CA Supreme Court: Caregiver Must Do More Than Provide Marijuana

A recent California Supreme Court ruling out of Santa Cruz adds a bit of clarity into the often murky world of the state's medical marijuana laws, but some worry the ruling could leave some patients facing more challenges accessing their medications.

The court's unanimous ruling upheld a Santa Cruz County Superior Court jury decision that found medicinal marijuana user and care provider Roger Mentch guilty of possessing and cultivating marijuana for sale. In issuing the ruling, the Supreme Court determined that, in order to qualify as a primary caregiver, one must do more for a patient than provide them with marijuana.

Mentch, 53, was arrested in 2003 and charged with cultivation of marijuana and possession with intent to sell after a teller at Monterey Bay Bank noticed Mentch had deposited almost $11,000 in cash, mostly in small bills, over a a two-month period, according to court documents.

The teller also noticed that Mentch's cash often reeked of marijuana, sometimes to the point that the smell filled the bank, forcing it to remove the currency from circulation. After the teller filed a suspicious activity report with the local sheriff's office, an investigation was launched that found hundreds of marijuana plants growing in Mentch's home, prompting his arrest.

Mentch claimed he was growing the marijuana for himself, a medical marijuana patient, as well as five others, all of whom had medical marijuana prescriptions, and that he didn't profit from his marijuana growing operation.

But, during Mentch's trial, a judge ruled against instructing the jury on the affirmative primary caregiver defense for marijuana possession and cultivation. After being convicted on both offenses, Mentch appealed and an appeals court reversed both convictions. Then, the Supreme Court granted a review in order to address the meaning of a "primary caregiver," which Senate Bill 420 defines as an individual designated by a qualified patient who "has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that patient."

In affirming Mentch's convictions, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to qualify as a primary caregiver under California's Compassionate Use Act, Proposition 215, Mentch would have had to assume the responsibility for a patient's housing, health, or safety, or some combination of the three, in addition to providing them with marijuana.

"There has to be something more to be a caregiver than simply providing marijuana," the Supreme Court ruling quotes the trial judge as saying. "Otherwise, there would be no reason to have the definition of a caregiver, because anybody who would be providing marijuana and related services would qualify as a caregiver, therefor giving them a defense to the very activity that's otherwise illegal, and I don't think that makes any sense in terms of the statutory construction, nor do I think it was intended by the people or the Legislature."

While the lasting implications of Mentch's case are hard to decipher, advocates on both sides of the issue agree its short-term result will likely be more patients seeking to get their medical marijuana from patient cooperatives instead of from individual suppliers.

"Ideally, (the court ruling) won't have a tremendous effect," Joseph Elford, a lawyer for Americans for Safe Access, a pro-medical marijuana group, told the San Francisco Chronicle. "Patients will now increasingly get their medication through collectives and cooperatives."

But, local attorney Greg Allen said he thinks that might be an overly city-oriented way of looking at things, as areas like the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles have a huge number of cooperative dispensaries, while more rural areas of the state don't have any.

"It was completely viewed with Los Angeles or Bay Area eyes," Allen said. "If you live in Alpine County, what good does it do you if everything's channeled through cooperatives in Humboldt County, Los Angeles and the Bay Area?"

Careful to say he'd only read a summary of the decision and not the court ruling itself, Allen said he has some other concerns as well.

Because many cooperatives don't grow all the marijuana they sell or give out, they often rely on buying cannabis from individuals, like Mentch, who grow in their homes as caregivers and sell excess marijuana to dispensaries. If these "caregivers" aren't allowed to grow, Allen wondered, will that result in a shortage at the dispensaries?

If dispensaries bulk up their growing operations to make up for the possible shortage, Allen asked, will that make them a more likely target for federal raids?

The ruling might also completely change the caregiver landscape, Allen said, as medical caregivers may now be expected to grow marijuana in addition to their other duties. For a profession that often garners minimum wage, locally at least, Allen said that's a lot to ask.

"Let's just say (the Supreme Court) didn't miss by a little bit on this, they missed by a whole lot," Allen said.

What this all means for the hordes of Humboldt County grow houses with 215 recommendations on the walls remains to be seen.

Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said the court's ruling provides some relief for law enforcement, but likely won't directly change anything his police department does.

"Any time we can get some clarity on Prop. 215 we think that's a good thing for everyone involved," Mendosa said.

But, because grow houses are generally the province of the Humboldt County Drug Task Force and the District Attorney's Office, Mendosa said those agencies, and not APD, are the ones who will have to decipher exactly what the ruling means on the North Coast.

"To me, this is a charging issue," Mendosa said.

Deputy District Attorney Maggie Fleming, who handles the bulk of the district attorney's drug cases, and a spokesperson for the Humboldt County Drug Task Force were not available to discuss the court ruling by the Times-Standard's deadline.

Where Mendosa sees more clarity, Allen sees the Supreme Court's decisions as further muddying the waters that Senate Bill 420 aimed to clarify.

"Frankly, (S.B. 420) made order out of chaos. Now, it seems the Supreme Court is trying to move us back into chaos again," Allen said, adding that this is just the latest in a string of the court's rulings against the rights of medical marijuana patients.

"How is this ruling consistent with providing patients with consistent and affordable access to their medications?" Allen asked.


News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Times-Standard
Author: Thadeus Greenson
Contact: Times-Standard
Copyright: 2008 Times-Standard
Website: CA Supreme Court: Caregiver Must Do More Than Provide Marijuana
 
But, during Mentch's trial, a judge ruled against instructing the jury on the affirmative primary caregiver defense for marijuana possession and cultivation.

This is the crux of the issue. The judiciary is denying the citizens their legal claim of defense. The jury is supposed to be the finder of facts. When the judge doesn't allow the argument it denies defendants their right to a fair trial.

In my opinion, the CA Supreme Court should have overturned on this basis alone. The trial judge's comment "no rational jury" speaks for itself

an investigation was launched that found hundreds of marijuana plants growing in Mentch's home, prompting his arrest.

82 in flower + 57 baby clones + 48 veg +3 mothers = 190

"There has to be something more to be a caregiver than simply providing marijuana," the Supreme Court ruling quotes the trial judge as saying. "Otherwise, there would be no reason to have the definition of a caregiver, because anybody who would be providing marijuana and related services would qualify as a caregiver, therefor giving them a defense to the very activity that's otherwise illegal, and I don't think that makes any sense in terms of the statutory construction, nor do I think it was intended by the people or the Legislature."

Unbelievable. Yeah there has to be something more. How about

1) Only if designated by a legit patient
2) Only to a legit patient

This judge makes it sound like otherwise, any dime bag street dealer could claim caregiver status

nor do I think it was intended by the people or the Legislature.

Because I'm clarvoyant

Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa said the court's ruling provides some relief for law enforcement, but likely won't directly change anything his police department does.

Kind of a telling choice of words "relief"

Yeah, lately law enforcement has been really struggling in its efforts to arrest otherwise innocent people doing nothing more than helping people (with cancer or aids) regain their ability to eat.

We need some relief because this law thingy about caregivers has been getting in the way
 
This is the crux of the issue. The judiciary is denying the citizens their legal claim of defense. The jury is supposed to be the finder of facts. When the judge doesn't allow the argument it denies defendants their right to a fair trial.
No, you're wrong, Soniq420.

The "crux of the issue" is that the majority of Americans (voters) don't want weed legalized or accessible by anyone in the world.

When that view changes, marijuana will be legal like coffee and cigarettes.

Until that view changes, expect more corrupt arrests and prosecutions and trials.

Splitting hairs over MMj and regular marijuana is just smoke and mirrors to hide a much bigger reality: That the voters don't want cannabis to exist on the planet, let alone to allow anyone access to it.

smokeD
 
No, you're wrong, Soniq420.

The "crux of the issue" is that the majority of Americans (voters) don't want weed legalized or accessible by anyone in the world.

When that view changes, marijuana will be legal like coffee and cigarettes.

Hi Smokedsmoke

You've changed the subject in your argument.

This is a state story about how the California Supreme Court ruled in a state medical case.

While you are right that the majority of American's don't (yet) want weed legalized. This has nothing to do with how many Californians want medical marijuana legalized.

