Medical marijuana users have long decried Michigan
Jerry Duval, Medical Marijuana Patient, Headed To Same Federal Prison Facility As Boston Bomber
In the face of public pressure, the Department of Justice will allow
Jerry Duval, a seriously ill medical marijuana patient, to serve his
10-year sentence for marijuana-related offenses in a federal facility
capable of meeting his medical needs, Duval told HuffPost Monday. The
DOJ originally sentenced Duval to standard federal prison despite a judge’s recommendation that
his medical condition be taken into account. Duval had been barred from
presenting his medical condition, or any discussion of state law,
during his trial, according to court documents.
Duval, whose juvenile diabetes led to both a kidney and a pancreas
transplant, also lives with glaucoma and neuropathy. He has a strict
medical regime, which prior to his arrest had included medical
marijuana. That regime will now be the responsibility of taxpayers and
the Federal Medical Center in Devens, Mass., where Duval may stay in a
cell similar to the one currently occupied by Boston bombing suspect
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev: a 10-by-10 foot steel room. The DOJ confirmed its
decision to move Duval to the federal medical facility rather than
standard federal prison, and Duval has been "ordered to surrender" and report to the facility by June 11.
"I’ve never even been out east," Duval told HuffPost.
Despite his conviction for marijuana distribution, court documents
indicate that Duval, 53, has followed medical marijuana laws in his home
state of Michigan that have been in place since 2008.
The threat to Duval’s health is real. In August, Richard Flor, a
seriously ill 68-year-old Montana man, died in federal custody while
serving a five-year sentence. The DOJ did not heed his attorney’s
health-related warnings. "It is anticipated he will not long survive
general population incarceration," his attorney had said.
Flor was swept up in a series of federal raids just as the Montana
legislature was debating reforms to the medical marijuana law. The raids
tilted the politics of the debate in the DOJ’s favor as it lobbied to roll back the law.
A HuffPost/YouGov poll
conducted in December found that 58 percent of Americans think the
federal government should exempt from federal drug law enforcement any
adults following state laws in the states that have legalized medical
marijuana. Only 23 percent said the federal government should enforce
its drug laws in those states the same way it does in any other state.
The cases against Duval and Flor are part of a broader use of power by the DOJ.
Under Attorney General Eric Holder, the department has managed a string
of victories against the elderly, sick and infirm, though it has been
less successful prosecuting Wall Street executives. Beyond Flor and
Duval, an 82-year-old nun
protesting nuclear power and a young Internet activist accused of
attempting to share academic journal articles are among the targets
Holder’s DOJ has pursued with vigor. The department has also targeted a
Fox News journalist for acts of reporting, issued a sweeping secret
subpoena for a large swath of Associated Press phone records and
prompted young men with radical inclinations to confess to undercover FBI agents that they would be willing to participate in a terrorist plot.
In the case of Duval, Michigan law allows a medical marijuana
caregiver to grow up to 72 plants for five registered patients. Duval
had two greenhouses on his property, where exactly 174 plants were
seized, according to federal court filings. Those greenhouses were run
not by Duval, but by his children, Jeremy and Ashley Duval, who were
registered as caregivers and served five patients each. Their father was
one patient.
Jeremy has been prosecuted and is currently serving a five-year
sentence in a federal prison in Morgantown, W.Va. He was offered a
reduced sentence if he would testify against his father, Duval said, but
Jeremy declined. Ashley was not charged, despite openly admitting to
her involvement. Meanwhile, the DOJ is attempting to seize the Duval family farm.
"Prosecutorial discretion was used" in not charging his daughter,
said Gina Balaya, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s office that
handled the case. She said she could not comment on whether a reduced
sentence was offered to Jeremy, Duval’s son, in exchange for testimony.
"The US Supreme Court ruled that state laws are not relevant to
federal narcotics laws," Balaya said in an emailed statement to The
Huffington Post. "Ignoring this rule and the law, Gerald Duval
Man Obeyed Mich. Laws, But Will Serve 10 In Federal Prison For Family Pot Operation
Despite obeying state law, several Michigan marijuana patients are
heading to prison because they violated federal marijuana laws.
As WWJ
Medical Cannabis Treatment for Cancer and HIV/AIDS?
Today, there are at least 17 states, including the District of
Colombia, where cannabis is legal. Ohio, South Carolina, Colorado, New
Jersey, California, and Michigan are just a few states that garnered
strong support in the legalization of medical cannabis. In Illinois, a
bill legalizing the use of cannabis needed the signature of Gov Pat
Quinn. The legislation was approved by House and Senate, permitting
doctors to prescribe cannabis for cancer and patients with HIV/AIDS and other diseases.
Dr Suzanne Carlber-Racich, a Master of Public health program
professor explains that the new legislation does not permit doctors to
write prescriptions without providing written clarification indicating
that the patient is allowed to take it for treatment. The patient must
then submit it to the Illinois Department of Public Health to receive an
ID card and obtain the medical cannabis through a state run dispensary.
In California, independent run dispensaries are increasing amid
relentless federal government
California lawmakers considering new rules for medical marijuana
A pair of bills that would
enhance the legal standing of medical marijuana providers have advanced
in the Legislature following this month’s landmark court ruling that
affirmed the rights of local governments to ban dispensaries.
The bills are two components of the ongoing and often passionate
arguments between Californians who support brick-and-mortar marijuana
dispensaries and those who oppose such storefront operations as "pot
shops" that often provide marijuana to people lacking serious medical
problems.
On one side, two of the Legislature’s leading Democrats are backing
the bills in the face of opposition from Republicans and law enforcement
leaders. The California Police Chief’s Association has pledged to
oppose the bills, which would create new regulations and protections for
medical marijuana providers within state law. The federal government’s
ban on marijuana would remain in force.
The more ambitious of the two bills, from San Francisco Assemblyman
Tom Ammiano, passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Friday.
Ammiano’s bill would establish Division of Medical Marijuana Regulation
within the state’s Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The new
bureaucracy would have power to set standards for growing, transporting
and selling medical marijuana. Providers would be able to register with
the state and marijuana products would be required to meet labeling and
quality standards.
The bill, A.B. 473, can now be considered by the entire Assembly.
"I think we’re turning a corner on marijuana regulation," Ammiano said in a statement Friday.
The second bill, from Senate President pro tem Darrell Steinberg,
would give marijuana collectives that operate according to the state
Attorney General’s guidelines immunity from prosecution for selling or
possessing marijuana. The bill would also allow dispensary operators and
employees to receive "reasonable compensation," but would not overturn
local governments’ power to ban dispensaries.
Steinberg’s bill, S.B. 439, passed a Senate floor vote on Monday over
opposition from the chamber’s Republican minority. A hearing date has
yet be scheduled in the Assembly Public Safety Committee, which Ammiano
chairs.
The California Police Chiefs Association will lobby against both
bills as they continue to move through the Legislature, said Kim Raney,
the group’s president.
Raney, chief of the Covina Police Department since 2001, said he and
other chiefs are concerned by the lack of clarity between the state law
and the federal prohibition of marijuana, as well as the ease of which
some people can obtain medical marijuana recommendations without
necessarily having serious medical conditions.
"If you’re going to have serious conversation about marijuana, in a
medical forum, it needs to be done through a legitimate medical
process," Raney said.
As opposed to Alcoholic Beverage Control, Raney said medical
marijuana policies could be better overseen by the state’s medical or
pharmacy boards, which respectively bear the responsibilities to license
and regulate physicians and pharmacists who practice in California.
Americans for Safe Access, which lobbies in support of medical
marijuana, is supporting both bills. The group would also prefer that
Alcoholic Beverage Control would not be the agency placed in charge of
medical marijuana regulation, although its reasons are different from
those of police chiefs.
Don Duncan, California director for Americans for Safe Access, said
Alcoholic Beverage Control is perceived as an enforcement-focused
agency. He suggested the state departments of Public Health or Consumer
Affairs as superior options.
"We don’t want to see it regulated like alcohol, or tobacco, because there are issues like patient rights," he said.
Although Duncan acknowledged he was unsure if the Legislature would
accept such a major amendment to Ammiano’s bill, he said he is
optimistic both bills will become law.
California’s medical marijuana laws have beset law enforcement and
patient advocates alike with several uncertainties since voters approved
Proposition. 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act in 1996.
That law exempted medical marijuana patients and their doctors from
punishment, and campaign supporters advocated for medicinal marijuana
use as a way to relieve the sufferings of patients suffering from
diseases like cancer, AIDS and glaucoma.
The 2004 Medical Marijuana Program made it possible for patients to
obtain identification cards and collectively grow marijuana with other
patients and caregivers for medical purposes.
But state laws, however, did not provide a crystal clear definition
of what a proper medical marijuana collective would be. Confusion over
the law allowed numerous storefront dispensaries to establish themselves
over the past few years and even operate openly in cities where their
existence is illegal under local ordinances.
The state Supreme Court ruled early this month in a unanimous
decision that cities have an absolute right under existing law to forbid
dispensaries. In San Bernardino, for example, officials quickly
followed the ruling raiding and shutting down dispensaries.
