Pubdate: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA) Copyright: 2007 The Media News Group Contact: http://www.chicoer.com/feedback Website: http://www.chicoer.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/861 Note: Does not print letters from outside circulation area Author: Karen McIntyre, Staff Intern Cited: Americans for Safe Access http://www.americansforsafeaccess.org Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Proposition+215 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/SB+420 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Marijuana - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Marijuana - California) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Americans+for+Safe+Access NO RULING YET IN MEDICAL MARIJUANA SUIT Judge Barbara Roberts is sitting in the hot seat right now, private legal strategy consultant Gordy Dise said after the judge did not make a ruling Friday about whether it's legal to sue regarding the way the medical marijuana law is being prosecuted. The case, David Williams versus Butte County, was put under submission until September, which means the judge did not decide whether the lawsuit can continue, and a new court date was scheduled. The case is the first of its kind in California. Williams, of Oroville, sued after a Butte County sheriff's deputy threatened to arrest the man if he didn't destroy all but 12 of the 41 marijuana plants he reportedly was growing for a seven-member collective. The legal amount of pot in a co-op is six mature plants, 12 immature plants and eight ounces of dried marijuana per patient, according to state Legislature's Senate Bill 420 enacted a few years ago. District Attorney Mike Ramsey established written guidelines that allow a larger one-pound threshold limit of pot per patient and requires members of a co-op to post their doctors' recommendations and "actively participate in the cultivation process" if their health allows. But if the Legislature cannot modify or change Proposition 215 -- which passed in 1996 allowing medical marijuana with a doctor's recommendation -- then who is Butte County to modify the law, Dise said. "Butte County Sheriff and county municipal policies are trying to promulgate an illegal underground regulation contrary to the people's will and the law of this state," he said. "They have to enforce the law whether they like it or not." The District Attorney's Office reportedly issued the guidelines to "end any confusion" and prevent growers from using Proposition 215 as a cover. Joseph Elford, Williams' San Francisco attorney for Americans for Safe Access, is challenging Ramsey's policies. He is suing the county on William's behalf in a civil suit claiming the deputy did not have the right to tell Williams to destroy the plants. Judge Roberts has heard arguments from both sides, and was scheduled to issue a written ruling Friday. In the Chico Courthouse, Roger Wilson showed up to represent Butte County, and Elford listened to the judge announce the submission through a conference call. He mentioned over the speaker phone that Roberts should take notice of O'Connell versus the city of Stockton, which ruled Thursday in the Superior Court of California that local jurisdictions cannot establish guidelines that contradict state laws. "It's a polite way of saying, we have more law in our favor right now," Dise said. Dise said Williams is going to win, and fighting over legislation that passed in 1996 is ludicrous. Police didn't barge into people's homes to check for alcohol 11 years after prohibition ended. The next court date is scheduled for 10:30 a.m. Sept. 21. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake