Medical Marijuana Law Is Imperfect

By DPFCA
Published February 17, 2009

I read with interest the guest commentary written by F. Aaron Smith regarding the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department's policies on medical marijuana. (Re: "Medical pot policy needs change," Feb. 2.)

As incoming sheriff, I will take the opportunity to review our practices and policies in regard to a number of issues. I appreciate Mr. Smith's opinion, and as a public servant, value any citizen's input when it comes to how we do our job.

The county of San Bernardino is a party to a lawsuit which is asking for clarification of the conflict between federal laws which prohibit the possession of marijuana under any circumstances and the state's medical marijuana law which allows possession to authorized users and their caregivers. This action is being litigated by salaried county counsel at no additional cost to taxpayers.

When one of our deputies contacts an individual in possession of less than one ounce of marijuana, that individual is issued a citation. They are not taken into custody. This action is not impacting our already overcrowded jails. If the individual has a medical marijuana card, then its existence is documented in the report that is turned over to the District Attorney's Office. As in any case, the matter of guilt or innocence will be decided by the court.

It is my personal opinion that the medical marijuana law is flawed. This is not to say that marijuana has no medicinal value, only that the initiative was poorly thought out, made no allowances for how marijuana is to be supplied and distributed and gave far too much discretion to physicians to prescribe it for any ailment or condition, real or imagined.

In the Supreme Court case Gonzales v. Raich, the court ruled 6 to 3 that the federal government has the power to arrest and prosecute patients and their suppliers even if the marijuana use is permitted under state law because of its authority under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. After the ruling, federal agents raided three of San Francisco's 40 medical marijuana dispensaries. Nineteen people were arrested and charged with running an international drug ring and selling the drug Ecstasy as well as marijuana.

The Sheriff's Department is caught in the middle of a conflict between state and federal law. Our deputies who work on joint federal task forces are sworn to uphold both state and federal law and are faced with a dilemma as to which law to enforce. I eagerly await a final decision from the courts and am hopeful of a ruling by spring.

As your sheriff, I will follow whatever direction I am given by the Supreme Court.

Rod Hoops is San Bernardino County sheriff-coroner.

http://www.sbsun.com/pointofview/ci_11707098

Below is F. Aaron Smiths original article referenced above.


Medical Pot Policy Needs Change

F. Aaron Smith
Posted: 02/01/2009 05:06:48 PM PST

Not everyone in San Bernardino was saddened by the news of Sheriff Gary Penrod's retirement. In particular, suffering patients who rely on medical marijuana are relieved to see Penrod step down.

Although California law has allowed patients to use marijuana in accordance with their doctors' recommendation for more than 12 years, Penrod has consistently instructed deputies to ignore that law.

Penrod's justification was that his department couldn't follow the state's voter-approved medical marijuana law because of an obligation to enforce federal law, which prohibits all marijuana use.

This might sound reasonable to someone who skipped his or her high school civics class - but to the rest of us it's completely absurd.

In December, the United States Supreme Court declined to take up an appeal to a lower court ruling affirming that when it comes to California's medical marijuana law, "it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws ."

Sheriff Penrod may have liked to hang his hat on federal law, but in practice his deputies generally cite patients with state-level marijuana charges - not federal drug crimes. And, since these cases are tried in state courts bound to recognize the medical marijuana laws, the charges are almost always eventually dismissed.

Crestline medical marijuana patient Scott Bledsoe recently filed a lawsuit against the county for its violation of state law. On the very day the suit was filed, a spokesperson for Sheriff Penrod brazenly told the press that deputies are instructed to arrest anyone in possession of marijuana - regardless of their status under state law.

Besides footing the bill for civil litigation, taxpayers are also paying to have sheriff's deputies arrest seriously ill patients just to have their cases tossed out once a court finds that they weren't breaking the law in the first place.

Does this sound like a responsible policy for a sheriff to follow while the county's budget is strained and its jails overcrowded? Sheriff Gary Penrod thought so. But it's time for a change.

Incoming Sheriff Rod Hoops should end this wasteful, cruel and illegal policy and instead side with the state's more mainstream law-enforcement leaders who understand the senselessness in knowingly arresting law-abiding citizens.

At Tuesday's Board of Supervisors hearing, it was made clear that the budget and jail overcrowding would be Hoops' biggest challenges.

In the words of the soon-to-be sheriff himself, "During these lean economic times, we have to be even more diligent with every dollar we are entrusted with."

Let's hope Sheriff Hoops lives up to these words and stops wasting precious public safety resources arresting law abiding medical marijuana patients.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About Us | Advertising Packages | Resources | Site Map | Link to Us | Contact Us |
Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
© 2006 - 2009 Inland Empire Cannabis Clubs

W3C Compliant XHTML Americans for Safe Access National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws Marijuana Policy Project