In Los Angeles, by contrast, city voters decided in the May 21
election to allow the city to regulate and tax as many as 135
dispensaries. Although the measure would allow dispensaries to exist in
the state’s largest city, there are hundreds of other marijuana
providers who could be shuttered as a result of the ballot measure.
Marijuana clinics turn to delivery model
Driving his black Subaru along a residential street in Garden Grove,
Steven Owen is careful not to attract the attention of police.
After all, he’s got a paper bag filled with marijuana in the back seat.
"When I’ve got medication in the car, I definitely follow the speed
limit," the 20-year-old says as he turns onto Lampson Avenue.
Owen is a delivery driver for OrganaCann Wellness Centers Inc., a
medical marijuana dispensary in Garden Grove that last week converted
its business from a traditional retail operation to a delivery-only
model.
Many of the dozens of pot clinics across Garden Grove have adopted
the strategy this month in response to the city’s decision to shut down
all storefront marijuana dispensaries in the city limits.
Officials ordered all such businesses to stop accepting walk-in
customers as of May 14 or face fines of as much as $1,000 per day.
Local dispensary owners are not happy about the move, but they say they are adapting.
"The ban in Garden Grove is strictly on storefront dispensaries,"
said Todd Smith, director of Euclid Medical Center, which closed its
storefront last week and began making deliveries this week. "We try to
follow the law to a T."
Smith said his drivers are equipped with iPads that allow them to verify customer information.
"It’s done exactly how we would do it at a storefront facility, but it’s brought to their door," he said.
Medical marijuana delivery is not an entirely new practice. Mary Jane
Rathbun, a medical marijuana activist who died in 1999, was known to
bake pot-filled brownies and hand-deliver them to AIDS patients at San
Francisco General Hospital in the 1980s and 1990s.
Rathbun, who earned the nickname "Brownie Mary," was instrumental in
getting the issue onto state ballots in 1996 and helping California
become the first state to approve the use of marijuana for medicinal
purposes.
Storefronts have proliferated in the years since, some of which will
deliver. But the California Supreme Court ruled this month that
individual cities can enforce storefront bans.
Garden Grove Mayor Bruce Broadwater, a vocal proponent of the ban, did not return calls requesting comment.
With a growing number of cities considering limiting or banning pot clinics, delivery-only operations are expected to spread.
"That is becoming more common," said Don Duncan, California director
of medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.
The adaptation by Garden Grove dispensaries to the changing legal
environment has been somewhat haphazard, but it is opening up unexpected
opportunities for some clinics.
In a recent interview in the back of OrganaCann’s offices, as workers
tended to racks of freshly grown marijuana plants nearby, Chief
Executive Jason Lopez and Chairman Bob Wayman talked about the
possibility of delivering snacks or fast food to customers along with
the weed, potentially opening up new revenue streams.
"We’re looking into expanding our services," Lopez said.
Garcetti Wins Mayor
Eric Garcetti is L.A.
S.D. Mayor Backs Medpot Distributor in federal Case
San Diego Mayor Bob Filner took the unusual step this week of injecting
himself into a federal criminal prosecution, encouraging jurors to find
the former owner of medical marijuana dispensaries not guilty of drug
charges if they believe prosecuting such cases is unjust.
Filner, a supporter of medical marijuana use who wants the city to adopt
regulations allowing outlets to provide the drug, spoke at a news
conference Monday outside the federal court following a hearing in the
case prosecutors have brought against Ronnie Chang.
Chang faces 60 charges, including conspiracy to manufacture and
distribute marijuana and money laundering, stemming from two medical
marijuana dispensaries he owned in San Marcos and Wildomar.
He has pleaded not guilty. His lawyers have argued his prosecution is
unjust because Chang was complying fully with California law, which
allows medicinal use of marijuana. They
Medical Marijuana: L.A. voters approve measure to limit number of dispensaries to 135
The overwhelming approval of
Proposition D on Tuesday’s ballot – and the rejection of two competing
proposals – could result in the shutdown of hundreds of marijuana
dispensaries around Los Angeles, but exactly how and when that would
happen remains undetermined.
One thing is known, however, and that is the pot shops aren’t likely
to go quietly. They have already shown a tendency to fight the city
through initiative and lawsuit, and some say they are continuing to
weigh their legal options now.
Proposition D, written by the City Council, imposes a cap of 135 on
dispensaries in Los Angeles – the facilities that were already open and
registered with the city before a moratorium was put in place in 2007.
Clinics that were shut out of the 135 had proposed Initiative
Ordinance F to regulate dispensaries, but not cap them. A third measure,
Ordinance E, also capped the number at 135, but offered fewer other
restrictions. Voters supported D with 62.57 percent of the vote, but
rejected F and E.
