For Immediate Release: October 10th, 2012
Appellate Court to Hear Landmark Medical Marijuana Dispensary Case Thursday in San Diego
Advocates fight to overturn a wrongful conviction and preserve the right to a medical marijuana defense
San Diego, CA -- Appellate court oral arguments are set to
occur Thursday in a widely watched medical marijuana dispensary case
that raises the question of what defines a legitimate dispensary.
Nearly a year ago, medical marijuana patient advocacy group
Americans for Safe Access (ASA) appealed the September 2010
conviction of San Diego dispensary operator Jovan Jackson. The case
against Jackson became a symbol of the effort by District Attorney
Bonnie Dumanis and other prosecutors across the state to criminalize
storefront collectives. ASA is appealing Jackson's conviction and
the denial of his defense.
What: Oral arguments in People v. Jackson,
a San Diego dispensary operator convicted in 2010 after being
denied a defense
When: Thursday, October 11th at 1:30pm
Where: Fourth District Court of Appeal, 750 B Street, Suite
300, San Diego
"Jackson and other medical marijuana providers are entitled to a
defense under the state's medical marijuana laws," said ASA Chief
Counsel Joe Elford, who filed the appeal and is arguing Thursday on
Jackson's behalf. "The denial of Jackson's defense was unfairly used
to convict a medical marijuana provider who was in full compliance
with state law." At Jackson's trial, San Diego Superior Court Judge
Howard Shore referred to medical marijuana as "dope," and called
California's medical marijuana laws "a scam."
Jackson operated his storefront collective for years without
incident until he was raided by law enforcement in 2008. Jackson was
tried for marijuana possession and sales in 2009, but was acquitted
by a jury. Dissatisfied with that result, District Attorney Dumanis
tried Jackson again on the same charges stemming from a September
2009 raid by a multi-agency task force made up of local and federal
law enforcement. It was at his second trial that Jackson was denied
a defense and ultimately convicted. Judge Shore sentenced Jackson to
180 days, but Jackson was later granted bail pending appeal.
The basis of the lower court's denial of Jackson's defense at trial
was the contention by the San Diego District Attorney's Office that
patients must take part in the collective cultivation of medical
marijuana by essentially "tilling the soil." Attorney General Kamala
Harris, whose office is now litigating the case for the state, says
this interpretation goes too far. However, Harris does argue that
all members of a collective must participate in some way. ASA has
argued that both of these interpretations of state law are flawed
and should not be used as a means to deny dispensary operators like
Jackson a defense at trial.
In February, after the Jackson appeal was filed, the Second District
Court of Appeal issued a ruling in
People v. Colvin
affirming the legality of storefront dispensaries and rejecting the
Attorney General's argument that every member of a collective or
cooperative must participate in the cultivation. According to the
Colvin
court, the Attorney General’s interpretation of state law would
"impose on medical marijuana cooperatives requirements not imposed
on other cooperatives. A grocery cooperative, for example, may have
members who grow and sell the food and run a store out of which the
cooperative’s products are sold. But not everyone who pays a fee to
become a member participates in the cooperative other than to shop
at it."
In an unusual twist, Deputy District Attorney Christopher Lindberg,
who prosecuted Jackson in Superior Court, filed his own amicus
'friend of the court' brief arguing against Jackson's appeal,
something rarely done. Further complicating matters for the state,
Lindberg's brief takes a decisively different position on
collectives than does the Attorney General, who is now prosecuting
the case. "This confusion over what the law means cries out for the
'rule of lenity,' which should guard against the prosecution of well
meaning civilians for crimes the law does not clearly spell out,"
continued Elford.
Further information:
Jackson appeal brief filed by ASA:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal.pdf
Attorney General reply brief:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal_AG_Reply.pdf
ASA reply brief:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal_Reply.pdf
ASA reply to District Attorney amicus curiae brief:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal_Reply_DA_Amicus.pdf
# # #