As always, we ask that you help PRN fight to protect the rights of patients and the doctors who treat them. Please click the link below.

Link

Pain Treatment Advocacy Group Sues State of WA

Jun 25, 2008

By: Donna Gordon Blankinship

The Associated Press SEATTLE - A pain treatment advocacy group filed suit Wednesday in federal court to challenge the restrictions Washington state officials have put on prescription pain medication.

The nonprofit Pain Relief Network says the guidelines for prescribing narcotics, written by the Washington state Department of Health and published in March 2007, have influenced pain treatment across the country and have made doctors afraid to give opiate prescriptions[...]

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Damages a class action lawsuit by Laura Cooper (lead attorney) et al., Filed: 2008-06-24

Exhibit 1: The WA state Opioid Dosing "Guidelines" by Agency Medical Directors Group (AMDG); Mar. 2007; Filed 2008-06-24

Exhibit 2: Findings of Fact Laura Cooper, Esq.; Filed 2008-06-24 www.painreliefnetwork.org

Lawyers for a Haysville, Kansas, physician facing a 34-count federal indictment alleging he acted as a drug dealer in prescribing pain medications fought back last Friday, filing in federal court <

Seventeen residents of Gerald, Missouri, located in Franklin County, have filed federal lawsuits alleging that their arrests on drug charges were illegal because a fake DEA agent helped make them,

In a March 31 order , the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from a man who was sentenced to 15

David Borden, Executive Director

The US Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a case that could clarify limits on when police using an informant may enter a residence. The case is Pearson v.

A federal judge in Sacramento sentenced Dr.

[Courtesy of California NORML]

SACRAMENTO, Mar. 19th - Dr. Mollie Fry and Dale Schafer walked out of US Court free on bail pending appeal after being sentenced to a five-year mandatory minimum by a US District Judge Frank Damrell, who deplored the sentence as a "tragedy" that should "never have happened."

Supporters were elated by Damrell's decision to grant release on bail, which capped a tense and dramatic day that began with a succession of adverse rulings for the defense. Defense attorney Tony Serra called it "one of the saddest days I've confronted in a long career" after Damrell turned down all the defense's motions to avoid the mandatory minimums. Mollie Fry stirred the courtroom to tears as she related the story of her cancer and subsequent desire to help people with medical marijuana. "We caused no harm to anyone," she said, "There were no victims." Judge Damrell acknowledged the legitimacy of Fry's medical use of marijuana, but said that the couple had "spiraled out of control.' He concluded that he had "no choice" but to impose the mandatory minimum of 5 years, a sentence dictated by the jury's finding that the couple had grown a total of slightly more than 100 plants over a period of three years.

On the final and crucial issue of the day, however, Damrell agreed that the couple had "substantial" grounds for appeal so as to justify their release on bail. Following expert testimony by attorneys J David Nick and Ephraim Margolin, Damrell found substantial appeals issues relating to entrapment, the defendants' state of mind, and the conflict between state and federal laws. He added that the couple's precarious state of health was further extraordinary grounds for keeping them out of prison. He reprimanded Dr.Fry for her loose standards in recommending marijuana, and stipulated as a strict condition for her release that she desist from further recommendations, to which she assented.

To this observer, today's events felt like a momentous step forward towards the inevitable changing of federal marijuana laws. Judge Damrell effectively declared the bankruptcy of US laws regarding mandatory sentencing and medical marijuana, and rightly referred the matter to higher authorities to decide. There are good grounds to hope that Dale and Mollie will be vindicated by the Ninth Circuit and/or a change in administration.

More later.... Dale Gieringer, Cal NORML
--
California NORML, 2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114
-(415) 563- 5858 - www.canorml.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 17, 2008
CONTACT: Bobby Eisenberg, FRY/SCHAFER Defense Committee at Bobby@docfry.com or 530-823-9963

California Dr. Mollie Fry to be Sentenced for Medical Marijuana

Sentencing scheduled for Wednesday, March 19th at 2pm in Sacramento Federal Court.

The federal sentencing of medical marijuana defendants Dr. Mollie Fry and her husband, Attorney Dale Schafer will take place on Wednesday, March 19th at the US courthouse in Sacramento (5th and I St.). The sentencing is at 2 PM. There will be a press conference before the hearing at 1PM in front of the Court House. The couple was denied the right to defend their actions that were protected under the Laws of the State of California.

WHO: Sentencing in Federal Court of Dr. Mollie Fry and her husband, Attorney Dale Schafer for cultivation and dispensing medical marijuana under the Laws of California.

WHAT: Press Conference prior to sentencing at 1 PM

WHEN: Sentencing is Wednesday, March 19th, 2008 at 2 PM

WHERE: Federal Court House, 501 "I " St., Sacramento, CA

"We never would have grown marijuana had it not been sanctioned by the Laws of the State of California, the Attorney General of California and the District Attorney and Sheriffs’ of El Dorado County. Why aren’t they being charged with conspiracy to violate Federal Law?" asks Dr. Fry.

Dr. Fry and her husband face a likely 5-year mandatory minimum sentence for conspiracy to cultivate and dispense medical marijuana for a small number of Dr. Fry’s patients. They ran (and continue to run) a popular medical marijuana clinic in El Dorado County that provides recommendations for many needy patients in the Sierra Foothills: http://www.docfry.com. Go to articles link for background.

Like other federal defendants, they were denied the right to mention medical marijuana or Prop 215 in their trial. Both are in fragile health - Dale has hemophilia and suffers from chronic back pain, and Mollie is a breast cancer survivor. They are currently caring for three beautiful children and two grandchildren in their home.

They were among the first medical marijuana providers raided by the Bush Administration, just a couple of weeks after 9/11 (9/28/01), but were not successfully indicted until June 22nd, 2005 after the Raich decision was overturned by the Supreme Court. Dale Schafer had also run for District Attorney in 2001.

The sentence they face is particularly egregious compared to other defendants who have grown far more marijuana. They are liable to a five-year mandatory minimum because they were convicted of growing 100 plants over a period of three years, a number far smaller than is usually prosecuted by federal authorities. The jury was forced to add three different years worth of gardens to come up with the 100-plant count. They were not allowed to mention at their trial that local law enforcement had (deliberately) entrapped them by telling them it was OK to grow their relatively modest garden or that they had received advice of counsel supporting their right to grow and care for others under the Law in California. The Attorney General, Bill Lockyer, the District Attorney and the Sheriff in El Dorado County were all aware of and supportive of Dr. Fry and Schafer’s activities, but the jury was also denied these truths.

Fry and Schafer’s case aptly exemplifies the kind of DEA enforcement abuses bill SJR 20 condemns.

Patients and medical marijuana rights supporters are welcome to attend.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 3rd, 2008
Contact: Nathan Sands, t: (916) 709-2483, e: nathan@CompassionateCoalition.org

California Dr. Mollie Fry to be Sentenced for Medical Marijuana

Sentencing scheduled for March 6th at 10am in Sacramento Federal Court

The federal sentencing of medical marijuana defendants Dr. Mollie Fry and her husband, Attorney Dale Schafer will take place on Thursday, March 6th at the US courthouse in Sacramento (5th and I St.). The sentencing is at 10 AM. There will be a press conference afterwards at Noon in front of the Court House.

The couple was denied the right to defend their actions that were protected under the Laws of the State of California.

WHO: Sentencing in Federal Court of Dr. Mollie Fry and her husband, Attorney Dale Schafer for cultivation and dispensing medical marijuana under the Laws of California.

WHAT: Press Conference to follow at NOON

WHEN: Sentencing is Thursday, March 6th, 2008 at 10am

WHERE: Federal Court House, 501 I St., Sacramento, CA

“We never would have grown marijuana had it not been sanctioned by the Laws of the State of California, the Attorney General of California and the District Attorney and Sheriffs’ of El Dorado County. Why aren’t they being charged with conspiracy to violate Federal Law?” Dr. Fry asks a group of patients who are waiting to see her at her clinic.

Dr. Fry and her husband face a likely 5-year mandatory minimum sentence for conspiracy to cultivate and dispense medical marijuana for a small number of Dr. Fry’s patients. They ran (and continue to run) a popular medical marijuana clinic in El Dorado County that provides recommendations for many needy patients in the Sierra Foothills: http://www.docfry.com. Go to articles link for background.

Like other federal defendants, they were denied the right to mention medical marijuana or Prop 215 in their trial. Both are in fragile health - Dale has hemophilia and suffers from chronic back pain, and Mollie is a breast cancer survivor. They are currently caring for three beautiful children and two grandchildren in their home.

They were among the first medical marijuana providers raided by the Bush Administration, just a couple of weeks after 9/11 (9/28/01), but were not successfully indicted until June 22nd, 2005 after the Raich decision was overturned by the Supreme Court. Dale Schafer had also run for District Attorney in 2001.

