Collective arrests

[CaliforniaLady]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Our community had 3 store front collectives. Each business went through the process for business licenses, permit to operate etc and sold their medical marijuana only to those with a valid physician recommendations. All 3 were raided after months of active sales and all owners and employees were arrested. All assets were seized including personal accounts.
Each of the businesses were in business entirely to provide/sell medical marijuana and when it came to trial readiness the judge denied them the compasionate medical marijuana defense, which left them with no defense. The charges were selling which is illegal and the jury would only have been able to hear that they sold pot. Just like the street corner sales. To add a nice layer to the sales, an undercover sheriff obtained a recommendation, made his purchase with a valid recommendation and the jury would have heard his testimony that he purchased pot from each accused, no mention of where or how, just a sale.

 

[tranquility]

Since the law does not permit sales, until the issue is cleared up in the state at the appellate level, what would you expect?

 

[Ladyback1]

Yep, same thing happened in my state....of course, part of the reason for the raids/arrests were for trafficking and tax evasion.

Until such time that the feds see the necessity of medical marijuana (if there is one--I'm not getting into that discussion!), and changes federal law, then state laws will not supersede Fed law.

We still have "care givers" who dispense medical marijuana and get very little blow back regarding the federal laws.

 

[CaliforniaLady]

Actually, I would expect the judge, any judge to grant applying the relevant laws to the relevant case. That's my understanding of a defense. The jury system is our system for determining the facts at issue, if all the facts are not allowed there is no way for a valid verdict to be decided. For some reason I thought this was everyones right

 

[You Are Guilty]

Actually, I would expect the judge, any judge to grant applying the relevant laws to the relevant case. That's my understanding of a defense. The jury system is our system for determining the facts at issue, if all the facts are not allowed there is no way for a valid verdict to be decided. For some reason I thought this was everyones right

It's not. At this point, you can either cop a plea, or start researching "jury nullification" and praying to the god of weed to visit that jury room.

 

[CaliforniaLady]

There is no trial because with the judge's denial of the defense of California medical marijuana use act took their right to a defense away. I'm not involved but always believed any accused was entitled to any defense that provides the facts at issue. This denial disallows a jury to decide fundamental justice that I thought was provided to all. If you get a DUI, commit murder, rob a retail store, can the legal system say it is not allowed for you to have a defense based on your actual crime????

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Our community had 3 store front collectives. Each business went through the process for business licenses, permit to operate etc and sold their medical marijuana only to those with a valid physician recommendations. All 3 were raided after months of active sales and all owners and employees were arrested. All assets were seized including personal accounts.
Each of the businesses were in business entirely to provide/sell medical marijuana and when it came to trial readiness the judge denied them the compasionate medical marijuana defense, which left them with no defense. The charges were selling which is illegal and the jury would only have been able to hear that they sold pot. Just like the street corner sales. To add a nice layer to the sales, an undercover sheriff obtained a recommendation, made his purchase with a valid recommendation and the jury would have heard his testimony that he purchased pot from each accused, no mention of where or how, just a sale.

Did you have a legal question, or did you just create this thread to rant? It's a valid question.

 

[CdwJava]

A defense without a legal foundation is generally not permissible. Since it appears that the only hope for the defense would be the concept of "jury nullification" and not a valid defense under the law, the court chose not to permit it.

As mentioned, until the legislature seeks to correct these ongoing and seemingly never ending issues with medical marijuana laws, there will continue to be issues pertaining to the use, cultivation of marijuana and enforcement of the law.

 

[CaliforniaLady]

@Zinger....even without a question mark, please notice there were responses to my questioning of the law. I thank those who took the time to accept my post for it's intent. I would doubt that your response to my post was posted for any reason other than a personal 'negative zinger' Maybe you are to monitor this site?

 

[Zigner]

@Zinger....even without a question mark, please notice there were responses to my questioning of the law. I thank those who took the time to accept my post for it's intent. I would doubt that your response to my post was posted for any reason other than a personal 'negative zinger' Maybe you are to monitor this site?

Again, you did not ask a question. You relied on us to guess what your issues may be.

 

[HighwayMan]

...please notice there were responses to my questioning of the law...

Many of us have no time to guess what your actual question is. Those with the time and/or inclination maybe be spurred by your rant to discuss the issue based on their view of it, but you can't expect much "help" without specific questions.