About Medical Marijuana

What the courts say

In my role as California Director of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), I talk to officials in cities and counties all over California about developing regulations for medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives. Many of these officials are confused as to the evolving case law surrounding this issue. The most commonly misunderstood cases is People v. Mentch, which is sometimes misinterpreted to mean that collectives and cooperatives can not sell medicine to members. While it is true that the Mentch decision upheld a narrow definition of the term “primary caregiver,” that ruling only concerns an individual’s claim to be a primary caregiver under state law; it does not address the legality of collectives and cooperatives. Applying Mentch to collectives and cooperatives of patients, including those, which maintain storefront facilities, is an interpretive stretch, at best. It’s like comparing apples to oranges.

(continued…)

In People v. Urziceanu, the Third District Court of Appeal issued a positive decision affirming the legality of collectives and cooperatives, and held that California health and Safety Code 11362.7 provides for a defense to cannabis distribution for collectives and cooperatives. Drawing from Proposition 215’s encouragement of the state and federal governments to implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of medical cannabis to those patients who need it, the court found that Section 11362.7 and its legalization of collectives and cooperatives represented the state government’s initial response to this directive. By expressly providing that medical cannabis patients are not subject to criminal penalties for cultivation and distribution of cannabis solely by virtue of doing so collectively, the Legislature has abrogated cases such as Trippet, Peron and Young, and established a new defense to those who form and operate collectives and cooperatives to dispense cannabis.

Finally, The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision not to review Garden Grove v. Superior Court establishes conclusively that federal law does not trump state law concerning medical cannabis. Garden Grove, taken together with a similar ruling in the California Appellate Court in San Diego v. San Diego NORML, clears the last legal impediment for full implementation of California law.

Tags: case law, medical cannbais, People v. Mentch, regulations