theresa Pham, Dumanis’ prosecuting puppet, has received a green light to do “anything it takes” to win this case. This green light seems to have allowed the puppet to insult my attorney in court, cry and whine to the judge when a ruling doesn’t go her way and use stalling tactics in an attempt to buy more time to investigate above and beyond the year and a half long investigation already conducted.
I anticipate that on the 9th the DA will pull a few more tricks out of the prosecutorial sleeve to add to the propaganda and misinformation filled, politically motivated prosecution. I ask that members of our community come to court to support me on Tuesday, March 9 2010 in Department 55 at 9am. Witness the relentless, political war being waged against patients in San Diego yourself.
MY STORY
I am a twenty year resident of San Diego, a medical cannabis patient, and a victim of Operation Green Rx and San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ brutal ambition to overturn California’s Compassionate Use Act.
After having served four years in the Navy, including two deployments to the Gulf, medals, commendations and an honorable discharge I began to experience serious medical symptoms. With the use of medical cannabis I found relief from the symptoms without the debilitating side-effects I’d experienced with prescription drugs. During my treatment I was able to complete a Bachelors Degree then a Masters in Business Administration, all while building a successful career as a project manager in software development field.
Then, as a result of law enforcement’s lack of training in California law or its unwillingness to follow that law, all collectives dispensing medical cannabis in San Diego were targeted and systematically closed. After reading the newly provided State Attorney General’s (AG) guidelines for cannabis collectives I formed my own collective and began to lawfully cultivate, and collectively distribute medical cannabis to other members of this collective on a non-profit basis according to the state law of Proposition 215, SB420 and the help of the AG guidelines.
In November of 2008, I received a call from a man calling himself Jamie Conlan and asking to join the collective. After a rigorous qualification process where Mr. Conlan presented both a driver’s license and a medical recommendation which he lied to a doctor to obtain, I was duped into allowing his participation.
Some months later, my Mission Valley apartment was raided by an armed narcotics team and I was taken to the police station where I met Conrado DeCastro who revealed Operation Green Rx. I was to discover later through the prosecutor’s discloser that the officers of the operation were targeting collectives from CA NORML’s website and posing as legitimate patients to obtain cannabis recommendations from doctors and then entrap collectives. I was shown two large binders with names and told “we are gonna’ bring all you medical pot people down.” Charged with four felonies, I was taken to jail, for legally providing a patient 120.00 worth of medical cannabis. I didn’t think things could get much worse.
Imagine my shock to find that the DA held a news conference of manufactured lies, touting the success of what they now referred to as Operation Endless Summer, depicting me as a dangerous dealer of large amounts of heroin, meth, marijuana, as well as trotting out the “don’t mess with the military” and the “streets of navy housing” mantra that the San Diego DA Bonnie Dumanis has been maintaining ever since. The evening news quickly picked up the story showing video footage of me at the arraignment hearing, and again listing drugs which did not exist nor with which I had any involvement, let alone charged with selling.
As a result of the false press conference, the police refusal to follow the law and the prosecutor attempting to deny the court evidence that I am a patient protected by medical cannabis laws, I am in the fight of my life. The amount of resources being spent on this case is unbelievable. Aside from the year long NTF investigation, the DA has put together a top notch team of prosecutors and law clerks as well as has recruited the famous anti marijuana activist Steve Reed to testify as an expert against me.
I am represented by attorneys Michael J. McCabe and Bahar Ansari who have been working tirelessly on my case and have provided me with exceptional representation throughout this process. They have been able to both help steer me through the legal system in my trial, as well as protect me from the constant threats and intimidation of the DA for speaking out about my situation.
This video was provided courtesy of the San Diego DA's office as part of the discovery in my case. It shows the delivery of medicine to the undercover officer who earlier had called, provided all his information, and was verified with his physician.
For more information about my case please visit www.eugenedavidovich.com
To get more involved in the community and to help bring this ‘fierce fight against patients’ to an end, join Americans for Safe Access and get involved.
Visit www.SafeAccessSD.org for the latest updates and news about medical marijuana in San Diego, come to the monthly ASA meetings, and get active.
On March 9, 2010 at 9am in Department 55 at the San Diego Superior Courthouse, day 2 of my trial will begin. District attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ office has filed a mountain of motions in limine with the court, all of which will be heard on the 9th in front of Judge So. Motions in limine are requests made by both sides to the Judge before the start of a trial that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced to the jury. The heap of in limine motions includes three that I believe are most troubling. The first is a request by the DA that the Judge not to allow me to use the medical marijuana defense, even though an official subpoena from the doctor who recommended the use of medical cannabis to me, was received and accepted into the record by the court at my preliminary hearing months ago. These records clearly prove to the court that I am a qualified patient, which even prompted the Judge at my prelim to say “there is evidence here that Mr. Davidovich is a qualified patient”, yet nothing fazes the prosecutor’s fierce fight.
The second troubling request is to ban the Jury from hearing any details about my four years of honorable military service with the United States Navy, including a request for a complete ban on mentioning that I was in the military at all. After my arrest in February of 2009, the DA’s office had no problem mentioning my military service in the Operation Endless Summer news coverage. Since then, it would seem that she changed her tune and now wants to conceal the fact that I was in the Navy.
Finally, the DA filed motions to exclude two character witnesses from testifying at my trial. These two individuals have known me for over fifteen years and are prepared and willing to testify about their opinions of my truthfulness and character. Theresa Pham the prosecuting DA cited in her filings that to hear from the character witnesses would be an unnecessary burden on the courts time. The DA wants to ensure that nothing positive is said about me and that only their side of the story is heard.
In addition to the disingenuous in limine motions, it would seem that Theresa Pham, Dumanis’ prosecuting puppet, has received a green light to do “anything it takes” to win this case. This green light seems to have allowed the puppet to insult my attorney in court, cry and whine to the judge when a ruling doesn’t go her way and use stalling tactics in an attempt to buy more time to investigate above and beyond the year and a half long investigation already conducted.
I anticipate that on the 9th the DA will pull a few more tricks out of the prosecutorial sleeve to add to the propaganda and misinformation filled, politically motivated prosecution. I ask that members of our community come to court to support me on Tuesday, March 9 2010 in Department 55 at 9am. Witness the relentless, political war being waged against patients in San Diego yourself.
MY STORY
I am a twenty year resident of San Diego, a medical cannabis patient, and a victim of Operation Green Rx and San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis’ brutal ambition to overturn California’s Compassionate Use Act.
After having served four years in the Navy, including two deployments to the Gulf, medals, commendations and an honorable discharge I began to experience serious medical symptoms. With the use of medical cannabis I found relief from the symptoms without the debilitating side-effects I’d experienced with prescription drugs. During my treatment I was able to complete a Bachelors Degree then a Masters in Business Administration, all while building a successful career as a project manager in software development field.
Then, as a result of law enforcement’s lack of training in California law or its unwillingness to follow that law, all collectives dispensing medical cannabis in San Diego were targeted and systematically closed. After reading the newly provided State Attorney General’s (AG) guidelines for cannabis collectives I formed my own collective and began to lawfully cultivate, and collectively distribute medical cannabis to other members of this collective on a non-profit basis according to the state law of Proposition 215, SB420 and the help of the AG guidelines.
In November of 2008, I received a call from a man calling himself Jamie Conlan and asking to join the collective. After a rigorous qualification process where Mr. Conlan presented both a driver’s license and a medical recommendation which he lied to a doctor to obtain, I was duped into allowing his participation.
Some months later, my Mission Valley apartment was raided by an armed narcotics team and I was taken to the police station where I met Conrado DeCastro who revealed Operation Green Rx. I was to discover later through the prosecutor’s discloser that the officers of the operation were targeting collectives from CA NORML’s website and posing as legitimate patients to obtain cannabis recommendations from doctors and then entrap collectives. I was shown two large binders with names and told “we are gonna’ bring all you medical pot people down.” Charged with four felonies, I was taken to jail, for legally providing a patient 120.00 worth of medical cannabis. I didn’t think things could get much worse.
Imagine my shock to find that the DA held a news conference of manufactured lies, touting the success of what they now referred to as Operation Endless Summer, depicting me as a dangerous dealer of large amounts of heroin, meth, marijuana, as well as trotting out the “don’t mess with the military” and the “streets of navy housing” mantra that the San Diego DA Bonnie Dumanis has been maintaining ever since. The evening news quickly picked up the story showing video footage of me at the arraignment hearing, and again listing drugs which did not exist nor with which I had any involvement, let alone charged with selling.
As a result of the false press conference, the police refusal to follow the law and the prosecutor attempting to deny the court evidence that I am a patient protected by medical cannabis laws, I am in the fight of my life. The amount of resources being spent on this case is unbelievable. Aside from the year long NTF investigation, the DA has put together a top notch team of prosecutors and law clerks as well as has recruited the famous anti marijuana activist Steve Reed to testify as an expert against me.
I am represented by attorneys Michael J. McCabe and Bahar Ansari who have been working tirelessly on my case and have provided me with exceptional representation throughout this process. They have been able to both help steer me through the legal system in my trial, as well as protect me from the constant threats and intimidation of the DA for speaking out about my situation.
This video was provided courtesy of the San Diego DA's office as part of the discovery in my case. It shows the delivery of medicine to the undercover officer who earlier had called, provided all his information, and was verified with his physician.
For more information about my case please visit www.eugenedavidovich.com
To get more involved in the community and to help bring this ‘fierce fight against patients’ to an end, join Americans for Safe Access and get involved.
Visit www.SafeAccessSD.org for the latest updates and news about medical marijuana in San Diego, come to the monthly ASA meetings, and get active. Operation Green Rx must come to an end, and we will help bring it to an end.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Eugene Davidovich - 995 Hearing Today - Court Support Needed
I am currently facing a Jury Trial which is scheduled to start Next Week on the 2nd of March. The trial is related to the February 2009 (Operation Endless Summer / Green Rx) raids, orchestrated by District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and her Cross Jurisdictional Narcotics Task Force (NTF).
Today I go to court for a 995 hearing, which is an attempt to get one of the charges against me dropped.
If you are able, please come out for court support as well as to see for yourself how medical cannabis patients are treated in court in San Diego.
220 W Broadway San Diego CA – Department 55 – 1:30pm
Originally I was charged with 4 felony counts, one of which about a month ago we were able to get dismissed by a judge bringing down the total charges to 3.
When my house was raided and I arrested in February of 2009, the NTF seized, 1.1 ounce of dried flowers and 14g (1/2 oz) of condensed kief (concentrated cannabis). Originally I was not charged with the possession of concentrated cannabis as clearly that amount is well within state/ city limits, as well as a very reasonable amount for any medical cannabis patient to have. One week before my trial was supposed to start in January and Theresa Pham (Deputy DA prosecuting my case) came back with another count. “Possession of Concentrated Cannabis”
As a result my trial has been moved to March 2 and today my attorneys will argue to get the Concentrated Cannabis Charge dismissed.
For more information about my story and to see the video of the delivery of medicine to the undercover narcotics task force officer posing as a legitimate patient please visit www.eugenedavidovich.com
Regards,
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
Today I go to court for a 995 hearing, which is an attempt to get one of the charges against me dropped.
If you are able, please come out for court support as well as to see for yourself how medical cannabis patients are treated in court in San Diego.
220 W Broadway San Diego CA – Department 55 – 1:30pm
Originally I was charged with 4 felony counts, one of which about a month ago we were able to get dismissed by a judge bringing down the total charges to 3.
When my house was raided and I arrested in February of 2009, the NTF seized, 1.1 ounce of dried flowers and 14g (1/2 oz) of condensed kief (concentrated cannabis). Originally I was not charged with the possession of concentrated cannabis as clearly that amount is well within state/ city limits, as well as a very reasonable amount for any medical cannabis patient to have. One week before my trial was supposed to start in January and Theresa Pham (Deputy DA prosecuting my case) came back with another count. “Possession of Concentrated Cannabis”
As a result my trial has been moved to March 2 and today my attorneys will argue to get the Concentrated Cannabis Charge dismissed.
For more information about my story and to see the video of the delivery of medicine to the undercover narcotics task force officer posing as a legitimate patient please visit www.eugenedavidovich.com
Regards,
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
Friday, February 19, 2010
JACKSON RETURN OF PROPERTY MOTION DENIED
By: Eugene Davidovich, February 19, 2010
This morning Lance Rogers, Attorney for Jovan Jacksons argued a return of property motion in front of Superior Court Judge Bashant. The courtroom had over a dozen of Jovan’s Supporters a large majority of whom were active members of San Diego Americans for Safe Access.
