Misconceptions

Cathy Finigan seems to harbor several misconceptions regarding the Mendocino Medical Marijuana Advisory Board's support of Supervisor Pinches' proposal to regulate medical marijuanaA based on environmental and neighborhood impacts and use permits,A rather than based on nuisance penalties.

[Pebbles Trippet]

The Supreme Court heard the Kelly case after this article appeared in the UDJ. They made it clear they will be throwing out the numerical limits--since they conflict with Prop 215, which contains no plant limits, & unconstitutionally deny a patient a proper defense at trial. Kelly was convicted of growing 7 medical marijuana plants instead of 6 & 12 ounces instead of 8 under the allowed Senate Bill 420 limits. The court indicated it will likely leave the state ID card program with those limits in tact since it is 1) voluntary and 2) serves as an enhancement rather than a restriction to medical access by giving qualified patients immunity from arrest and prosecution. The 6 plant/8 oz limit can be increased if a doctor says the amount is insufficient for the patient's medical needs. The court left open the possibility of a future lawsuit on the ID card program.

[Pebbles Trippet]

The 25-50 plant regulation exemption in the Pinches proposal is also a limit that might be found unconstitutional by the same standard, that is, that it is not in the original Prop 215 and has not been approved by the voters. The exception would likely be if the garden was registered with the ID card program which would still allow the limits, since they "enhance access" by giving the patient immunity from arrest and prosecution. This was decided in a lawsuit against the CHP, brought by Americans for Safe Access, which was settled in favor of patients' rights. The court said keeping limits on the ID card program, since it is voluntary & doesn't violate SB420's purpose to "enhance access", can be challenged separately in the future.