California Supreme Court Denies Review of Landmark Medical Marijuana Case, Affirms Legality of Storefront Dispensaries
High Court also denied depublication of People v. Jackson despite request from League of California CitiesSan Diego, CA -- The California Supreme Court denied review
yesterday of a landmark medical marijuana dispensary case, which
drew widespread attention from prosecutors and policymakers across
the state. The Fourth District Court of Appeal for California issued
a unanimous published ruling on October 24th in the case of People
v. Jackson, reversing the conviction of former San Diego
dispensary operator Jovan Jackson and establishing a clear defense
for Jackson and other medical marijuana providers similarly
prosecuted in state court.
Notably, however, the State Supreme Court took decisive action
yesterday in the way that it did, despite requests to depublish the
appellate court decision from the League of California Cities and an
amicus brief supporting the High Court's review of the case from
district attorneys in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Sonoma Counties,
as well as the Los Angeles City Attorney.
"Not only has the California Supreme Court rejected attempts to have
it review the Jackson case, thereby affirming the legality
of medical marijuana sales and distribution in the state, it also
chose not to depublish this landmark ruling benefiting thousands of
patients," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe
Access, who represented Jackson in his appeal. "Even though the
appellate court decision garnered significant opposition, patients
have prevailed in their struggle to protect safe access to medical
marijuana."
Jackson was convicted in September 2010 after being denied a defense
in San Diego Superior Court. However, yesterday's decision not to
review his case now entitles Jackson -- and, by extension, other
California dispensary operators -- to a defense in state court. By
rejecting the Attorney General's argument that patients who utilize
dispensaries must collaborate, or 'come together' in 'some way' to
cultivate the marijuana they purchase, the appellate court ruling
provided the elements for a defense in future jury trials across the
state.
Specifically, the appellate ruling held that in mounting a defense
at trial, "Jackson was only required to produce evidence which would
create a reasonable doubt as to whether the defense provided by the
[Medical Marijuana Program Act] had been established." The court
further held that, "the collective or cooperative association
required by the act need not include active participation by all
members in the cultivation process but may be limited to financial
support by way of marijuana purchases from the organization. Thus,
contrary to the trial court's ruling, the large membership of
Jackson's collective, very few of whom participated in the actual
cultivation process, did not, as a matter of law, prevent Jackson
from presenting an MMPA defense."
ASA appealed Jackson's conviction in late 2011, and his case quickly
became a symbol of the effort by San Diego District Attorney Bonnie
Dumanis and other prosecutors across the state to criminalize
storefront medical marijuana collectives. However, today's decision
by the High Court not to review the case deals a significant blow to
that effort.
Jackson operated his storefront collective 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 law
enforcement raid. It was at his second trial that Jackson was denied
a defense and ultimately convicted. San Diego Superior Court Judge
Howard Shore, who referred to medical marijuana as "dope," and
called California's medical marijuana laws "a scam," gave Jackson
180 days in jail, a sentence that was later vacated.
Further information:
Docket sheet for People v. Jackson: http://bit.ly/U4Gr7G
Landmark appellate court ruling in People v. Jackson: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal_Ruling.pdf
Jackson appeal brief filed by ASA: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Jackson_Appeal.pdf