The sentence they face is particularly egregious compared to other defendants who have grown far more marijuana. They are liable to a five-year mandatory minimum because they were convicted of growing (not a lot more than) 100 plants over a period of three years, a number far smaller than is usually prosecuted by federal authorities. The jury was forced to add three different years worth of gardens to come up with the 100-plant count. They were not allowed to mention at their trial that local law enforcement had (deliberately) entrapped them by telling them it was OK to grow their relatively modest garden or that they had received advice of counsel supporting their right to grow and care for others under the Law in California. The Attorney General, Bill Lockyer, the District Attorney and the Sheriff in El Dorado County were all aware of and supportive of Dr. Fry and Schafer’s activities, but the jury was also denied these truths.

Dale Schafer is still meeting with the local Task Force (2/29/08) made up of local law enforcement and medical marijuana advocates to further implement the State and County guidelines regarding medical marijuana.

Fry and Schafer’s case aptly exemplifies the kind of DEA enforcement abuses bill SJR 20 condemns.

Patients and medical marijuana rights supporters are welcome to attend.

Bobby Eisenberg-FRY/SCHAFER Defense Committee • Bobby@docfry.com • 530-823-9963

In oral arguments Monday, the US Supreme Court displayed considerable skepticism about the Justice Department's broad interpretation of federal money laundering laws.

The US Supreme Court agreed Monday to rule on whether police may search a parked vehicle whenever they arrest a driver or passenger.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, February 19, 2007
CONTACTS: Tom Murphy 207-542-4998 or tom@votehemp.com, Adam Eidinger 202-744-2671 or adam@votehemp.com

North Dakota’s Licensed Hemp Farmers File Appeal in Eighth Circuit

BISMARCK, ND – Two North Dakota farmers, whose federal lawsuit to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on state-licensed and regulated commercial hemp farming in the United States was dismissed on November 28, 2007, filed their appeal today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. A copy of the appeal will be available later this evening at: http://www.VoteHemp.com/legal_cases_ND.html.

Lawyers working on behalf of the farmers, State Representative David Monson and Wayne Hauge, are appealing the district court’s inexplicable ruling that said hemp and marijuana are the “same,” as the DEA has contended. The ruling failed to properly consider the Commerce Clause argument that the plaintiffs raised — that Congress cannot interfere with North Dakota’s state-regulated hemp program. Indeed, the lower court itself recognized in the decision under appeal that “the stalk, fiber, sterilized seed, and oil of the industrial hemp plant, and their derivatives, are legal under federal law, and those parts of the plant are expressly excluded from the definition of ‘marijuana’ under the CSA [Controlled Substances Act].”

“This appeal is basically saying why can Canadian farmers grow non-drug industrial hemp plants to produce perfectly legal hemp fiber and seed commodities for the interstate US market, but North Dakota farmers cannot under North Dakota’s state-regulated industrial hemp program,” says Vote Hemp President Eric Steenstra. “The DEA has banned hemp farming for 50 years by conflating hemp and marijuana on very shaky legal ground while at the same time imports of hemp fiber, seed and oil are allowed. With North Dakota regulating industrial hemp, there is no reasonable threat farmers would be able to grow marijuana without being caught,” says Steenstra.

Scientific evidence clearly shows that industrial hemp, which includes the oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis that would be grown pursuant to North Dakota law, is genetically distinct from the drug varieties of Cannabis and has absolutely no use as a recreational drug.

Vote Hemp, the nation's leading industrial hemp advocacy group, and its supporters are providing financial assistance for the lawsuit. If the suit is ultimately successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own regulated hemp farming programs without fear of federal interference. More information about the case can be found at: http://www.VoteHemp.com/legal_cases_ND.html.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national, single-issue, non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for low-THC industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow this agricultural crop.
More information about hemp legislation and the crop's many uses may be found at www.VoteHemp.com and www.HempIndustries.org. BETA SP or DVD Video News Releases featuring footage of hemp farming in other countries are available upon request by contacting Adam Eidinger at 202-744-2671.

Police who entered an apartment after smelling marijuana being smoked there violated the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, the 4th US Circuit Court of Appea

In a case that has been stinking up northeast Ohio for several years now, a federal judge in Cleveland Tuesday decided that 15 Mansfield men imprisoned on drug charges should be freed because their

Marc Emery, Canada's most well-known marijuana activist, has reached a tentative plea bargain agreement with US federal prosecutors who charged him and two associates as drug dealers for selling ma

When a Baltimore hustler clothing line manufacturer and barber named Rodney Bethea released a straight-to-DVD documentary about life on the mean streets of West Baltimore back in 2004 in a bid to f

A man who made a career out of snitching on his neighbors for profit is suing the Atlanta Police Department and the city, claiming he lost his job after the November 2006 drug raid that left 92-yea

Both the US Supreme Court and the US Sentencing Commission acted this week to redress inequities in the sentencing of federal crack cocaine defendants, but changes in sentencing will be only margin