Pubdate: Tue, 01 Apr 2014
Source: Sun, The (Yuma, AZ)
Copyright: 2014 The Sun
Contact: http://www.yumasun.com/sections/opinion/submit-letters/
Website: http://www.yumasun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1258
Author: Amy Crawford
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

WILMOT LOSES SUPREME COURT POT CASE

PHOENIX - Cops take your pot?

They've got to give it back if you've got a medical marijuana card - 
even one from another state.

Without comment the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to disturb 
state court rulings that said medical marijuana patients whose drugs 
are taken by police are entitled to get them back.

Monday's order most immediately affects Valerie Okun, whose drugs 
were taken at a Border Patrol checkpoint on Interstate 8 near Yuma in 
2011. While she was never prosecuted  she has a valid medical 
marijuana card from California  sheriff's deputies refused to return the drugs.

The order should finally put the issue to rest. Until now, Yuma 
County Sheriff Leon Wilmot refused to hand over the marijuana despite 
contrary rulings from the Arizona Court of Appeals and Arizona Supreme Court.

But Alfonso Zavala, a spokesman for Wilmot, said Monday that his boss 
is consulting with the county attorney's office before deciding what 
to do next.

More significant, Monday's order from the nation's high court cements 
into law that precedent for all of the state's more than 43,000 
medical marijuana users and more than 500 people who are not users 
but serve as caregivers.

By simply upholding those rulings, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to 
look at the obvious conflict between laws in places like Arizona, 
where at least some individuals can buy and have marijuana, and 
federal statutes that consider possession by anyone other than 
authorized researchers a felony  potentially leading to a definitive 
ruling on whether states have the right to enact their own pot laws.

That decision to sidestep the issue disappointed Yavapai County 
Attorney Sheila Polk, who also serves on the Arizona Prosecuting 
Attorneys Advisory Council.

"To me, that is the elephant in the room," she said Monday.

Polk said police are required to follow not only state but also 
federal law. And the same, she said, is true for prosecutors and judges.

She said that the Supreme Court needs to deal with the issue of 
federal pre-emption head-on, if not in this case than in some other 
litigation from another state.

In Okun's case, the Border Patrol turned over her marijuana and 
hashish to county officials. But charges against her were dropped 
because she is enrolled in California's Medical Marijuana Program, 
which Arizona recognizes.

The Yuma County Sheriff's Office, however, refused her request to 
return her marijuana.

Attorneys for the sheriff argued that Arizona law requires any 
marijuana seized in connection with a drug offense be forfeited to 
the state and that the sheriff would be violating federal law by 
giving the drug to someone else - positions state courts have rejected.

Wilmot had another concern: being prosecuted under federal law for 
giving out an illegal drug.

But in its ruling last year, the state Court of Appeals said that 
fear is without merit.

"The sheriff is immune from prosecution under federal law for acts 
taken in compliance with a court order," wrote Judge Diane Johnsen 
for the court.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom