T
The420Guy
Guest
Mendocino County Sheriff Tony Craver and District Attorney Norman Vroman
recently released their annual statistics for arrest, prosecution, and
convictions for marijuana offenses, Mendocino County Voter approved Measure
G requires the sheriff and district attorney to submit annual statistics to
the Board of Supervisors.
For 2001, the sheriff reports that a total of 139,051 marijuana plants have
been eradicated by his department, 138,525 of which were uprooted by the
County of Mendocino Marijuana Eradication Team (COMMET) and 526 of which
were pulled by the patrol division. As to the number of sites searched, 391
were visited by COMMET and 12 by the patrol division. As to the number of
arrests, COMMET took 55 suspects into custody for illegal cultivation
compared to 13 arrests by patrol. The patrol division reports 52 arrests
were made for illegal possession of marijuana.
For the same time period, the district attorney reports that 405 marijuana
possession, cultivation, and trafficking cases were submitted to his office
for prosecution. 321 cases were accepted for prosecution. 29 cases were
declined because the facts and evidence did not support filing charges, 32
cases were referred to other jurisdictions (e.g., parole violation hearings,
federal prosecution, other counties etc.), and 23 cases are still under
consideration pending results from further investigation.
The district attorney also reports that his office is currently prosecuting
170 marijuana cases. His convictions are broken down according to offenses:
Illegal possession of more than one ounce (Health & Safety Code section
11357): 76; illegal cultivation (Health & Safety section 11358): 2;
possession of marijuana for purposes of sale (Health & Safety Code section
11359): 2; maintaining a place for the unlawful storage of marijuana (Health
& Safety Code section 11366): 13; and conspiracy to do an act contrary to
the public welfare (Penal Code section 182(a)(5): 7.
Both Vroman and Craver said that the above numbers verify that the marijuana
laws are vigorously enforced and prosecuted in Mendocino County. In fact,
Vroman and Craver maintain that they are even willing to tackle the
fraudulent use of Proposition 215.
Recently, a special panel of the Mendocino County grand jury returned felony
cultivation and trafficking indictments against two perpetrators (William
Matthews and Kathleen Honzik) despite their medicinal claims. The case was
investigated by COMMET and prosecuted by Vroman's office. The suspects
offered specious claims of being caregivers to phantom patients. When the
case was presented to the grand jury, prosecutors presented all medicinal
evidence in their possession to the grand jury for consideration. They also
read the applicable jury instruction and the entire text of the
Compassionate Use Act to the grand jury. Prosecutors told the grand jurors
not to return an indictment if they felt there was merit to the suspects'
medicinal claims. The grand jury presented a true bill in a matter of
minutes. The suspects are awaiting trial in the superior court.
Both Vroman and Craver believe it is a good idea to involve the conscience
of the community in the charging decision by utilizing the grand jury in
these kinds of situations. "It is gratifying to see people who have
undoubtedly voted for Proposition 215 reject frivolous medicinal marijuana
claims," Vroman said. 'It does a disservice to legitimate patients and
caregivers when traffickers abuse a law designed to help seriously ill
people," Vroman elaborated. Craver echoed those sentiments.
Newshawk: Help us Help Reform About Us | DrugSense
Pubdate: Thu, 27 Dec 2001
Source: Advocate-News (CA)
Copyright: 2001, MediaNews Group, Inc.
Contact: advocatenews@mcn.org
Details: MapInc (Cannabis - California)
recently released their annual statistics for arrest, prosecution, and
convictions for marijuana offenses, Mendocino County Voter approved Measure
G requires the sheriff and district attorney to submit annual statistics to
the Board of Supervisors.
For 2001, the sheriff reports that a total of 139,051 marijuana plants have
been eradicated by his department, 138,525 of which were uprooted by the
County of Mendocino Marijuana Eradication Team (COMMET) and 526 of which
were pulled by the patrol division. As to the number of sites searched, 391
were visited by COMMET and 12 by the patrol division. As to the number of
arrests, COMMET took 55 suspects into custody for illegal cultivation
compared to 13 arrests by patrol. The patrol division reports 52 arrests
were made for illegal possession of marijuana.
For the same time period, the district attorney reports that 405 marijuana
possession, cultivation, and trafficking cases were submitted to his office
for prosecution. 321 cases were accepted for prosecution. 29 cases were
declined because the facts and evidence did not support filing charges, 32
cases were referred to other jurisdictions (e.g., parole violation hearings,
federal prosecution, other counties etc.), and 23 cases are still under
consideration pending results from further investigation.
The district attorney also reports that his office is currently prosecuting
170 marijuana cases. His convictions are broken down according to offenses:
Illegal possession of more than one ounce (Health & Safety Code section
11357): 76; illegal cultivation (Health & Safety section 11358): 2;
possession of marijuana for purposes of sale (Health & Safety Code section
11359): 2; maintaining a place for the unlawful storage of marijuana (Health
& Safety Code section 11366): 13; and conspiracy to do an act contrary to
the public welfare (Penal Code section 182(a)(5): 7.
Both Vroman and Craver said that the above numbers verify that the marijuana
laws are vigorously enforced and prosecuted in Mendocino County. In fact,
Vroman and Craver maintain that they are even willing to tackle the
fraudulent use of Proposition 215.
Recently, a special panel of the Mendocino County grand jury returned felony
cultivation and trafficking indictments against two perpetrators (William
Matthews and Kathleen Honzik) despite their medicinal claims. The case was
investigated by COMMET and prosecuted by Vroman's office. The suspects
offered specious claims of being caregivers to phantom patients. When the
case was presented to the grand jury, prosecutors presented all medicinal
evidence in their possession to the grand jury for consideration. They also
read the applicable jury instruction and the entire text of the
Compassionate Use Act to the grand jury. Prosecutors told the grand jurors
not to return an indictment if they felt there was merit to the suspects'
medicinal claims. The grand jury presented a true bill in a matter of
minutes. The suspects are awaiting trial in the superior court.
Both Vroman and Craver believe it is a good idea to involve the conscience
of the community in the charging decision by utilizing the grand jury in
these kinds of situations. "It is gratifying to see people who have
undoubtedly voted for Proposition 215 reject frivolous medicinal marijuana
claims," Vroman said. 'It does a disservice to legitimate patients and
caregivers when traffickers abuse a law designed to help seriously ill
people," Vroman elaborated. Craver echoed those sentiments.
Newshawk: Help us Help Reform About Us | DrugSense
Pubdate: Thu, 27 Dec 2001
Source: Advocate-News (CA)
Copyright: 2001, MediaNews Group, Inc.
Contact: advocatenews@mcn.org
Details: MapInc (Cannabis - California)
