Prop 19 - A victory

Over 3 million Californians, nearly half the voters, voted to legalize recreational use of marijuana.

We can unbelievably close but more importantly, marijuana politics is in the mainstream across the country.

Now we begin legalize 2012 - the fight never ends.

Vote Today

Yes on 19!
End the expensive futile prohibition.

Possession of under oz Marijuana Reduced to an Infraction

SB1449 has been signed by the governor. Possession of marijuana (under an ounce) is no longer a criminal offense.




11357(b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses not
more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis,
is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than one
hundred dollars ($100).



From California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, on September 30, 2010.To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am signing Senate Bill 1449.

This bill changes the crime of possession of less than an ounce of marijuana from a misdemeanor punishable only by a $100 fine to an infraction punishable by a $100 fine. Under existing law, jail time cannot be imposed, probation cannot be ordered, nor can the base fine exceed $100 for someone convicted of this crime.

I am opposed to decriminalizing the possession and recreational use of marijuana and oppose Proposition 19, which is on the November ballot.

Unfortunately, Proposition 19 is a deeply flawed measure that, if passed, will adversely impact California’s businesses without bringing in the tax revenues to the state promised by its proponents.

Notwithstanding my opposition to Proposition 19, however, I am signing this measure because possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is an infraction in everything but name. The only difference is that because it is a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney.

In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket.

As noted by the Judicial Council in its support of this measure, the appointment of counsel and the availability of a jury trial should be reserved for defendants who are facing loss of life, liberty, or property greater than $100.

For these reasons, I am signing this bill.

Sincerely, Arnold Schwarzenegger

Medical Marijuana Defense Motion to Dismiss Denied

In Calaveras County, Judge John Martin has denied a motion to dismiss by defense attorney's for medical marijuana patient and collective operator, Jay Smith. Jay Smith was arrested by the Calaveras County Sheriff's Department when undercover deputies used a legitimate patients medical marijuana recommendation to join the collective and purchase marijuana. Smith faces felony charges of Sale of Marijuana,

The motion cited extensive case law, critical examination of the preliminary hearing testimony of Deputies Avila and Hoffman, attorney general guidelines, police reports, and of the hearing itself.

In denying the motion, Judge Martin did not address the medical marijuana defense or any other argument preferred by the defense.

The ruling denying the motion is short and to the point stating:

In ruling on a motion to set aside the information, the reviewing court may not substitute it's judgment for that of the magistrate, and if there is some evidence to support the information, the reviewing court will not inquire into it's sufficiency. Rideout v Superior Court (1967( 67 Cal.2d 471, 474

The evidence at the preliminary hearing need only support a reasonable inference of guilt, and such inference need not be the only inference the court could draw, or even the more probable one.

The court finds there is some evidence to support the information. The motion to set aside the information is denied.

A ruling such as this can be viewed as potentially side stepping the issue and sending it to the trial or appeals process (presuming the defense will appeal).

Letter to the Editor: YesOn19.com

On behalf of the campaign, I'm proud to announce the launch of our new website at YesOn19.com! I hope you'll take a moment to check it out -- and then forward this email to five friends, encouraging them to check out the site too.

It's our goal to make the new website a great resource for you to learn more about the campaign and get involved. That's why our homepage centers around the three main reasons to support the initiative, and makes it easy to take action -- whether that's signing up to volunteer, making a contribution, or (as you've already done!) getting email updates from the campaign.

Besides highlighting these important actions with a fresh new design, we've added a lot of engaging content to the site, including:

• A "Voices" page that captures the main reasons you should support Prop 19
• Access to our brand new RSS feed that will allow you to stay up to date on all the breaking news from the campaign -- just click the orange RSS icon at the top-right of the page
• The latest news, videos, endorsements, and more

So what are you waiting for? Head over to the new YesOn19.com and check it out.

Thanks again for all your support. We hope you like the new site!

Sincerely,

Jeff Jones
Proponent, Yes on 19

Jay Smith's Motion Denied

*BREAKING NEWS*
On Friday, August 20, 2010 before the Hon. John Martin in Calaveras Superior Court, a motion to set aside the charges filed by Jay Smith's attorney Ean Vizzi was heard. An exhaustive brief was filed prior to the hearing on behalf of the defense.

Jay Smith, a medical marijuana patient and operator of a medical collective was arrested Jan. 4 in the Valley Oaks Center parking lot in Valley Springs on felony charges of sales, cultivation and possession of marijuana for sale.

We have received word that the motion to set aside the indictment was denied on Aug 24, 2010.

We are awaiting confirmation, more details, and a copy of the ruling.

More on this story can be found following the links here:
http://calaverascannabis.co.cc/html/calaveras.shtml#Local%20News%20Archive
http://www.calaverasenterprise.com/articles/2010/04/13/top_story/top01_marijuana.txt

The Polling Disparity and other News Blunts July 29

The Broadus Effect:
LA Weekly

Of six polls released so far on Prop 19, the November ballot initiative that would legalize marijuana for adults 21 and older, three have the yeas winning easily, while three have it losing narrowly.

What gives? As usual, if you have a polling conundrum, Nate Silver is your man. And in this case, his hypothesis is fascinating.

Silver is the stat whiz who first created a formula for predicting -- with astounding accuracy -- the performance of baseball players. Then, under the pseudonym Poblano, he began analyzing polls to forecast the many outcomes of the long Democratic presidential primary campaign. Then he set up shop as fivethirtyeight.com, which has since been bought by The New York Times. He predicted with uncanny accuracy the 2008 election.

Anyway, Silver notes that three polls in which Prop 19 is winning are "robopolls," meaning they're automated -- you push a number on your phone to respond. In the three where Prop 19 is losing, the pollsters are actual humans asking the respondents questions.

Silver notices something else: Huge spreads in the numbers among African-Americans.

In the robopolls, blacks favor Prop 19 by 28 points or more. In the only human poll where they break out demographics, African-Americans are opposed by 12. There are large disparities among Latino voters, too.

The hypothesis: The automated polls give the respondent a more secure feeling of anonymity and no social stigma, so he feels free to voice his true opinion. (Silver also notes that it's possible the automated polls are having trouble getting a representative sample of African-Americans because they have a lower response rate to robopolls.)

But if indeed black voters are more honest with the robopolls, it would amount to a mirror of the Bradley effect.

More at LA Weekly>>

Federal Inconsistency shouldn't stop the legalization of marijuana
LA Times

The law is the law. If we unquestioningly accepted that maxim, imagine where we would be today. Jim Crow would be alive and well, rivers and skies would be polluted, and women wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Yet such is the mindset of many of those who criticize Proposition 19, the marijuana regulation and taxation initiative on the November ballot. In his July 18 Times Op-Ed article, UCLA public policy professor Mark A.R. Kleiman declares that state legalization "can't be done." He points out, correctly, that if the initiative is successful, the federal marijuana prohibition laws will remain in place. What he assumes, incorrectly, is that federal agents will swarm into California, busting farmers and arresting distributors and shopkeepers, to say nothing of the garden stores that sell them equipment and supplies, the accountants who do their books and the municipal tax officials who delight in assessing and collecting the new tax revenues.

Advertisement

Kleiman might well have uttered, "The law is the law."

But the law is neither absolute nor infallible, and that's why Californians can — and should — legalize, regulate and tax marijuana-related commerce.

The federal-state dynamic concerning marijuana is not complicated. Under our system of federalism, both the states and the feds may prohibit commerce in marijuana, but neither is required to do so. Similarly, during alcohol prohibition (1920-33), commerce in alcoholic beverages was prohibited not only by federal law (the Volstead Act) but by the laws of most states. In 1923, New York repealed its state prohibition laws, leaving enforcement, for the remaining 10 years, entirely to the feds. California voters overwhelmingly did the same thing in 1932, one year before national prohibition was repealed.

Let's think this through. If Proposition 19 passes, two important balls roll into the feds' court. The first is that the sole responsibility and expense of enforcing marijuana prohibition will be shifted to them. After Nov. 2, marijuana "offenders" could be arrested only by federal agents, prosecuted only under federal law, and sentenced only to federal detention.

More at LA Times >>

Prop 19: The Battle of the Polls

News Blunts - 7-27

Medical Marijuana Legal in Washington D.C.
Washington Post

Medical marijuana is now legal in the District after the Democrat-controlled Congress declined to overrule a D.C Council bill that allows the city to set up as many as eight dispensaries where chronically ill patients can purchase the drug.

Former San Jose Chief of Police: Legalize Pot
SF Chronicle

California voters have a chance on this November's ballot to bring common sense to law enforcement by legalizing marijuana for adults. As San Jose's retired chief of police and a cop with 35 years experience on the front lines in the war on marijuana, I'm voting yes.

I've seen the prohibition's terrible impact at close range.

Like an increasing number of law enforcers, I have learned that most bad things about marijuana - especially the violence made inevitable by an obscenely profitable black market - are caused by the prohibition, not by the plant.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) said in a statement the bill become law after Congress finished its business Monday night because neither the House nor Senate opted to intervene.

