Pubdate: Thu, 21 May 2009
Source: Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)
Copyright: 2009 The Press-Enterprise Company
Contact: http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/letters_form.html
Website: http://www.pe.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/830
Author: John Asbury, The Press-enterprise
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

INLAND AUTHORITIES REVIEWING MEDICAL MARIJUANA ENFORCEMENT POLICIES

Inland authorities are reformulating their enforcement policies for
medical marijuana after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a
challenge of the state law filed by San Bernardino and San Diego counties.

However, authorities and experts agree that the high court's move may
have little or no effect on many criminal cases already pending or
city bans on medical marijuana co-ops and dispensaries.

On Monday, the Supreme Court announced it would not review the two
counties' appeal after lower courts rejected their challenge of
California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which permits medicinal
marijuana use with a doctor's approval.

In 2003, the state Legislature passed a law spelling out regulations
governing the use of medical marijuana, including a requirement that
counties issue ID cards to patients who have letters from their
doctors confirming the medical need. San Bernardino County, among
several others, had not done so, saying federal law prohibiting
marijuana use trumped state law.

Following Monday's court action, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's
Department is amending its procedures and policies for investigating
possession of marijuana for medicinal purposes, said sheriff's
spokeswoman Cindy Beavers.

"Up until Monday, a deputy would at least issue a citation, but since
the recent decision we will be looking what the medical marijuana law
dictates, how dispensaries are operated and how cards will be issued,"
Beavers said.

San Bernardino County Assistant District Attorney Dennis Christy said
in a small number of cases, medical marijuana users could have charges
dismissed if they can show they had a doctor's recommendation and the
legal amount of pot. But most pending cases will be unaffected, he
said.

In Riverside County, the Department of Public Health has been issuing
medical marijuana ID cards, but the county district attorney's office
has maintained a stance that medical marijuana and dispensaries are
not legal under federal law.

District attorney's officials said after the Supreme Court decision
that they still stand by that stance.

The Riverside County Sheriff's Department is finalizing a new policy
on its response to medical marijuana, said Chief Deputy Mitch Alm. He
declined to elaborate on what that policy would be.

Several Inland cities have banned dispensaries -- retail outlets that
sell medical marijuana -- or enacted moratoriums against their
opening, including Beaumont, Perris, Moreno Valley, Highland and Hemet.

On Tuesday, the Beaumont City Council passed an emergency 45-day
moratorium on medicinal marijuana co-ops, which are groups of people
who are authorized to grow medical marijuana.

City spokeswoman Darci Carranza said the decision was not directly
related to the Supreme Court's ruling, but followed a May 5 ban on
dispensaries. The city did not have legislation addressing the co-ops,
Carranza said.

Such bans are not likely to be affected by the Supreme Court's
decision, said USC law professor Michael H. Shapiro. The court did not
affirm that California's law was legal, Shapiro said; it only said
that it would not review it.

However, the decision should erase some worries for dispensaries
operating in cities that allow them. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder
said the Department of Justice would stop raids on clinics that
operate legally under state law.

In a statement Tuesday, U.S. Department of Justice officials said the
Drug Enforcement Administration would focus its resources on
large-scale drug trafficking, rather than "individual patients with
cancer or other serious diseases.' 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D