Pubdate: Wed, 23 Dec 2009
Source: Oklahoma Gazette (OK)
Copyright: 2009 Gazette Media, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.okgazette.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/317
Author: Scott Cooper
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/foster.htm (Foster, William)

WILLIAM JOSEPH FOSTER FREE OF DRUG-RELATED CHARGES AFTER 15-YEAR LONG CASE

A man Oklahoma authorities wanted back in prison for growing marijuana
and violating parole is now free of jail and moved on to California.

The case of William Joseph Foster stretches nearly 15 years and
involves two states. The Oklahoma Department of Corrections wanted the
governor to revoke Foster's parole; administrators got what they
wanted. Foster either wanted Gov. Brad Henry to deny the DOC's request
or grant him time served and release him from jail; he got the latter.

The governor signed a certificate of revocation finding that Foster
had violated one rule of parole, Rule 10, or failure to follow lawful
directives by not submitting or applying to be supervised. The state
had accused Foster of violating four parole rules. But the governor
also ordered the revocation to time already served by Foster,
including parole time, of nearly six and half years. The governor's
finding was based on a recommendation from the general coun-sel of
the state's Pardon and Parole Board.

The (general counsel) basically found him not guilty of almost all of
those viola-tions, except the technical violation of not reporting,
which was the basis of the rec-ommendation to the governor for such
a light disposition," said Foster's Oklahoma City attorney, Mike Arnett.

The state's law enforcement and legal systems have been fixed on
Foster since 1995 when he was arrested in Tulsa for cultivating
marijuana. The nation focused its eye on Foster when he was handed a
93-year prison sentence on charges related to the drug. That sentence
was found to be excessive by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
and reduced to 20 years.

California, Here We Come

By 2002, Foster was out on parole and had moved to California, where
he was under the supervision of the California Department of
Corrections under the Interstate Compact Agreement. The compact allows
parolees to move to another state whereby the new state would monitor
their whereabouts and activities.

But California officials decided Foster no longer needed to be
monitored and released him from their supervision. Oklahoma
authorities then moved to get Foster back under supervision and sent a
new contract to Foster for parole status. Foster signed the agreement,
which he claims would keep him under supervi-sion until 2011.
Oklahoma charged it sent Foster a new contract for a different
violation, which would keep supervision ongoing until 2015.

He refused to sign the new contract under advice from his California
attor-ney, which prompted Oklahoma to issue an arrest warrant in
2007. A year later, California police raided Foster's home and found
he was growing marijuana. Nearly 300 plants were seized at his
residence. He was extradited back to Oklahoma to await a parole
revocation hearing.

The state charged Foster not only for violating his parole by not
signing the new contract, but also with violating California laws,
failure to report residence changes and possession of illegal drugs.

But Foster claimed he was not in viola-tion of California laws,
which allow for growing marijuana for medical purposes. He also
pointed out that California offi-cials never charged him with any
crimes.

Both the general counsel and the governor agreed with Foster, save the
one count of not applying for supervi-sion with the state of California.

States' Rights

Arnett said the decision speaks more about where a person is as
opposed to what a person does.

If Will Foster had possessed medical marijuana in Oklahoma, even
though he had a prescription to do so from California, I think he
would have been found guilty of those violations if he pos-sessed it
here," Arnett said.

If he is following California law, even though California law is
contrary to Oklahoma, he can't be accused of violating a law if it is
not a violation in the jurisdic-tion where he was arrested." 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D