Drug War Chronicle #733 - May 10, 2012

House of Representatives Votes Down Defunding Medical Marijuana Raids [FEATURE]

Four US representatives introduced an amendment to the Justice Department appropriations bill, House Resolution 5326, which would bar the agency from spending funds to attack medical marijuana operations in states where it is legal. The bill was being considered Wednesday, before failing on a voice vote Wednesday evening.

A roll call vote was taken later, with the amendment failing 163-262 -- 50 Democrats opposed it and 28 Republicans supported it. While the total number of "ayes" was almost identical to the last time the amendment was offered several years ago, that reflects the larger number of Republicans in the House. Both Democrats and Republicans voted for the amendment in greater percentages than in the past. [Ed: We will publish analysis of the voting breakdown this week.]

The House heard Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Jerold Nadler (D-NY), and Steve Cohen (D-TN) speak in favor of the amendment, while the most notable opposition came from committee Chairman Frank Wolf (R-VA).

Hinchey was a cosponsor of the amendment, as was Rohrabacher, of Huntington Beach, and his California colleagues Reps. amie Farr (D-Carmel) and Tom McClintock (R-Auburn).

As a presidential candidate, then-Senator Obama said his administration would not use its resources to undermine state medical marijuana laws, especially if people were following their state’s law. At first, the administration lived up to his word. Shortly after he was elected president, the Department of Justice issued a memorandum to US Attorneys urging them not to waste taxpayer dollars and law enforcement resources arresting and prosecuting people following their state’s medical marijuana law.

But according to the medical marijuana defense group Americans for Safe Access, the DEA has undertaken more than 200 raids against medical marijuana dispensaries and associated businesses since it took office in 2009, with most of them coming in the past year. Beginning in March 2011 with raids on dispensaries across Montana, the Justice Department has shifted its stance on medical marijuana, becoming much more aggressive in enforcing federal law.

It's not just the DEA. Federal prosecutors in dispensary states, such as California, Colorado, and Montana, have also been aggressively targeting medical marijuana operations. They typically try to intimidate dispensary operators and/or their landlords in voluntarily closing their doors by issuing threat letters in which they warn that operators and/or landlords could face civil asset forfeiture or even criminal prosecution if they do not comply.

The threat letters are based on arbitrary standards having nothing to do with state medical marijuana laws. Instead, federal prosecutors typically allege that targeted dispensaries are within 1,000 feet of a school or playground. There is no federal law disallowing dispensaries in those areas, but there is a federal sentencing enhancement for drug law violations within them, and federal prosecutors are using that statute as a measuring rod for deciding which dispensaries to pick on.

The federal crackdown has, to some extent, worked. The Montana medical marijuana distribution scene was all but wiped out by federal raids and prosecutions, dozens of dispensaries have been forced out of business in Colorado, and more than 200 have closed in California.

But medical marijuana supporters and advocates have been mobilizing their forces, too. The crackdown has been criticized by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and drug reform friend Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), as well as elected officials in all three states and local Democratic Party organizations in the San Francisco Bay area.

And this week, the fight came to the House.

"It is time for the federal government to stop targeting the legal vendors that are providing safe access to this treatment, and instead focus limited resources on those who sell illicit drugs," Farr said in a statement. "The amendment I will offer with my colleagues will work to assure funds under the Department of Justice do not target the safe access to treatment patients need."

A plethora of medical marijuana and drug reform groups and even labor unions were mobilizing their members to contact Congress this week in a bid to show popular support for reining in the feds. Among them was the Drug Policy Alliance.

"Both Democrats and Republicans are telling the Obama administration: enough is enough, stop wasting taxpayer money to undermine state medical marijuana laws, said Bill Piper, the group's director of national affairs. "President Obama needs to realize his assault on patient access is not just immoral -- but a serious political miscalculation. For more than a decade, polling has consistently shown that 70% to 80% of Americans support medical marijuana."

