Pubdate: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 Source: Rapid City Journal (SD) Copyright: 2001 The Rapid City Journal Contact: PO Box 450, Rapid City SD 57709 Fax: (605) 394-8463 Website: http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/ Author: Joe Kafka, AP writer MEDICAL MARIJUANA BILL DISCUSSED IN LEGISLATURE PIERRE - Use of marijuana for legitimate medical purposes should be allowed as a defense in trials involving marijuana charges, legislators were told Friday. Making it clear he does not favor legalization of marijuana, Rep. Tom Hennies, R-Rapid City, pleaded with fellow members of the House Judiciary Committee to approve HB1120. The bill says people charged with use or possession of marijuana may offer the defense of medical necessity in some instances, which would allow experts to testify that marijuana eases the health problems of the accused. "We have a duty to try and find relief for these people," said Hennies, former police chief in Rapid City. Exposure to neurological toxins as an Army nurse in the Gulf War caused her serious nerve damage, said Valerie Miller of Hill City. She told legislators that only marijuana has worked to ease her anxieties, seizures and hallucinations. "It has helped me as a medicine," Miller said. "Since I've been using cannabis, the pain has decreased. I know it's illegal." Rep. Duane Sutton, R-Aberdeen, said he met many terminally ill cancer patients last fall when he received radiation therapy after having his cancerous tonsils removed. Prescription drugs are provided before radiation to relieve the nausea, but often little can be done, he said. If marijuana can help people with their nausea in such instances, it should be allowed, said Sutton, who added that he did not use it to relieve his nausea. "I'm for any form of relief that we can give these people ... to ease some of their suffering and pain," he said. Testifying against the bill, which was set aside until Wednesday, Assistant Attorney General Charlie McGuigan said allowing a medicinal marijuana defense would lead to more trials. And those trials would be costly because more experts would be called to testify, he said. McGuigan also said the bill is wide open in terms of the amount of marijuana a person could have and still claim it's for medical purposes. "There's nothing in here that limits the quantity," he said. Even if such a defense is allowed in state courts and people successfully use it to get acquitted, they still could be prosecuted under federal law because marijuana possession is also a federal crime, McGuigan added. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D