The latter was clearly established by prop 215

On a side note, Zogby just published poll results that 58% of people "in the west" want cannabis legalized. Nationally, the number is up to 44%.

:peace:
 
Hi Smokedsmoke

You've changed the subject in your argument.

This is a state story about how the California Supreme Court ruled in a state medical case.

While you are right that the majority of American's don't (yet) want weed legalized. This has nothing to do with how many Californians want medical marijuana legalized.

The latter was clearly established by prop 215

On a side note, Zogby just published poll results that 58% of people "in the west" want cannabis legalized. Nationally, the number is up to 44%.

:peace:
Hi Soniq420,

Just to be clear, I am not "in conflict" at all with what you are saying.

I am just pointing out that there is literally no such thing as "MMj" (the courts have proved this by the judges disallowing the words and all references during by-trial prosecutions); 215/420 mean nothing. That "medical marijuana" is a 100% myth, it does not exist in the eyes and minds of the majority American voter block.

Marijuana exists. All stigmas and lies attached to marijuana exist and are prevalent, swaying ignorant, yet majority voters.

People have to get this through their head.

Moving on from that viewpoint 215/420 are extremely dangerous. They result in multi-month and multi-decade prison sentences for those "in full compliance" according to the MMj concepts.

"MMj patient" and employee receives 30-months in prison.
Former marijuana dispensary employee sentenced - Today's Paper > Local News | Bakersfield.com - Kern County news, events, shopping & search

Luke Scarmazzo set up in a sting - 30-years in prison.
Federal Sentence Reduction For Luke Scarmazzo & Richardo Montes Medical Marijuana Dispensary Petition

Point being, MMj is entirely set aside and fully discredited as merely another hallucination of drugged out people. That's the law. That's the will and the mindset of the VAST majority of American voters.

Therefore, my point is, it's utterly ludicrous to debate hair splits.

The entire "MMj movement" is a horrid idea. It is putting HIGH risk in front of ALL "MMj patients." Plus, while living and dwelling and functioning in the high risk environment, pot smokers are complacent. They are "relaxed" and "peaceful" due to smoking Mj. Meanwhile, counter-thinkers are raging hot. They are fully and altogether at WAR with drug users. And, have been since the early 1900s.

That problem right there is absolutely counter productive.
We need to rethink core logistics and strategies.

Here's market reality.
Prescription drug abuse rising - The Herald Dispatch

1997 ANNUAL AMERICAN DEATHS
CAUSED BY DRUGS
TOBACCO ........................ 400,000
ALCOHOL ......................... 100,000
ALL LEGAL DRUGS .............. 20,000
ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS ............ 15,000
CAFFEINE ............................. 2,000
ASPIRIN ................................... 500
MARIJUANA ............................... 0
Source: United States government,
National Institute on Drug Abuse,
Bureau of Mortality Statistics.
Marijuana And Hemp The Untold Story
Author: Thomas J. Bouril

People and the Supreme court WANT the deaths and sicknesses caused from (and addictions to) substances that are NOT cannabis. For them it is a corralling and a cornering of money and higher investment returns from the medical/pharmaceutical/tobacco/alcohol/incarceration system in this country. That is why all our statistics clearly proving Mj to be near harmless continue to fall on deaf ears. People know the facts but they want the money. They can't make money from Mj because Mj and MMj users don't get sick thus contribute to their massive "cattle boat" wherein people are merely numbers reflected in the price of investors' and shareholders' stock.


Since 1971 (Nixon declaring "War On Drugs") 38,000,000 people have been arrested for non-violent drug offenses.
We are bought and sold as a commodity.


The entire, complete US Constitution and Bill of Rights had to be utterly set aside and disallowed by people in order to get these substance prohibition laws (and enforcement) in place, so they could try to make more money. It was never about safety. It was and is always about money due to greedy investors who are the majority block of voters.

I'm leaving this thread but... want to give you something to think about. Plus, I do not want to get off-topic out of respect for the OP.

We must fully legalize Mj. We must get the laws and rules changed at the federal and state level. There can be no half-measures (such as 215/420). Think only and strictly in these terms and IF Mj or MMj is ever going to be fully legal, this is the only way to get it done - by changing laws/rules.

Our continuing to be "sitting ducks" having full exposure to the deadly cannon blasts of contrary-minded people "at war" with us, the government and Supreme court backing them ... is no way to live and is no way to proceed.

Peace out,

smokeD
 
Hi smokeD,

Thanks for the fabulous discussion. Personally, I'm for clarity over agreement and while I think we agree completely on the end state goal (full legalization), we disagree on the current state (I think 214/420 is a step in the right direction, you think it has obscured the true goal, made us complacent to the fight, and that most people think MMJ is a myth).

I see this as a tactical disagreement and would only add that the arrests you site as examples are from the distribution side of the equation(Caregiver/Coop) and not of simple sick patients (which have happened but to my knowledge are generally pretty rare). There are a lot of sick people that wouldn't otherwise have access to this medicine if 215/420 didn't exist.

While we'd agree these arrests are immoral, illegal, and unjust, I don't think they support the argument that MMJ doesn't exist in minds of the majority of Americans. If 44% of all Americans (recent Zogby poll) believe in full legalization, what percent believe in decriminalization (I believe the majority or damn close to the majority), and what percent believe sick people should have access (I'm convinced but can't prove it's a clear majority).

We completely agree on the benefits of cannabis, the disparity of deaths from other substances presently legal, and and fact that the Constitutional rights (BOR) of the people were illegally stripped.

This subject fascinates me and I posted a poll about it that I'll dig out of the archives and post here, please check out the distribution of opinions that exist about this topic.

For clarity, what I mean about drag public opinion into the future strategically is using all the incremental weapons at our disposal; decrim, lowest priority initiative, MMJ, etc.

Poll: Goal of the Movement

I look forward to the day when we can enjoy a completely legal bowl of natures gift. :peace:

++reps
 
Hi smokeD,

Thanks for the fabulous discussion. Personally, I'm for clarity over agreement and while I think we agree completely on the end state goal (full legalization), we disagree on the current state (I think 214/420 is a step in the right direction, you think it has obscured the true goal, made us complacent to the fight, and that most people think MMJ is a myth).

I see this as a tactical disagreement and would only add that the arrests you site as examples are from the distribution side of the equation(Caregiver/Coop) and not of simple sick patients (which have happened but to my knowledge are generally pretty rare). There are a lot of sick people that wouldn't otherwise have access to this medicine if 215/420 didn't exist.

While we'd agree these arrests are immoral, illegal, and unjust, I don't think they support the argument that MMJ doesn't exist in minds of the majority of Americans. If 44% of all Americans (recent Zogby poll) believe in full legalization, what percent believe in decriminalization (I believe the majority or damn close to the majority), and what percent believe sick people should have access (I'm convinced but can't prove it's a clear majority).

We completely agree on the benefits of cannabis, the disparity of deaths from other substances presently legal, and and fact that the Constitutional rights (BOR) of the people were illegally stripped.

This subject fascinates me and I posted a poll about it that I'll dig out of the archives and post here, please check out the distribution of opinions that exist about this topic.

For clarity, what I mean about drag public opinion into the future strategically is using all the incremental weapons at our disposal; decrim, lowest priority initiative, MMJ, etc.

Poll: Goal of the Movement

I look forward to the day when we can enjoy a completely legal bowl of natures gift. :peace:

++reps
Hi Soniq420,

I know I said that post was my last before leaving but I feel compelled to make one more because of your interest and your enjoyment of our discussion - this time entirely stepping onto your side and posting from that vantage point.

Yes and No. That is the answer to, Is 215/420 a benefit and progressive?

Yes, in this respect. I believe it was ignorant, propaganda-prone "Reefer Madness" mentality that slammed Mj into prohibition status to begin with.

Likewise, it is the Internet, with its Google searches (34,100,000 results for MARIJUANA. CANNABIS returns 16,100,000 results), YouTube and other video sites wherein 1000s of videos show the "reality" and more importantly transparent education about cannabis and marijuana, and message boards like yours along with links that are also powerful forces that will ultimately pry ignorance, fear and blindness from the minds of the masses, resulting in a sea change with marijuana being fully legalized.