After hearing the arguments from both sides, Judge Bashant denied the motion. Throughout the arguments it was clear by the expression on the Judge’s face that she was simply going through the motions, and had already made up her mind prior to walking into court.
She explained that the motion was being denied without prejudice for two main reasons; first the prosecution could potentially still use the evidence in the new case which goes to prelim later this month, secondly, because the medical cannabis as well as most other items are held by the DEA. she had no authority to order the Feds to do anything.
When asked why the evidence was in the DEA’s possession on a state case, Prosecutor Chris Lindbergh explained that most evidence is given to the DEA because the Narcotics Task Force that conducted the raid is a cross jurisdictional entity and also has federal power. He also explained that it is more convenient for them to store it there.
Mr. Jackson will return to court on February 26, 2010 for the preliminary hearing in his second trial. The Prelim is scheduled for 8:30 am in Department 11 in the San Diego Superior Court House.
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
This morning Lance Rogers, Attorney for Jovan Jacksons argued a return of property motion in front of Superior Court Judge Bashant. The courtroom had over a dozen of Jovan’s Supporters a large majority of whom were active members of San Diego Americans for Safe Access.
After hearing the arguments from both sides, Judge Bashant denied the motion. Throughout the arguments it was clear by the expression on the Judge’s face that she was simply going through the motions, and had already made up her mind prior to walking into court.
She explained that the motion was being denied without prejudice for two main reasons; first the prosecution could potentially still use the evidence in the new case which goes to prelim later this month, secondly, because the medical cannabis as well as most other items are held by the DEA. she had no authority to order the Feds to do anything.
When asked why the evidence was in the DEA’s possession on a state case, Prosecutor Chris Lindbergh explained that most evidence is given to the DEA because the Narcotics Task Force that conducted the raid is a cross jurisdictional entity and also has federal power. He also explained that it is more convenient for them to store it there.
Mr. Jackson will return to court on February 26, 2010 for the preliminary hearing in his second trial. The Prelim is scheduled for 8:30 am in Department 11 in the San Diego Superior Court House.
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
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Medical Cannabis Report, Commissioned by State, to be Released
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
http://tinyurl.com/ydsv54j
SACRAMENTO – In 1999, the California Legislature and Governor enacted Senate Bill 847 (Vasconcellos), which commissioned the University of California to establish a scientific research program to expand the scientific knowledge on purported therapeutic usages of medical marijuana. The legislation passed with a strong bi-partisan vote and was supported by former Attorney General Dan Lungren as well as a coalition of statewide public safety and health organizations.
Pursuant to the new law, the University of California-San Diego established the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) in 2000. The Legislature appropriated a total of $8.7 million to CMCR that has been used during the ensuing years to conduct clinical and pre-clinical trials of cannabis, including smoked medical marijuana, to provide evidence one way or the other to answer the question, “Does medical marijuana have therapeutic value?”
To achieve its objectives, CMCR funded a variety of carefully designed studies, and is prepared to release a report summarizing its research.
When: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 10 a.m.
Where: State Capitol, Room 3191
Who:
Senator Mark Leno
Senator John Vasconcellos (ret), author of SB 847
Igor Grant, MD, Director, CMCR
J. Hampton Atkinson, MD, Co-director, CMCR
Barth Wilsey, MD, Clinical Professor, UC-Davis Health System
http://tinyurl.com/ydsv54j
SACRAMENTO – In 1999, the California Legislature and Governor enacted Senate Bill 847 (Vasconcellos), which commissioned the University of California to establish a scientific research program to expand the scientific knowledge on purported therapeutic usages of medical marijuana. The legislation passed with a strong bi-partisan vote and was supported by former Attorney General Dan Lungren as well as a coalition of statewide public safety and health organizations.
Pursuant to the new law, the University of California-San Diego established the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) in 2000. The Legislature appropriated a total of $8.7 million to CMCR that has been used during the ensuing years to conduct clinical and pre-clinical trials of cannabis, including smoked medical marijuana, to provide evidence one way or the other to answer the question, “Does medical marijuana have therapeutic value?”
To achieve its objectives, CMCR funded a variety of carefully designed studies, and is prepared to release a report summarizing its research.
When: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 10 a.m.
Where: State Capitol, Room 3191
Who:
Senator Mark Leno
Senator John Vasconcellos (ret), author of SB 847
Igor Grant, MD, Director, CMCR
J. Hampton Atkinson, MD, Co-director, CMCR
Barth Wilsey, MD, Clinical Professor, UC-Davis Health System
Sunday, February 7, 2010
People v. Kelly: What Does it Mean for Patients?
People v. Kelly: What Does it Mean for Patients?
Part 1 of 2: Law Enforcement Encounters
The California Supreme Court issued a unanimous published decision in People v. Kelly, striking down what it considered unconstitutional legislative limits on how much medical marijuana patients can possess and cultivate. The decision also affirms protection from arrest and prosecution for patients who both possess a state-issued identification card and comply with state or local personal use guidelines.
Although the court affirmed that qualified patients and their primary caregivers retain "all the rights afforded by the CUA [Compassionate Use Act of 1996]," law enforcement can still arrest and prosecute if probable cause exists. In keeping with the CUA, qualified patients and their primary caregivers will still have an affirmative defense in court.
What does Kelly mean for patients? There are a few things that remain unclear; what is clear is that holding a state-issued ID card and following the guidelines for possession and/or cultivation will prevent arrest.
* If you are dealing with law enforcement, having a state ID card and having less medicine than the county or state guidelines should prevent you from being arrested or prosecuted.
* The ID card is still an optional program, but having an ID can help in a law enforcement encounter.
* NOT having an ID card might result in an arrest
* Patients will have an additional defense to bring to court, if they are facing charges for possession over state or local limits. It will be the patient's burden to prove that the amount they are charged with is medically necessary.
* Medicann ID cards or ID cards issued by a dispensary are NOT the same as the state ID card. To find information about your county’s ID program, check out http://www.cdph.ca.gov/services/Pages/MMPCounties.aspx
* San Diego County Medical Marijuana ID Card Program: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/programs/phs/mmic/
The bottom-line: play it safe by applying for the state ID card through your county's Department of Public Health. Otherwise, you might have to defend yourself in court, which can be stressful, expensive, and time-consuming.
