Pubdate: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 Source: Reuters (Wire) Copyright: 2002 Reuters Limited Author: Melissa Schorr CALIF. COURT: NO PROSECUTION FOR MEDICAL POT USERS NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - In a unanimous decision, the California Supreme Court reasserted the voter-approved law granting ill patients the right to use marijuana for medical purposes without fear of prosecution. "The court made it clear that medical marijuana patients with a physician's authorization are no different than patients who have a prescription for prescription drugs--they are to be treated the same," Gerald Uelmen, the attorney who argued the case before the court, told Reuters Health. Uelmen is a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law. California voters passed Proposition 215, or the Medical Use of Marijuana initiative, in 1996. The law gave patients the right to possess marijuana if it was prescribed by a doctor for ailments such as glaucoma, AIDS and cancer. Eight other states--Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, Hawaii and Washington--have since passed similar laws. However, a 2001 US Supreme Court ruling found that federal drug laws do not recognize these state initiatives and that medical marijuana users and third-party distributors are still technically subject to federal prosecution. The California law was challenged by Myron Mower, a Tuolumne County diabetic who was arrested in 1997 for growing 31 marijuana plants in his home. On Thursday, Chief Justice Ronald George overturned an appeal court's earlier decision. In the court's ruling, he wrote that patients who produce a prescription for marijuana should not have to proceed to trial, but should have their cases dismissed at an earlier point in time. The initiative "reasonably must be interpreted to grant a defendant a limited immunity from prosecution," the justice wrote. In addition, the justices found that defendants who do go to trial should be judged by whether there was merely a reasonable doubt, rather than a preponderance of the evidence, that they were guilty. "For many patients who still live in fear, it should put their minds at ease that the law is the law," Paul Armentano, a senior policy analyst for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a Washington, DC-based advocacy group, told Reuters Health. "For qualified patients, the possession as a medicine should be treated as we treat other prescription medications people use every day." California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, whose office prosecuted the case, said in a written statement he approved of the clarity of the court's decision. "The court's decision strikes an appropriate balance in helping to ensure that truly needy patients whose doctors have recommended medical marijuana to alleviate pain and suffering related to serious illnesses will have access to this medicine under California law," he said. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine reviewed the medical literature on marijuana's health effects. "Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs," the report concluded. "Cannabinoids would be moderately well suited for particular conditions, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and AIDS wasting." The American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society have previously called for clinical trials investigating marijuana's reputed health benefits, such as relief from pain and nausea, and appetite stimulation. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake