1 Prop. 215 has been variously interpreted from one locality to another since its passage in November 1996. While large metropolitan areas like San Francisco and Oakland have developed policies which favorably support licensing and oversight of Cannabis cooperatives, other rural localities continue to arrest and prosecute patients in direct defiance of California law. The previous Attorney General, Dan Lundgren, worked tirelessly to undercut and destroy Prop. 215. His successor, Bill Lockyear came to power on a pledge to fully implement the law. His efforts were unraveled by democratic Governor Gray Davis' refusal to support statewide implementation efforts. Thus, California spins out of control because key political leaders lack the integrity to carry out the will of the people.
2 The confusing language surrounding multiple patients or caregivers was compounded by the 1999 Oregon Legislature in an attempt to limit grow operations exceeding seven plants. Language was inserted which forbids the manufacture or production of marijuana "at a place other than one address for property under the control of the patient and one address for property under the control of the primary caregiver..." (HB 3052 Section 5 (e)). But Section 5 (f) prohibits the production of marijuana at more than one address. An attempt to add language which would forbid any caregiver from registering for more than one patient was withdrawn.
3 The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act allows cultivation of Cannabis in amounts in excess of seven plants, but the patient might have to prove the medical necessity of this increased quantity in the courts. The 1999 legislative revision added a clause to the affirmative defense stating that a patient who has their physician's agreement that seven plants are not adequate can thereby prove that the greater amount is medically necessary. Thus it is possible that the patient could petition the Medical Marijuana Program for increased cultivation limits by obtaining written support from their doctor prior to action by law-enforcement that would bring the issue to the courts. A few patients have done so.
4 If the police have sufficient evidence that a law is being broken a judge will issue a warrant to search. If police announce that they have a warrant to search, they are legally entitled to enter and search the premises without the consent of the occupant. Of course, they must produce the warrant and show it to the occupant.
Was this article helpful?