Visit http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=4834 for more information and the latest Legal Tips from ASA!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Part 1 of 2: Law Enforcement Encounters
The California Supreme Court issued a unanimous published decision in People v. Kelly, striking down what it considered unconstitutional legislative limits on how much medical marijuana patients can possess and cultivate. The decision also affirms protection from arrest and prosecution for patients who both possess a state-issued identification card and comply with state or local personal use guidelines.
Although the court affirmed that qualified patients and their primary caregivers retain "all the rights afforded by the CUA [Compassionate Use Act of 1996]," law enforcement can still arrest and prosecute if probable cause exists. In keeping with the CUA, qualified patients and their primary caregivers will still have an affirmative defense in court.
What does Kelly mean for patients? There are a few things that remain unclear; what is clear is that holding a state-issued ID card and following the guidelines for possession and/or cultivation will prevent arrest.
* If you are dealing with law enforcement, having a state ID card and having less medicine than the county or state guidelines should prevent you from being arrested or prosecuted.
* The ID card is still an optional program, but having an ID can help in a law enforcement encounter.
* NOT having an ID card might result in an arrest
* Patients will have an additional defense to bring to court, if they are facing charges for possession over state or local limits. It will be the patient's burden to prove that the amount they are charged with is medically necessary.
* Medicann ID cards or ID cards issued by a dispensary are NOT the same as the state ID card. To find information about your county’s ID program, check out http://www.cdph.ca.gov/services/Pages/MMPCounties.aspx
* San Diego County Medical Marijuana ID Card Program: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/programs/phs/mmic/
The bottom-line: play it safe by applying for the state ID card through your county's Department of Public Health. Otherwise, you might have to defend yourself in court, which can be stressful, expensive, and time-consuming.
Visit http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=4834 for more information and the latest Legal Tips from ASA!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Diego Americans for Safe Access
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Get involved, get active, make a difference!
Join ASA - www.safeaccessnow.org
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Uptown Community Planning Committee Meeting
February 2, 2010 – 6:00-9:00 p.m.
Joyce Beers Community Center
3900 Vermont Street San Diego, CA 92103
On Tuesday February 2, 2010 the Uptown Community Planning Committee (CPC) will discuss the request by the city council of the planning group to review and comment on the medical marijuana task force recommendations. The Uptown CPC will vote on recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance which will allow medical marijuana collectives to apply through a process 3 Conditional Use Permit. Please come out and support the Uptown CPC as they will discuss regulating safe access to medical marijuana in San Diego.
Uptown CPC Medical Marijuana Agenda Item:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS – Request by the City Council of the City of San Diego for its Community Planning Groups to make review and comment on the issue: Motion by Wilson; second by Lamb:
1. To implement the intent of the voters in enacting Proposition 215, the City of San Diego should establish a conditional use permit (CUP), process by which medical marijuana dispensaries may operate. Applications for such a CUP will be reviewed under a Process Three procedure – the initial decision would be make by a hearing officer; whose decision is appealable to the Planning Commission;
2. In drafting the enabling ordinance for the CUP process, it is recommended the City of San Diego review and consider incorporating applicable provisions from the draft ordinance prepared by Jeffrey A. Lake, Esq., and put forward by Southern California NORML: subject to revision to incorporate the City Council’s Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations;
3. The CUP permitting process should require all medical marijuana dispensary applications to contain the governing document for each collaborative or cooperative; which should:
(1.) Identify the individual organizers and principal operators of the collaborative or cooperative;
(2.) Specifically identify how the collaborative or cooperative will be governed and operated, and what will be its administrative structure;
4. The CUP permitting process should also require a verifiable accounting and bookkeeping procedure be instituted at each medical marijuana dispensary, in accordance with standard accounting procedures. All dispensaries should be subject to annual audit; obtain business licenses; and pay taxes and all applicable fees.
www.safeaccessnow.org
Joyce Beers Community Center
3900 Vermont Street San Diego, CA 92103
On Tuesday February 2, 2010 the Uptown Community Planning Committee (CPC) will discuss the request by the city council of the planning group to review and comment on the medical marijuana task force recommendations. The Uptown CPC will vote on recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance which will allow medical marijuana collectives to apply through a process 3 Conditional Use Permit. Please come out and support the Uptown CPC as they will discuss regulating safe access to medical marijuana in San Diego.
Uptown CPC Medical Marijuana Agenda Item:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS – Request by the City Council of the City of San Diego for its Community Planning Groups to make review and comment on the issue: Motion by Wilson; second by Lamb:
1. To implement the intent of the voters in enacting Proposition 215, the City of San Diego should establish a conditional use permit (CUP), process by which medical marijuana dispensaries may operate. Applications for such a CUP will be reviewed under a Process Three procedure – the initial decision would be make by a hearing officer; whose decision is appealable to the Planning Commission;
2. In drafting the enabling ordinance for the CUP process, it is recommended the City of San Diego review and consider incorporating applicable provisions from the draft ordinance prepared by Jeffrey A. Lake, Esq., and put forward by Southern California NORML: subject to revision to incorporate the City Council’s Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations;
3. The CUP permitting process should require all medical marijuana dispensary applications to contain the governing document for each collaborative or cooperative; which should:
(1.) Identify the individual organizers and principal operators of the collaborative or cooperative;
(2.) Specifically identify how the collaborative or cooperative will be governed and operated, and what will be its administrative structure;
4. The CUP permitting process should also require a verifiable accounting and bookkeeping procedure be instituted at each medical marijuana dispensary, in accordance with standard accounting procedures. All dispensaries should be subject to annual audit; obtain business licenses; and pay taxes and all applicable fees.
www.safeaccessnow.org
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Medical Cannabis Patient gets her Bong and Pipes Back from Probation
By: Eugene Davidovich
Tiffani Kjeldergaard a legitimate medical cannabis patient in January of 2009 was sentenced to probation on a non drug related offense. She continued to use her legal medication and tested positive for THC on drug tests conducted by the probation department until June of 2009, when the probation department decided to stop by her house for a safety check.
As with any medical cannabis patient, they found medical cannabis. Tiffani had some dried cannabis, 7 immature plants, several bongs, pipes, and medical cannabis magazines which the police totaled at $12,000, and at that time sent out a press release announcing a great bust.
The policed seized all the property and took Tiffani to jail on charges of violating her probation.
Although under pressure by the District Attorney and her Public Defender to agree to a plea deal where she would be sentenced to three years in jail, Tiffany did not waiver. She refused to bargain with the DA and fired her public defender that was encouraging her to stay in jail and take a deal.
She maintained to the prosecution and her public defender that it is in fact legal. She conducted her own research at the jail law library, hired a private attorney, presented to him the appropriate cases to cite, and after a court hearing where the evidence was presented, was released from jail. Not only did the judge release her from jail, but he also changed the terms of Tiffani’s probation to allow her to use medical cannabis and ordered her bongs, pipes and marijuana magazines to be returned.
Shortly after her release and change of probation conditions, Tiffani arrived to her probation officers office to present her doctor’s recommendation, only to learn that the probation department thought the recommendation was no good without a San Diego County Medical Marijuana Card to go along with it. She was told that everyone who is on probation and is a medical marijuana patient is now required to also obtain a county card.
Wanting to both be compliant with the system, and to continue to assert her rights as a patient, Tiffani got her county card, brought it back to her probation officer and received the green light to be able to medicate.
On January 19, 2010, Tiffani finally received her bongs, pipes, as well as some medical marijuana literature seized in the raid. After receiving her property back from her probation officer, Tiffany said “This is a huge win for us”.
Her public defender is currently filing a motion for the return of her medicine and plants.
Last month, San Diego Americans for Safe Access caught up with Tiffani to discuss the details of her situation, the interview with Tiffani can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHTFH7yFyDM
Tiffani Kjeldergaard a legitimate medical cannabis patient in January of 2009 was sentenced to probation on a non drug related offense. She continued to use her legal medication and tested positive for THC on drug tests conducted by the probation department until June of 2009, when the probation department decided to stop by her house for a safety check.
As with any medical cannabis patient, they found medical cannabis. Tiffani had some dried cannabis, 7 immature plants, several bongs, pipes, and medical cannabis magazines which the police totaled at $12,000, and at that time sent out a press release announcing a great bust.
The policed seized all the property and took Tiffani to jail on charges of violating her probation.
Although under pressure by the District Attorney and her Public Defender to agree to a plea deal where she would be sentenced to three years in jail, Tiffany did not waiver. She refused to bargain with the DA and fired her public defender that was encouraging her to stay in jail and take a deal.
She maintained to the prosecution and her public defender that it is in fact legal. She conducted her own research at the jail law library, hired a private attorney, presented to him the appropriate cases to cite, and after a court hearing where the evidence was presented, was released from jail. Not only did the judge release her from jail, but he also changed the terms of Tiffani’s probation to allow her to use medical cannabis and ordered her bongs, pipes and marijuana magazines to be returned.
Shortly after her release and change of probation conditions, Tiffani arrived to her probation officers office to present her doctor’s recommendation, only to learn that the probation department thought the recommendation was no good without a San Diego County Medical Marijuana Card to go along with it. She was told that everyone who is on probation and is a medical marijuana patient is now required to also obtain a county card.
Wanting to both be compliant with the system, and to continue to assert her rights as a patient, Tiffani got her county card, brought it back to her probation officer and received the green light to be able to medicate.
On January 19, 2010, Tiffani finally received her bongs, pipes, as well as some medical marijuana literature seized in the raid. After receiving her property back from her probation officer, Tiffany said “This is a huge win for us”.
Her public defender is currently filing a motion for the return of her medicine and plants.
Last month, San Diego Americans for Safe Access caught up with Tiffani to discuss the details of her situation, the interview with Tiffani can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHTFH7yFyDM
Monday, January 11, 2010
CA Cops Must Return 60 Pounds of Medical Marijuana
By Don Duncan
The outcome of legal victories by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) could be seen again last week, when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William Sterling ruled that the California Highway Patrol (CHP) must return sixty pounds of medical cannabis confiscated during a traffic stop. ASA successfully sued the CHP to stop illegal confiscation of medical cannabis in 2005; and secured the right to return of property, regardless of federal law, when the US Supreme Court refused to overturn our victory Garden Grove v. Superior Court in 2008.
The defendant in this week’s case argued he was transporting the confiscated medicine for his collective in Venice. The judge disagreed with an expert witness from the CHP, who argued that only a Primary Caregiver can transport medicine under state law. The judge acknowledged that any member of a collective or cooperative could transport medicine on behalf of other members.
Cities and counties still working to develop and implement regulations for medical cannabis should take note of decisions like this, which acknowledge the broad immunities offered to collectives and cooperatives under the Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420). Patients involved in collective cultivation can maintain storefronts to provide medicine to members (and be reimbursed for doing so), grow medicine, possess enough for members, and transport it. Local regulations should respect these collective immunities – not try to roll them back with onerous restrictions.
http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-ca-cops-must-return-60-pounds-of-medical-marijuana-r-1263236799
The outcome of legal victories by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) could be seen again last week, when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William Sterling ruled that the California Highway Patrol (CHP) must return sixty pounds of medical cannabis confiscated during a traffic stop. ASA successfully sued the CHP to stop illegal confiscation of medical cannabis in 2005; and secured the right to return of property, regardless of federal law, when the US Supreme Court refused to overturn our victory Garden Grove v. Superior Court in 2008.
The defendant in this week’s case argued he was transporting the confiscated medicine for his collective in Venice. The judge disagreed with an expert witness from the CHP, who argued that only a Primary Caregiver can transport medicine under state law. The judge acknowledged that any member of a collective or cooperative could transport medicine on behalf of other members.
Cities and counties still working to develop and implement regulations for medical cannabis should take note of decisions like this, which acknowledge the broad immunities offered to collectives and cooperatives under the Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420). Patients involved in collective cultivation can maintain storefronts to provide medicine to members (and be reimbursed for doing so), grow medicine, possess enough for members, and transport it. Local regulations should respect these collective immunities – not try to roll them back with onerous restrictions.
http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-ca-cops-must-return-60-pounds-of-medical-marijuana-r-1263236799
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Jovan Jackson Sentencing Interview / Update
Mr. Jackson of Answerdam Collective is a legitimate medical cannabis patient and victim of two Operation Green Rx raids, part of Bonnie Dumanis’ effort to eradicate medical cannabis from San Diego. The first raid occurred in August of 2008, the second on September 9, 2009. Last month, Mr. Jackson was tried and vindicated of felony charges related to the first raid. Today Mr. Jackson was sentenced in State Court.
