A federal appeals court has
thrown out the January 2003 conviction of "Guru of Ganja" Ed Rosenthal
on federal marijuana cultivation charges. A three-judge
panel of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the verdict was
tainted by a juror's phone call to an attorney friend, who told her
she could get in trouble if she failed to follow the judge's instructions
not to consider the crop's medical purpose.
Rosenthal, the author of
numerous books on marijuana horticulture and a counterculture icon, was
growing a crop in Oakland with the approval of city officials to provide
it to medical marijuana patients at the San Francisco Harm Reduction Center
when he was arrested by federal agents in 2002. After a trial where
Judge Charles Breyer refusal to allow any mention of medical marijuana,
Rosenthal was convicted on three felony counts.
After the trial, seven of
the 12 jurors publicly disavowed their verdicts, saying they would have
acquitted if they had known if was a medical marijuana grow. At sentencing,
even though Rosenthal faced a mandatory minimum five-year prison sentence,
however, Breyer sentenced him to one day. Rosenthal had reasonably
-- if mistakenly -- believed his appointment as an agent of the City of
Oakland shielded him from federal drug law, Breyer said.
Rosenthal appealed on numerous
grounds, including the judge's disallowal of medical marijuana testimony,
but the 9th Circuit found no error except with the advice-seeking juror.
In a sworn declaration, that juror said the lack of testimony about medical
marijuana during the trial and the judge's instructions that jurors must
follow federal law troubled her. She called a lawyer friend, who
advised her to follow the instructions of she could "get in trouble."
For the 9th Circuit, the
question was whether the advice was an "improper influence" that raised
the "reasonable possibility" of prejudicing the juror. In a word,
yes: "Jurors cannot fairly determine the outcome of a case if they believe
they will face 'trouble' for a conclusion they reach as jurors," the panel
held. "The threat of punishment works a coercive influence on the
jury's independence, and a juror who genuinely fears retribution might
change his or her determination of the issue for fear of being punished."
The case was remanded for
retrial, and the government's motion challenging Rosenthal's sentence and
seeking 6 ½ years was held moot pending any new conviction.
But whether the feds will seek to prosecute Rosenthal again is questionable.
And the 9th Circuit signaled strongly in a final footnote in its opinion
it thought the one-day sentence was just fine. "We would not be inclined
to disturb the [trial] court's reasoned analysis underlying its sentencing
determination," it said.
-- END --
Mail this article to a friend
Send us feedback on this article
This issue -- main page
This issue -- single-file printer version
Drug War Chronicle -- main page
PERMISSION to reprint or
redistribute any or all of the contents of Drug War Chronicle (formerly The Week Online with DRCNet is hereby
granted. We ask that any use of these materials include proper credit and,
where appropriate, a link to one or more of our web sites. If your
publication customarily pays for publication, DRCNet requests checks
payable to the organization. If your publication does not pay for
materials, you are free to use the materials gratis. In all cases, we
request notification for our records, including physical copies where
material has appeared in print. Contact: StoptheDrugWar.org: the Drug Reform Coordination Network,
P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8340 (voice), (202)
293-8344 (fax), e-mail [email protected]. Thank
Articles of a purely
educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of the DRCNet
Foundation, unless otherwise noted.