Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact:  http://www.ocregister.com/
Copyright: 1998 The Orange County Register
Pubdate: 10 Nov 1998

THE CHAVEZ TRIAL

The trial of Marvin Chavez on marijuana sales and transportation charges
began on schedule yesterday in Judge Thomas J. Borris courtroom in
Westminster. Amid numerous questions, sparring by the attorneys for both
sides and occasional conferences in the judge's chambers, the prosecution
and defense gave their opening arguments to the jury and the first
witnesses were called.

Most compelling, the judge allowed jurors to hear references to Prop. 215,
the medical marijuana initiative voters passed in 1996 - a change from an
earlier judge's decision.

Judge Borris, however, will not make a final ruling as to what laws the
jury will be allowed to consider as relevant to the charges until the end
of the case. But if jurors are permitted to weigh the issue of medical
marijuana and Prop. 215 (now Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety
Code), not only Mr. Chavez but the entire issue will receive consideration
beyond that of previous court proceedings.

Deputy District Attorney Carl Armbrust told the jury the case was simple.
His office has evidence of nine instances when Marvin Chavez sold marijuana
to individuals and undercover officers and one instance when Mr. Chavez
sent marijuana through the mail. Selling or mailing marijuana is against
the law, and the evidence will show that Mr. Chavez did it.

Defense Attorney James Silva told the jury the case would be much more
interesting than that. The jury would be told about Mr. Chavez's rare
medical condition, about the relief he got from smoking marijuana, with
fewer side-effects than from prescription medications, and how Mr. Chavez
had helped to form the Orange County Patient Doctor Nurse Support Group to
help patients learn more about marijuana and work out ways to acquire it.

The defense said it didn't plan to contest allegations that Mr. Chavez had
supplied marijuana to Thomas Jerry Pollard, for a friend of his now dead of
cancer, or Glen Hoffer, but would explain that the circumstances
represented a bona fide effort to operate within the law, Prop. 215.

Mr. Pollard testified under a grant of immunity. Mr. Armbrust asked him if
Mr. Chavez had furnished marijuana to him or to his friend and if Mr.
Chavez or his associate, David Herrick, had received money, on more than
one occasion. Mr. Pollard acknowledged that had been the case, but said the
money was a donation.

The defense asked what Mr. Pollard's relationship had been to his friend
and whether the friend's doctor had recommended marijuana, which Mr.Pollard
said was the case. The fact that Mr. Pollard and his friends had to
identify themselves, fill out forms, get their photos taken and be issued
membership cards before marijuana was furnished was discussed. Mr. Pollard
said he was told the donations were to keep the club going and that he had
received marijuana on several occasions without making a donation.

The next witness was David Reyes, an undercover officer with the Garden
Grove Police Department. He said he was first brought into the case to
investigate a Jack Schanchter, described as an associate of Mr. Chavez, and
eventually posed as the nephew and caretaker of another undercover officer
who told Mr. Chavez of back pain and furnished a false doctor's letter.

At an evidentiary hearing, out of the presence of the jury, the court heard
from a Dr. Del Dalton, a pain management specialist who furnished a
physician's recommendation to many of the members of Mr. Chavez's support
group and others, and from Mr. Hoffer, who had received a recommendation
and joined Mr. Chavez's organization. The attorneys explored to what extent
Mr. Chavez functioned as Mr. Hoffer's caregiver. The hearing, to determine
ground rules under which Dr. Dalton and Mr. Hoffer could appear before the
jury, will continue this morning.

This case has the potential to begin what is likely to be a difficult
process of furnishing ground rules to determine how Section 11362.5 will be
implemented and under what circumstances patients who have a legal right to
possess and use marijuana may actually acquire it. We will continue to
follow it. 
- ---
Checked-by: Mike Gogulski