Kelly Wheeler of the City News Service reported that “Before sentencing, Judge Cynthia Bashant reduced Jackson’s felony conviction for possession of ecstasy to a misdemeanor, saying it probably would have been charged as such if not for the underlying medical marijuana case.”
Mr. Kelly went on to report “The judge also cited Jackson’s lack of prior criminal record and said there was no evidence that the 31-year-old defendant had the pills so he could sell them to others. Prosecutor Chris Lindberg unsuccessfully argued that the defendant’s possession of ecstasy was not misdemeanor conduct.”
San Diego Americans for Safe Access caught up with Mr. Jackson today after his sentencing to discuss the details. Watch the in depth interview here:
The prosecution has not given up in its efforts. Mr. Jackson is still facing a second trial for the same charges he was vindicated of. The preliminary hearing for the second medical marijuana trial is set for January 11, 2010 @ 8:30 am in Department 11 of the San Diego Superior Court 220 W Broadway, San Diego, CA 92111 on January 11, 2010. It is critical that concerned citizens, patients and anyone concerned about your tax dollars being spent on another wasteful trial.
Local Media Coverage of Mr. Jackson's Sentencing Hearing:
http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-01-06/local-county-news/medical-marijuana-collective-manager-gets-probation-for-ecstasy-posession
Eugene Davidovich
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Kelly Wheeler of the City News Service reported that “Before sentencing, Judge Cynthia Bashant reduced Jackson’s felony conviction for possession of ecstasy to a misdemeanor, saying it probably would have been charged as such if not for the underlying medical marijuana case.”
Mr. Kelly went on to report “The judge also cited Jackson’s lack of prior criminal record and said there was no evidence that the 31-year-old defendant had the pills so he could sell them to others. Prosecutor Chris Lindberg unsuccessfully argued that the defendant’s possession of ecstasy was not misdemeanor conduct.”
San Diego Americans for Safe Access caught up with Mr. Jackson today after his sentencing to discuss the details. Watch the in depth interview here:
The prosecution has not given up in its efforts. Mr. Jackson is still facing a second trial for the same charges he was vindicated of. The preliminary hearing for the second medical marijuana trial is set for January 11, 2010 @ 8:30 am in Department 11 of the San Diego Superior Court 220 W Broadway, San Diego, CA 92111 on January 11, 2010. It is critical that concerned citizens, patients and anyone concerned about your tax dollars being spent on another wasteful trial.
Local Media Coverage of Mr. Jackson's Sentencing Hearing:
http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-01-06/local-county-news/medical-marijuana-collective-manager-gets-probation-for-ecstasy-posession
Eugene Davidovich
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Monday, December 28, 2009
January 4th City Council Meeting / MMTF Update
Dear San Diego Medical Marijuana Community and Concerned Citizens,
At the last San Diego City Council meeting public comment on the item of Medical Marijuana Recommendations was heard and the Council voted to continue the item until Monday, January 4 at 2:00pm.
It is critical that we turn out and send a quiet message that we want fair regulations and support the San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations.
In support of our message we will be handing out “Target” stickers for supporters of the task force recommendations to wear in response to the “no pot shop” stickers handed out by the county funded organizations who spoke out against regulations at the last meeting. We do not support “pot shops” we support regulations and fair treatment of this issue.
Come to the city council meeting on January 4th at 202 C St San Diego, CA 92101 at 2 pm to get your “Target” sticker and help us send a message to the city council.
The next San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force Meetings:
• Thursday, January 21 – 9am – 11am
• Friday, February 5 – 9am – 11am
• Friday, February 19 – 9am – 11am
The meetings will be every other week until the end of October 2010.
www.SafeAccessSD.org
At the last San Diego City Council meeting public comment on the item of Medical Marijuana Recommendations was heard and the Council voted to continue the item until Monday, January 4 at 2:00pm.
It is critical that we turn out and send a quiet message that we want fair regulations and support the San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force recommendations.
In support of our message we will be handing out “Target” stickers for supporters of the task force recommendations to wear in response to the “no pot shop” stickers handed out by the county funded organizations who spoke out against regulations at the last meeting. We do not support “pot shops” we support regulations and fair treatment of this issue.
Come to the city council meeting on January 4th at 202 C St San Diego, CA 92101 at 2 pm to get your “Target” sticker and help us send a message to the city council.
The next San Diego Medical Marijuana Task Force Meetings:
• Thursday, January 21 – 9am – 11am
• Friday, February 5 – 9am – 11am
• Friday, February 19 – 9am – 11am
The meetings will be every other week until the end of October 2010.
www.SafeAccessSD.org
Saturday, December 26, 2009
NC Times - County issues medical marijuana IDs
Advocates say fear, cost keep many from applying
By EDWARD SIFUENTES - esifuentes@nctimes.com | Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 7:10 pm
San Diego County has received 260 applications for medical marijuana ID cards since it launched the program in July, according to county health officials.
Nearly half the applications were from people ages 31-50, according to data provided by the county. A quarter of the applicants lived in North County, most of them in Carlsbad.
All of the applicants paid $166 for the card, which identifies them as legitimate medical marijuana patients entitled to carry up to 8 ounces of pot.
The county implemented the program this past summer after it lost a long legal struggle challenging the state law that required counties to provide the ID cards. The law does not require medical marijuana patients to have a card.
While acknowledging the program has only been in place for six months, medical marijuana advocates say the 260 applicants do not come close to the number of people they believe are legally allowed to use the drug. They say patients may be reluctant to apply for the card, fearing the information on the applications will be used by authorities.
"The problem here in San Diego County is that nobody trusts (the county)," said Rudy Reyes, a medical marijuana patient and activist.
The county says those fears are unfounded. The information on the applications is protected under federal privacy laws. And the county's top prosecutor said people should use the card because it quickly identifies them as legitimate users of the drug.
In recent years, law enforcement agencies in the county have repeatedly cracked down on medical marijuana dispensaries, including a Sept. 9 sweep that shut down 14 of the shops, two of them in North County.