The 1900 - 1980 darkness is being dispelled. The masses can only laugh at the preposterous allegations made about cannabis in the Reefer Madness era, as lies are fully dismantled in our modern times. This is a very powerful video from an elder professor - YouTube - Vaporizers 101 - showing the benefits of using a vaporizer. It changes everything. Professor Brian Murphy is out of the generation of utter morons who slammed Mj into prohibition.

In that regard, even risky access to MMj provided by 215/420 is a good thing. Plus, the big picture is: we've got almost 15 years of sick and ill people getting 100% benefits from MMj usage. 100s of 1000s of people are being helped by marijuana. That is sending a strong message.

This reality dispels all false notations, skepticism and speculation as to the "harm" cannabis allegedly causes. It will be found, as was already known for 1000s of years, by direct experience that cannabis is the most useful, most beneficial plant with its compounds and substances on the earth.

Now we can compare real facts to real facts. But, the death chart stays the same:

1997 ANNUAL AMERICAN DEATHS CAUSED BY DRUGS:
TOBACCO ........................ 400,000
ALCOHOL ......................... 100,000
ALL LEGAL DRUGS .............. 20,000
ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS ............ 15,000
CAFFEINE ............................. 2,000
ASPIRIN ................................... 500
MARIJUANA .................................. 0

Hence, my conclusion is, the more people who have access to MMj the better it is.

On the flip side, while 215/420 can be seen to be a progressive step, it has been 15 years. These years have also probably strengthened the resolve of idiot people (still the majority) to keep Mj in prohibition status, with strict law enforcement and sentences in place. They would have no motivation to change from this current semi-criminal, semi-legitimate, fully prohibition status.

In their minds, the "dope smokers" are getting their "weed" while DEA agents are breathing down their necks. "Good. Serves the dope addicts right."

This is most likely how they want it. We may see a partial-legalization in 20 years from now (it's already been 15 years and zero real progress has been made) or we may never see progressive steps beyond what is in place now.

I do think and am fully persuaded after studying this scenario and this phenomena, that the US government will go bankrupt soon due to blowing TRILLIONS on their War on Drug Disorder, and their being the enemy of 10s of millions of core citizens who use Mj. When that happens, and the "US government" is extinct, another government will come in and take over governing. I want it to be Holland who allows marijuana to be consumed.

But, while this current, corrupted, illegal, artificial, anti-Constitutional government is in place and functioning, the chances of really getting anywhere close to full legalization of Mj is pretty much non-existent. I would not presume otherwise.

Best,

smokeD

graph.jpg

chart of US government financially blowing up
 
i hope you just mean your leaving this conversation because i'm looking forward to future posts from you.

Yeah, me too.

Thanks for the great discussion

Much respect to the cannabis activists of the world; smokedesmoke

Soniq420
 
smokeD's Issue

lmao... you guys.... :-D

Okey-dokey then, usually I'm at places I'm not wanted. You kiddin'? Here? I'll stick around. :p

OK, this is the deal.

I am attributing value... that you all here are hard-wired and cutting edge as it pertains to information and knowledge regarding a few things I may not have info and knowledge of, OK? So, let's start there.

My particular situation is: I'm dealing with debilitating, chronic back pain. OK, but, there's a twist, so please... ears perked up. :)

My condition is a direct result of US gov policies extending into their allowing a certain prevailing sector of "health care practitioners" for the last several decades. What I refer to as (their) continuing criminal enterprise based on and due to their negligence.

This US gov-backed, US gov-approved group performed over 100 procedures on my spine.

This resulted in my spine being "turned into dust" essentially. I am not a doctor.

It's against the law for someone to come over to me and destroy my spine. That is a human "health care" tragedy. One the US gov fully supports and still does support and authorize to be done to US citizens like myself.

Sound bizarre? Brace yourself, it's reality and it happened to and is happening to me.

The "remedy" provided to me by the US gov for the debilitating, chronic back pain directly caused BY them? Either take opiate-based "legally prescribed" painkillers OR... take MMj that is 100% prohibited and illegal according to the US gov and to the Supreme court.