The council approved the bill in May, and under Home Rule Congress had 30 legislative days to review it.

Sutter Creek looks to impose moratorium
Ledger Dispatch

The Sutter Creek City Council has asked its attorney to draft a new ordinance to repeal and replace the current ordinance allowing medical marijuana dispensaries within city limits.
After the approval of the agenda and a public comment session, councilwoman Linda Rianda told the council a use permit application recently turned into the city by someone intending to open a dispensary on Sutter Hill had caused her to become concerned.

Pot Grows targeted in Sweep
Stockton Record
A team of state and local law enforcement officers eradicated 21,760 marijuana plants from clandestine growing sites on private property in Sheep Ranch and Calaveritas in Calaveras County last week, the Calaveras County Sheriff’s Department announced.

Participating officers came from the Calaveras Narcotics Enforcement Unit, the California Department of Justice, the Alpine County Narcotics Team and the California Department of Fish and Game. The seized immature plants weighed 2,400 pounds. The team also seized 15 pounds of processed marijuana.

Note: No arrests were made. No arrests have been made in the Mokelumne Hill burglary murder either.

San Jose Looks to Tax Medical Marijuana
San Jose Mercury

San Jose city officials are recommending a ballot measure that would create a tax on pot, drawing opposition from medical marijuana proponents.

The ten percent medical marijuana tax, if approved, would give San Jose the highest medical cannabis tax in the state. Proponents say this would put an undue burden on patients.

Yes on Prop 19 Winning 52%-36%; Majority Supports Legalizing Marijuana

Proposition 19, which would legalize, tax and regulate marijuana for adults over 21 years old, is currently winning by a wide margin among California voters according to a new PPP poll. The measure is supported by 52% of voters while opposed by only 36%.

Prop 19 PPP
Support 52%
Oppose 36%

This is the largest margin of support we have seen from recent polling on Prop 19. Interestingly, the poll found support among African Americans to be extremely high. From PPP blog:

Democrats are more likely to throw their support behind the prop than Republicans. 62% of Democrats, 37% of Republicans and 55% of Independents support Prop 19.

African-Americans are the strongest supporters of Prop 19; 68:32, followed by Whites who support it 53:37.

Those are surprisingly high numbers among African Americans. A SurveyUSA poll from earlier this month had African Americans on average about as likely to support Prop 19 as whites. Significantly, a small percentage of African Americans said they were certain to oppose it.

Jay Smith Case Set to be continued

Jay Smith, the collective owner facing felony distribution and cultivation charges in Calaveras County in what Access for Safe Americans called "Identity Theft to Entrap Medical Marijuana Provider" is facing more delay in his court case.

Ian Vizzi, Jay Smith's attorney filed a brilliant motion to set aside the felony indictment that obviously caused the DA pause. Highlighting established and clear state law, case law, and the attorney general guidelines, Vizzi held class and the Calaveras County District Attorney was the student.

DA Seth Mathews responded with a request to continue, highlighting his need to further study the issues presented by Smith's attorney. Vizzi has agreed to the continuance. It is expected that the case will be continued into late August, early September. More details as they become available.

VA Changes Rules, Allows Medical Marijuana Use

The Department of Veterans Affairs will formally allow patients treated at its hospitals and clinics to use medical marijuana in states where it is legal, a policy clarification that veterans have sought for several years.

A department directive, expected to take effect next week, resolves the conflict in veterans facilities between federal law, which outlaws marijuana, and the 14 states that allow medicinal use of the drug, effectively deferring to the states.

The policy will not permit department doctors to prescribe marijuana. But it will address the concern of many patients who use the drug that they could lose access to their prescription pain medication if caught.

Under department rules, veterans can be denied pain medications if they are found to be using illegal drugs. Until now, the department had no written exception for medical marijuana.

This has led many patients to distrust their doctors, veterans say. With doctors and patients pressing the veterans department for formal guidance, agency officials began drafting a policy last fall.

“When states start legalizing marijuana we are put in a bit of a unique position because as a federal agency, we are beholden to federal law,” said Dr. Robert Jesse, the principal deputy under secretary for health in the veterans department.

At the same time, Dr. Jesse said, “We didn’t want patients who were legally using marijuana to be administratively denied access to pain management programs.”

The new, written policy applies only to veterans using medical marijuana in states where it is legal. Doctors may still modify a veteran’s treatment plan if the veteran is using marijuana, or decide not to prescribe pain medicine altogether if there is a risk of a drug interaction. But that decision will be made on a case-by-case basis, not as blanket policy, Dr. Jesse said.

More at NY Times>>