The number of cards issued in San Diego County in the program's first six months appears to be on par with the number issued by neighboring counties in their first year, according to state figures.
For example, Riverside County issued 265 medical marijuana cards its first year, Los Angeles County issued 401 cards and Orange County issued 114 cards. But advocates cite other places, such as Oakland in Alameda County, which issued 1,475 cards in its first year.
Unfounded fears?
There are potentially thousands of eligible patients in San Diego County based on discussions with doctors who recommend pot as medicine, said Eugene Davidovich, a medical marijuana advocate with the group Americans for Safe Access.
"People are afraid," Davidovich said.
County officials said legitimate patients have nothing to fear.
The county does not provide personal information from the applications to anyone, including law enforcement, because it is protected by federal privacy laws, said Adrienne Yancey, assistant deputy director at the county's Health and Human Services Agency.
"We do not," Yancey said. "If we were subpoenaed, I can't say what would happen then ... (but) we have not been subpoenaed."
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis said her office has not asked for the information. She said people should use the ID cards because they help law enforcement identify legitimate patients.
"No one should feel intimidated," Dumanis said. "The county program is totally separate from us."
Of the 260 applications the county received this year through November, 255 were approved. Five were rejected because the county could not get the doctor to confirm the recommendation, Yancey said.
Other statistical information provided to the North County Times by the county includes patients' age range and city of residency. The newspaper also asked for, but did not receive, information on the types of illnesses reported by patients and information about their medical providers.
That information was not provided due to privacy rules, county officials said.
More data
Most of the people who requested a medical marijuana ID are between the ages of 31 and 50, a total of 114 patients, according to the data. Of the 260 applicants, only 14 were between the ages of 18 and 21.
Nearly half of the applicants, 120 people, said they lived in San Diego. Sixty applicants said they lived in North County cities, according to the data. Carlsbad had the highest number of applicants in North County, 14, followed by Vista with 11 and Oceanside with 10, according to the county's data.
Patients' distrust coupled with the $166 price tag for the card may have discouraged people from applying, said James Stacy, a Vista resident who operated one of the medical marijuana dispensaries raided by authorities in September.
The state requires a $66 fee and the county charges $100 to cover staff time and other administrative costs. San Diego County's $166 fee is $13 higher than neighboring Riverside and Los Angeles counties, which charge $153 for the cards.
"Why would I pay $166 to be harassed and be put on a potential arrest list?" Stacy asked.
Stacy faces federal charges of selling marijuana to an undercover officer who posed as a patient at Movement in Action. He has said he did nothing wrong and operated his dispensary according to state guidelines.
In 1996, voters in the state approved the Compassionate Use Act, which legalized marijuana for medical use. The Legislature later passed Senate Bill 420 in 2003, which required counties to participate in the state's medical marijuana ID program.
The county fought the state's medical marijuana law until the case hit a legal dead end earlier this year, when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from San Diego and San Bernardino counties.
'Additional protection'
After losing that case, the Board of Supervisors agreed to implement the medical marijuana ID card program.
Officials estimated that they would receive about 100 applications a month based on other counties' experience.
Yancey said the county processed about 100 applications the first month, but the number quickly dropped off in following months.
Since the state began the program in 2004, more than 37,000 medical marijuana ID cards have been issued. The county with the largest number of cards is San Francisco, with more than 13,000, according to the state's Department of Public Health.
Riverside County has 2,180 ID cards and Orange County has 622, according to state figures.
Davidovich said the county could do more to publicize the card and calm people's fears about privacy protection. Davidovich said he has a card and encourages others to get it because it offers an "additional layer of protection" for legitimate patients.
"We go out of our way to tell people to sign up for the program," Davidovich said.
Call staff writer Edward Sifuentes at 760-740-3511.
San Diego County medical marijuana ID program
Patients by age
Ages 18-21: 14
Ages 22-30: 47
Ages 31-50: 114
Ages 50-over: 85
Total: 260
Applications by city
Carlsbad: 14
Chula Vista: 9
Del Mar: 5
El Cajon: 18
Encinitas: 3
Escondido: 7
Imperial Beach: 3
La Mesa: 12
Lemon Grove: 2
National City: 3
Oceanside: 10
Poway: 1
San Diego: 120
San Marcos: 7
Santee: 6
Solana Beach: 2
Vista: 11
Unincorporated: 27
Total: 260
Source: San Diego County Health and Human Service Agency
Cards issued by county
San Diego: 255
Riverside: 2,180
Orange : 622
Los Angeles: 1,579
Imperial: 15
San Bernardino: 200
Source: California Department of Public Health
By EDWARD SIFUENTES - esifuentes@nctimes.com | Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 7:10 pm
San Diego County has received 260 applications for medical marijuana ID cards since it launched the program in July, according to county health officials.
Nearly half the applications were from people ages 31-50, according to data provided by the county. A quarter of the applicants lived in North County, most of them in Carlsbad.
All of the applicants paid $166 for the card, which identifies them as legitimate medical marijuana patients entitled to carry up to 8 ounces of pot.
The county implemented the program this past summer after it lost a long legal struggle challenging the state law that required counties to provide the ID cards. The law does not require medical marijuana patients to have a card.
While acknowledging the program has only been in place for six months, medical marijuana advocates say the 260 applicants do not come close to the number of people they believe are legally allowed to use the drug. They say patients may be reluctant to apply for the card, fearing the information on the applications will be used by authorities.
"The problem here in San Diego County is that nobody trusts (the county)," said Rudy Reyes, a medical marijuana patient and activist.
The county says those fears are unfounded. The information on the applications is protected under federal privacy laws. And the county's top prosecutor said people should use the card because it quickly identifies them as legitimate users of the drug.
In recent years, law enforcement agencies in the county have repeatedly cracked down on medical marijuana dispensaries, including a Sept. 9 sweep that shut down 14 of the shops, two of them in North County.
The number of cards issued in San Diego County in the program's first six months appears to be on par with the number issued by neighboring counties in their first year, according to state figures.
For example, Riverside County issued 265 medical marijuana cards its first year, Los Angeles County issued 401 cards and Orange County issued 114 cards. But advocates cite other places, such as Oakland in Alameda County, which issued 1,475 cards in its first year.
Unfounded fears?
There are potentially thousands of eligible patients in San Diego County based on discussions with doctors who recommend pot as medicine, said Eugene Davidovich, a medical marijuana advocate with the group Americans for Safe Access.