Problem is, I cannot take ANY "legal" prescription medication (such as painkillers). My system simply has zero tolerance for them.

Modern, cutting edge, up the minute info, OK? We still all on the same page?

The US gov policies regarding this are literally killing me. Their official stance? Based on the ruling they gave Angel, "Tough sh|t. We'll prosecute you if you use MMj."

Now, I'm pissed. The US Constitution / Bill of Rights does not give any governmental authority to the government the grounds to kill me or to criminalize me based upon medical issues they themselves caused me.

So, now you've got the issue (my issue). I am certain the principles set ground-breaking precedence over Angel's situation.

However, there is a second part. That I'll explain... in Part 2.
 
smokeD's Issue Part 2

OK, here's the conclusion.

I do not prefer either prevailing "remedy" (either legal drugs or illegal MMj). I have the right... to reject both.

I clearly see there is more at work here. Underlying principles that gave rise and give rise to my situation.

I have a solution. It is better than either of the (limited) 2 "fixes" already described.

My solution results in my being helped. It results in entirely correcting all US gov policies that gave rise and give rise to my issue.

There's more. Ironically, it also results in all "prohibition" of all Schedule 1 & Schedule 2 drugs being repealed. It also results in all current US gov policies towards all drugs being 100% abolished entirely. All of them.

Think. No more "drug agents." No more "DEA." No more "war on drugs." No more "Scheduled" substances lists. No more "drug enforcement" agencies of any kind whatsoever.

Have I piqued your interest? :)

It gets better. It altogether cures at one time, in one action, in one step, the monetary "crisis" our lazy-dog, careless, inept, corrupted, greedy, incompetent, inefficient, ineffective, dumb, stupid, irresponsible national "managers" aka, our "gov officials" dwelling in the Whack House, on down, created and brought upon us by US gov toxic, death knell policies, that is currently putting at extreme risk of the high likelihood of catastrophic failure (financial, safety and otherwise) and in great jeopardy the lives of 303,824,640 US citizens (July 2008 consensus est.).

Look at the chart. They try to tell us we are just in the midst of a "2 year old recession." I don't see any recession. In the national debt chart I see the financial implosion resulting in the death of a nation that these idiots made happen. That chart just grew deeper (from 2005 to 2009 red channels greatly extended downward) as $2 trillion more was recently added in the form of "financial bailout packages."

Obama says the interest America paid on its debt in 2008 is $250 billion.

That is a crime committed against every US citizen.

graph.jpg


Bill "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton just said of Obama's speech, "I just want the American people to know that he's (Obama) confident that we are going to get out of this and he feels good about the long run. I just would like him to end by saying that he is hopeful and completely convinced we're going to come through this."

The step, the measure, the action... is something gov officials do not want you to know about, it is a measure fully lawful they do not want us as citizens to take.

In addition to correcting the monetary "crisis," it fully legalizes all drugs now categorized as "illegal."

:)

Anyone want to get on board here?

smokeD
 
Its like a never ending Twilight Zone! Why don't they apply these stupid ass rules to the major drug pushers. Like the maker of Oxycontin they sell billions of these pills every year and they do make money lots of money. They even pay doctors to prescribe their vile, addictive killer medicine. I could see them assigning a person with every prescription to make sure the user had a nice house and was taken care of. WHAT A DAMN JOKE....

As with anything related to making weed legal the ruling is in the favor of the existing drug pushers.They do not want you to have a choice unless its their product. Its sad to say but in our country if you want to know why our leaders or courts make decisions the way they. Not to benefit the majority of Americans but to protect corporate profits...Just follow the money that is the motivator and they enslave us rather that spending one penny to help us..
 
Re: smokeD's Issue Part 2

I with ya man!
Thanks, well, let me clarify what needs to be done to "get on board."

If you're interested, I need some assistance getting this action regarding the US gov legally mounted.

So, if you know anyone who knows anyone... such as attorneys in the big pro-legalization .orgs... maybe you can pass this thread onto them or just provide me their names and contact (email).

We can get this done. It just needs to be done via attorneys.

Cheers!

-sds
 
Back
Top Bottom