An estimated 800 to 1,000 dispensaries or more are believed to fall
outside the cap and would have 30 days after the measure takes effect in
about three
weeks to close down. But whether the city’s enforcement action would
actually begin that quickly remains unclear. A Los Angeles Police
Department spokesman said it was too early to detail the enforcement
plans.
Garry South, the consultant for Ordinance F, said he suspects there
will be a period of reflection by clinics facing closure and then they
will decide whether to challenge the measure in court.
"Proposition D has the same deficiencies as previous ordinances in
that it bases the right to stay open on the interim control ordinance
that already has been ruled a violation of due process," South said.
He predicted that many clinics that believe they will be able to stay
open will be pressured by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration
and forced to shut down.
David Welch, attorney for Ordinance F, said those discussions are
already underway among clinics on whether to challenge the measure.
"We think there’s a strong possibility we would prevail in a
lawsuit," Welch said. "A lot of the issues have been decided already and
we think we could prevail. We will be talking over the next month to
decide what course of action to take."
Art Aza, the co-owner of Green Kiss Collective, a dispensary in North
Hollywood, argued Measure D was more about limiting competition in the
market.
"This is not about marijuana being illegal or legal, it’s about
controlling the number of shops and keeping the market exclusive for the
lucky shops who just happened to get their license before me," Aza
said. "I’m not a supporter of having too many shops, but even at 135 it
still seems like a monopoly to me."
Aza, who opened his clinic at 6356 Vineland Ave. in 2012, argues that
it’s unfair that the reason his clinic will close and others can stay
open is that they were opened before 2007, rather than basing it on the
quality of their operations.
"Go ahead with regulations and close the shops that don’t follow the
rules," Aza said. "But if you’re operating in the right place and doing
good business, whether you opened before 2007 or not, there’s no reason
to shut down."
Incensed by the issue, Aza called it "the worst thing that I’ve seen
in Los Angeles," but said as a businessman he’ll likely be OK,
ultimately looking for another type of business to open.
Proposition D received 193,969 votes, or 62.57 percent, with 72,070, or 23.43 percent, opposed to it.
Ordinance E was rejected by a margin of 97,499 in favor, or 34.55 percent, and 184,681 opposed, or 65.44 percent.
Ordinance F received 117,305 votes, or 40.88 percent, and was rejected by 169,629 voters, or 59.11 percent.
The vote was receiving statewide attention as the first test of
efforts to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries since the state
Supreme Court upheld the right of local jurisdictions to ban the
clinics.
City Council President Herb Wesson said he was pleased with the
outcome and hopes it will resolve the disputes that have raged for the
past several years.
"I think this was important for us to be able to let people know how and where they can operate," Wesson said.
Wesson added the measure will put into place regulations for the city
and the remaining clinic operators to follow, but he would oppose any
effort to actually shut them all down.
"There are only a couple of members on the City Council who want to
close them all down, and I’m not one of them," Wesson said. "I had
family members who suffered with AIDS and the only way they got through
it was with medical marijuana."
Welch said he is not sure the city is able to say which clinics are legal and can continue to operate.
City officials are reviewing a list of operating marijuana
dispensaries and expect to have an updated one by the end of the week,
said city attorney special assistant Jane Usher.
"Because of the legal uncertainties under which the industry has
been operating, shops currently try to fly under the radar through a
great amount of fluidity – they open, close, move, reopen, and so
forth," Usher said. "The beauty of the new law is that this shuffle will
become a thing of the past."
Don Duncan, California director of Americans for Safe Access – a
pro-medical marijuana group that supported Proposition D – said the vote
helps bring some clarity after years of uncertainty over the issue in
Los Angeles.
"At long last, after more than seven years of trying to establish
reasonable regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries in Los
Angeles, patients can now expect safe and legal access to their
medication," Duncan said.
"The vote, however, does not entitle the city to aggressively shut
down disqualified dispensaries using criminal enforcement," he added.
"The city should allow dispensaries to voluntarily comply with the new
law and rely on civil enforcement only if necessary."
Duncan said the regulations contained in the proposal will require
dispensaries to operate as nonprofits, pay local taxes, and locate at
least 600 feet from public parks, libraries and other facilities. It
also includes a 6 percent tax on any sales.
TLMD, a cannabis clinic at 12458 Magnolia Blvd. in Valley Village,
supported Proposition D and is among the 135 clinics licensed before
2007. Avery York, a manager at TLMD, is hopeful that the measure will
help weed out the unlawful collectives that have made it hard for the
industry to maintain a respectable reputation in local circles.
"We don’t want to see anyone have to close their doors because we
knew there are new collectives that operate under state law," York said.
"But there are plenty other who made a bad name for us, the ones who
have tried to do it right from the beginning."