"People are afraid," Davidovich said.
County officials said legitimate patients have nothing to fear.
The county does not provide personal information from the applications to anyone, including law enforcement, because it is protected by federal privacy laws, said Adrienne Yancey, assistant deputy director at the county's Health and Human Services Agency.
"We do not," Yancey said. "If we were subpoenaed, I can't say what would happen then ... (but) we have not been subpoenaed."
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis said her office has not asked for the information. She said people should use the ID cards because they help law enforcement identify legitimate patients.
"No one should feel intimidated," Dumanis said. "The county program is totally separate from us."
Of the 260 applications the county received this year through November, 255 were approved. Five were rejected because the county could not get the doctor to confirm the recommendation, Yancey said.
Other statistical information provided to the North County Times by the county includes patients' age range and city of residency. The newspaper also asked for, but did not receive, information on the types of illnesses reported by patients and information about their medical providers.
That information was not provided due to privacy rules, county officials said.
More data
Most of the people who requested a medical marijuana ID are between the ages of 31 and 50, a total of 114 patients, according to the data. Of the 260 applicants, only 14 were between the ages of 18 and 21.
Nearly half of the applicants, 120 people, said they lived in San Diego. Sixty applicants said they lived in North County cities, according to the data. Carlsbad had the highest number of applicants in North County, 14, followed by Vista with 11 and Oceanside with 10, according to the county's data.
Patients' distrust coupled with the $166 price tag for the card may have discouraged people from applying, said James Stacy, a Vista resident who operated one of the medical marijuana dispensaries raided by authorities in September.
The state requires a $66 fee and the county charges $100 to cover staff time and other administrative costs. San Diego County's $166 fee is $13 higher than neighboring Riverside and Los Angeles counties, which charge $153 for the cards.
"Why would I pay $166 to be harassed and be put on a potential arrest list?" Stacy asked.
Stacy faces federal charges of selling marijuana to an undercover officer who posed as a patient at Movement in Action. He has said he did nothing wrong and operated his dispensary according to state guidelines.
In 1996, voters in the state approved the Compassionate Use Act, which legalized marijuana for medical use. The Legislature later passed Senate Bill 420 in 2003, which required counties to participate in the state's medical marijuana ID program.
The county fought the state's medical marijuana law until the case hit a legal dead end earlier this year, when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from San Diego and San Bernardino counties.
'Additional protection'
After losing that case, the Board of Supervisors agreed to implement the medical marijuana ID card program.
Officials estimated that they would receive about 100 applications a month based on other counties' experience.
Yancey said the county processed about 100 applications the first month, but the number quickly dropped off in following months.
Since the state began the program in 2004, more than 37,000 medical marijuana ID cards have been issued. The county with the largest number of cards is San Francisco, with more than 13,000, according to the state's Department of Public Health.
Riverside County has 2,180 ID cards and Orange County has 622, according to state figures.
Davidovich said the county could do more to publicize the card and calm people's fears about privacy protection. Davidovich said he has a card and encourages others to get it because it offers an "additional layer of protection" for legitimate patients.
"We go out of our way to tell people to sign up for the program," Davidovich said.
Call staff writer Edward Sifuentes at 760-740-3511.
San Diego County medical marijuana ID program
Patients by age
Ages 18-21: 14
Ages 22-30: 47
Ages 31-50: 114
Ages 50-over: 85
Total: 260
Applications by city
Carlsbad: 14
Chula Vista: 9
Del Mar: 5
El Cajon: 18
Encinitas: 3
Escondido: 7
Imperial Beach: 3
La Mesa: 12
Lemon Grove: 2
National City: 3
Oceanside: 10
Poway: 1
San Diego: 120
San Marcos: 7
Santee: 6
Solana Beach: 2
Vista: 11
Unincorporated: 27
Total: 260
Source: San Diego County Health and Human Service Agency
Cards issued by county
San Diego: 255
Riverside: 2,180
Orange : 622
Los Angeles: 1,579
Imperial: 15
San Bernardino: 200
Source: California Department of Public Health
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
James Stacy - Federal MMJ Trial
Support James Stacy as he stands up against the charges in Federal Court!
James was raided on 9/9/9 as part of Bonnie Dumanis' effort to overturn the will of the people.
Please visit his website and donate to his legal defense: http://movementinaction.org/donte/
Nonsense About Medical Marijuana and Teens
A new survey showing, among other things, a slight uptick in teen marijuana use, got considerable press yesterday and today. A widely-circulated Associated Press story, along with many other reports, included this claim: “The increase of teens smoking pot is partly because the national debate over medical use of marijuana can make the drugs seem safer to teenagers, researchers said.”
Baloney.
Medical marijuana burst onto the national scene in 1996, when California passed the first effective medical marijuana law, Arizona passed a flawed initiative with similar intent (whose value turned out to be only symbolic due to its wording), and the Clinton administration went ballistic. It stayed a major issue in 1998 and 1999 as a further wave of initiatives passed and the Institute of Medicine issued a report giving a qualified endorsement to medical marijuana, which has been in and out of the spotlight ever since.
In 1996, the last survey taken before any medical marijuana initiatives passed, 11.3 percent of eighth graders reported current (past 30 days) marijuana use. For 10th graders the figure was 20.4 percent, and for 12th graders it was 21.9 percent. In 2009, after 13 years of medical marijuana laws that now exist in 13 states, the figures for current use are 6.5 percent for eighth graders, 15.9 percent for 10th graders and 20.6 percent for 12th graders.
The pattern is the same for lifetime use: In every age group, marijuana use is down, not up, since the medical marijuana debate hit the national stage. That’s even true in California, where the lack of tight regulation has led to the most allegations of abuse, according to the official California Student Survey. Alas, the state no longer seems to have the data posted online, but we compiled it (and other state surveys) here.
It’s a shame that researchers who’ve been enlisted in the war on marijuana choose to repeat unfounded propaganda rather then address the reality that their federal bosses prefer to avoid: Teen access to marijuana isn’t caused by laws that let sick patients use it, it’s caused by a failed policy of prohibition that prevents the sort of sensible regulation we apply to tobacco.
http://blog.mpp.org/medical-marijuana/nonsense-about-medical-marijuana-and-teens/12152009/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)