California Supreme Court to review People v. Kelly

State top court to review medical pot limit
The state Supreme Court returned to the medical marijuana wars Wednesday, agreeing to decide the validity of a law that shields doctor-approved pot users from arrest for possessing up to eight ounces of dried marijuana or growing six plants.

The justices voted unanimously to review the issue after a prosecution appeal of a lower-court ruling in May. In that ruling, an appellate court found the 2003 law [SB 420] conflicted with California’s 1996 medical marijuana initiative, which allows possession of an amount of marijuana “reasonably related to the patient’s current medical needs,” but did not set specific limits.

The appellate panel overturned the conviction of a Los Angeles County man who possessed more than eight ounces of marijuana and ruled that the 1996 initiative bars the Legislature from specifying the amount a patient can possess.

Americans for Safe Access, argued that the 2003 law did not limit the amount of marijuana a patient could possess; it merely set guidelines for police. Striking down the law would eliminate a statewide standard that “protects qualified patients from unnecessary arrests,” attorney Joseph Elford argued in court papers.

The American Civil Liberties Union offered a different interpretation: The eight-ounce limit and protection from arrest is an option that applies to the more than 18,000 patients who have obtained medical marijuana identification cards, also authorized by the 2003 law.

All patients remain covered by Prop. 215, which allows doctors to recommend greater amounts of marijuana and leaves local governments free to set higher limits, ACLU lawyer M. Allen Hopper said. San Francisco, for example, allows possession of up to 24 marijuana plants, he said.

Deputy Attorney General Michael Johnsen took a similar view, arguing that without the numerical standards, “law enforcement has no clear legislative guidance … and medical marijuana patients have little incentive to volunteer for the cardholder program.”

The Supreme Court has not set a hearing date.

The basic reasoning of the appellate court was that only citizens can amend a citizen-approved initiative.  Since Prop 215, a citizen initiative, did not specify medicine or plant limits, only the citizens can make that kind of change to the law, not the legislature, as they did with SB 420.

Setting plant and possession limits, as the other eleven medical marijuana states have, is an unworkable burden of a compromise to deal with the maddening notion that some pot smokers are patients and the rest are criminals.  If marijuana were legalized for all of its users, there would be a regulated commercial marijuana market and no need for plant or medicine limits.

The compromise of limits – from as low as 1 plant and 2 ounces in Vermont to 24 plants and 24 ounces in Oregon – means that a certain number of patients get a free pass from law enforcement, but it also guarantees that a certain number of patients get more harassment from law enforcement.  A limit draws a bright line for law enforcement (they dislike nuance) separating patients from criminals, so any patient on the criminal side of the line faces extra burdens to protecting his rights.