For the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW), which represents dispensary workers in California and Colorado, smothering the federal crackdown is not just about compassion, it's about jobs and the economy.

"The UFCW supports the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment," the group said in a statement Wednesday. "Medical marijuana laws have been enacted to allow patients safe and legal access to appropriately produced and compliantly dispensed medical marijuana in the safest possible environment and UFCW members in the medical cannabis industry work in accordance with state laws to provide safe and effective medical treatment for persons suffering from cancer and other serious medical conditions.

"At a time when millions of hardworking Americans are out of work and still struggling to make ends meet, the use of taxpayer money for the misguided targeting and prosecution of an industry that provides Americans with good middle class jobs with benefits is counterproductive. The US Justice Department should not use the fewer resources it has to focus on targeting patients and dispensaries abiding by state law. That is a problem that the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment will solve and the UFCW wholeheartedly supports it," the union said.

The political calculus behind the Obama administration's crackdown on medical marijuana is unclear. What is certain is that the opposition to it is broad and cuts across party lines.

"History is calling on President Obama to protect terminally ill patients from suffering, and he is dangerously close to falling on the wrong side," said Piper. "He will continue to pay a political price as long as his administration continues to waste taxpayer money undermining state law."

The Obama administration may have won a victory Wednesday night, but even victories come with a cost.

back to top

False Testimony: How Prosecutors Leave Justice Behind [FEATURE]

special to the Chronicle by investigative journalist Clarence Walker, [email protected]

Prosecutors are arguably the most powerful figures in the American criminal justice system. They decide which charges to bring, what plea bargains to offer, and what sentences to request. Given their role in the system and the broad powers they exercise, it is critical that they discharge those duties responsibly and ethically.

But according to attorneys and criminal justice reform advocates, prosecutors across the country are misbehaving -- and getting away with it. While the most common forms of prosecutorial misconduct are hiding exculpatory evidence and engaging in improper examination and argumentation, another form of intentional misconduct is the knowing use of false testimony to win convictions.

"Perjury can easily undermine a defendant's right to a fair trial," said Chicago criminal defense attorney Leonard Goodman.

He ought to know.

In 2009, Goodman represented Brian Wilbourn in a federal narcotics case in which prosecutors knowingly allowed an informant to testify that Wilbourn sold crack cocaine out of a penthouse apartment over a three-year period when he was in fact nowhere near the scene at any time.

"Mr. Wilbourn was safely locked away in prison when the informant testified that Wilbourn was selling drugs at the penthouse between 2002 and 2005," Goodman explained.

The US 7^th District Court of Appeals overturned Wilbourn's conviction because of the perjured testimony.

"When the government obtains a conviction through the knowing use of false testimony, it violates a defendant's due process rights," wrote Judge Daniel Manion as he ordered the reversal.

And when a prosecutor knowingly allows perjured testimony to be heard, that's prosecutorial misconduct. In the Wilbourn case, Assistant US Attorney Rachel Cannon knew that her informant's testimony was false -- because Goodman told her so before the trial -- yet she has not been sanctioned in any way. That's not unusual.

Legal experts say most prosecutors dedicate themselves to do an ethical and professional job, but that some prosecutors repeatedly commit misconduct because they realize they most likely will never face serious punishment. Prosecutors have immunity from civil liability for their misbehavior, and the legal system seems unable or unwilling to effectively police itself.

Prosecutorial misconduct can have serious financial consequences for state and local governments. Taxpayers take the hit to retry cases thrown out because of misconduct, and they take another hit when states pay compensation to the wrongfully imprisoned.

But despite the seriousness of the issue, there has been little research done nationwide on the scope of prosecutorial misconduct. What research there is suggests that even misbehaving prosecutors have little to worry about.

A 2003 study conducted by the Center for Public Integrity, Harmful Error, found that among 11,452 documented appeals alleging prosecutorial misconduct between 1970 and 2002, approximately 2,012 appeals led to reversals or remanded indictments, indicating prosecutorial misconduct in 17.6% of the cases.

In California, the Veritas Institute issued a 2009 report, Preventable Error: A Report on Prosecutorial Misconduct in California, 1997-2009, which reviewed 4,000 complaints of misconduct and found it occurred in 707 of them. Only six prosecutors were disciplined.

In March, the Prosecutorial Oversight Coalition released research findings on Texas convictions between 2004 and 2008 that showed appeals courts found a pattern of prosecutorial error or misconduct in 91 cases, ranging from hiding exculpatory evidence to improper argument and examination. While the appeals courts found the errors "harmless" in 72 cases, affirming the convictions, they reversed 19 cases because of prosecutorial conduct "harmful" to the defendant.

Still, none of those prosecutors were disciplined, the report found. Only one prosecutor in the state was disciplined for misconduct during that period, and that was for misconduct committed before 2004.

"As best we can determine, most prosecutors' offices don't even have clear internal systems for preventing and reviewing misconduct, but perhaps even more alarming is that bar oversight entities tend not to act in the wake of even serious acts of misconduct," said Stephen Saloom, Policy Director of the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law.  "We don't accept this lack of accountability and oversight for any other government entity where life and liberty are at stake, and there's no reason we should do so for prosecutors."

Prosecutors want to win cases, even at the expense of justice, said legal observers.

"It's a result-oriented process today, fairness be damned," said Robert Merkle, a former US Attorney in Florida.

That certainly seems to be the case in the Brian Wilbourn prosecution. He was charged along with 16 other defendants in December 2007 with numerous federal counts of possession and conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine, heroin, and marijuana at the Cabrini Green Public Housing Development in Chicago Illinois.

The DEA and prosecutors alleged that Wilbourn was part of the Gangster Disciples drug dealing gang led by Rondell "Nightfall" Freeman. When the DEA announced federal charges against the defendant, a spokesman said the agency was "upending the gang's flagrant drug dealing at public housing projects and  other apartments in the Chicago area."

Charging that the group was taking in $3 million a year, the feds played on a holiday theme.

"It's a season of giving, so our gift to the people is to let them live without constant fear of this drug organization all around them," said ATF Special Agent in Charge Andy Traver. "And our gift to Rondell Freeman and his organization is 20 years to life."

But in the end, prosecutorial misconduct gave the defendants a gift. Wilbourn, Freeman, and three other defendants who went to trial and were convicted had their convictions thrown out because prosecutors knowingly allowed perjured testimony to be heard.

"This was a case where prosecutors allowed an informant to testify falsely against my client, Brian Wilbourn," said Goodman. "Prior to trial, I informed the government that my client was in prison from 2002-2005 -- when the informant said he saw Mr. Wilbourn selling drugs in the company of co-defendant Rondell Freeman."

Prosecutors conceded that Goodman submitted the certified documents to them in December 2008, two months before the trial started, but they would later argue before Judge Lefkow they could not accurately verify the dates of Wilbourn's incarceration.

In one example, prosecutor Rachel Cannon noted that three separate entries in court documents said that Wilbourn was not in court in April 2002 and that a no-bail warrant had been issued for him. But Goodman explained that Wilbourn had in fact been arrested a week later, pleaded guilty to an offense, and had been sentenced to prison, from which he was not released until September 2005.

"Wilbourn's incarceration date was listed on records from Illinois Department of Corrections including the time period he was re-arrested and placed in the county jail," Goodman explained.

Despite Goodman's notice that Wilbourn was incarcerated during the period described in the indictment, the government plowed ahead to convict Goodman's client. And it did so in part relying on the testimony of informant Seneca Williams, who had rolled over for the feds and agreed to testify against others in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Williams testified at length about an apartment penthouse that was allegedly at the center of the conspiracy, frequently placing Wilbourn on the scene discussing sales and bagging up the drugs for distribution with Freeman and other players in the group.

Of particular significance to the conspiracy charge, Seneca Williams not only testified to seeing Freeman, Wilbourn, Hill, and Sanders transport and sell drugs at designated locations during specific time periods. Williams also went far as to identify Wilbourn's voice on two audio recordings -- which served as the basis for a conspiracy charge which carried up to life in prison.

"You mentioned that you saw Brian Wilbourn at this apartment as well, what did you see him do?" asked prosecutor Cannon during direct examination.

"I seen him use orange-striped bags to bag up crack cocaine, heroin and marijuana." Williams testified.

"And when was that?"

"That was early 2003."

During cross examination, Goodman confronted Williams with the fact that his client  was in prison from 2002 to 2005 and could not have been at the penthouse apartment discussing drug business like Williams said Wilbourn had been doing.

"Now Mr. Williams, isn't it true that Brian Wilbourn was in jail from April 23rd of 2002 until September 2005?" Goodman asked.

"I don't know it to be true," Williams replied.

Suddenly, Assistant US Attorney Kruti Trivedi objected, saying "That's not true."

"It is true, your honor," Goodman rejoined, and Judge Lefkow overruled the prosecutor.

Under continued intense questioning by Goodman, Williams confessed to other misdeeds, including previously perjuring himself in an earlier drug case against Rondell Freeman to help him beat that rap. He said he testified falsely in that case because he didn't want to lose his job and a place to stay at Freeman's car wash. He added that he decided to cooperate with the government because he was facing a minimum of 20 years in prison and was looking forward to receive a reduced sentence of 58 months. That gave Goodman an even larger opening.

"You would lie at Rondell Freeman's trial in state court because if he got convicted you might not get to live at the car wash, correct?" he asked.

"Yes," Williams responded.

"But you wouldn't lie to save yourself 15 years of your life?"

"No."

On redirect the government made no attempt to correct Williams' false testimony that he saw Wilbourn selling drugs between 2002 and 2005, when Wilbourn was in Illinois Department of Corrections. Instead the government tried to bolster Williams' glaringly inaccurate testimony:

"Have you been truthful and tried to the best of your ability to give approximate dates as you remember them?" prosecutors asked.

"Yes," he replied.

In a hearing outside the presence of the jury, Goodman informed Judge Lefkow that he had filed a motion to dismiss the counts against Wilbourn because of prosecutors allowing Williams' false testimony against his client.

Wilbourn had been "incarcerated from April 2002 until September 2005 -- and Williams' testimony about the events and conversations purportedly involving Wilbourn and co-defendants at the penthouse apartment on Granville during late 2002-2003, was false," Goodman told the judge. "The government had an obligation under to correct the record," he said.

But prosecutors weren't interested. "The government stipulated as to the dates of Wilbourn's incarceration and if Mr. Goodman wants to argue to the jury that Seneca Williams perjured himself, he's absolutely free to do that," retorted Cannon. "Our argument will be Williams was wrong about the dates but the facts remain true."

Judge Lefkow responded to Cannon's argument. "You know, you as the representative of the United States have an obligation to make sure the evidence you are presenting is truthful and accurate."

"We stand by everything that's been presented, your honor," Cannon replied.

Judge Lefkow then denied the motion to dismiss based on the perjured testimony, and the trial headed for its conclusion.

Even in closing arguments, Cannon continued to insist that Williams had not perjured himself. "Williams did not lie," she explained. "Don't think what he testified to about Brian Wilbourn's involvement with drugs never happened. Ladies and gentleman, it's for you to decide whether these witnesses were testifying to facts as they remember them or whether they were actually lying."

Goodman implored the jury to find his client not guility. "They put a liar on the stand and he got caught and the government still has the nerve to ask you to rely on Seneca Williams' testimony to convict. You should be offended."

The jury sided with the government and convicted all four defendants. The jury convicted Wilbourn and Freeman on the conspiracy charge to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine, an offense that carried up to life in prison.

The defendants appealed, and on appeal, prosecutors continued to argue that they did not knowingly use false testimony to convict them. That even after Judge Lefkow found that when Cannon "bolstered William's false testimony it constituted prosecutorial misconduct. The government had a duty to correct false testimony."

Upon winning the appeal, Goodman felt vindicated and pleased that his client no longer faces life in prison for a conviction based on perjured testimony.

"It is an important opinion because it stands for the principle that federal prosecutors are not above the law and that telling the truth is more important than winning. Federal cases are based on the word of informants who understand the only way to get a lesser sentence is to help government prosecutors convict others," he said.

"Everybody knows these witnesses will lie, saying whatever the government want them to say to get a deal," said Goodman after winning the appeal. "The only difference in this case is we happened to catch one."

"No trial is perfect, and sometimes mistakes are made, but for a prosecutor to put perjury on the witness stand that is scary," said Mark Vinson, a former Harris County (Houston), Texas, Chief Prosecutor, now in private practice as a criminal defense attorney.

Despite winning their appeal, Wilbourn and the others remain in federal custody pending the resolution of other charges against them.

Nothing has happened to Assistant US Attorney Cannon or her colleagues.

[Editor's Note: There is more on prosecutorial misconduct coming from Clarence Walker. In his next installment, Walker will look at how a bulldog lawyer exposed misconduct in a major cocaine case with Mexican cartel connections. Walker can be reached at [email protected].]

back to top

DEA Forgets Student in Cell, Pols Want Answers

The DEA and its parent agency, the Justice Department, have come under increasing criticism over the case of a University of California-San Diego student who was swept up in a drug raid, placed in a holding cell, and forgotten. When 23-year-old Daniel Chong was finally discovered five days later, his condition was so poor he was hospitalized for three days in intensive care.

The DEA has since apologized for the incident, but US representatives and senators from California are demanding answers, and Chong and his attorney have filed a $20 million lawsuit against the agency.

Chong was one of nine people swept up in a raid targeting Ecstasy traffickers early in the morning of April 21. Chong said that he had gone to the residence the night before -- the marijuana holiday of 4/20 -- "to get high" and was arrested along with the others the next morning. DEA agents booked all nine, then transported seven to local jails, released one person, and apparently forgot all about Chong.

In an interview with the Associated Press last Wednesday, Chong said that after waiting hours in the cell, which had no toilet or running water, he screamed and kicked the door, to no avail. As the days dragged on, he said he realized he was trapped. On day three, he began to hallucinate. He urinated on a metal bench so he could drink his urine to quench his thirst. He eventually began to accept that he would die in the cell. He bit into his glasses to break them and used a shard of glass to carve "Sorry, Mom" on his arm as a farewell, but only got as far as the letter "S".

He said he was considering using the glass to kill himself and end his suffering. "I pretty much lost my mind," he said. He also admitted ingesting some methamphetamine that had been left hidden in a mattress in the cell by a previous occupant.

Then, on day five, a DEA agent opened the door to find the still handcuffed Chong covered in his own feces. "Where did you come from?" the agent asked.

The engineering student for taken to a local hospital, where he was treated for dehydration, kidney failure, cramps and a perforated esophagus. He had lost 15 pounds. He spent three days in intensive care and two more days at the hospital before being released.

San Diego DEA Special Agent in Charge William Sherman apologized to Chong, though not directly, and said in a statement he was "deeply troubled" by the incident. Sherman said he had ordered an extensive review of policies and procedures at the office.

That wasn't good enough several members of the state's congressional delegation, who have demanded answers from the DEA and the Justice Department.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) last Wednesday called on US Attorney General Eric Holder to begin an "immediate and thorough" Justice Department investigation into the matter. "After the investigation is completed, I ask that you please provide me with the results and the actions the department will take to make sure those responsible are held accountable and that no one in DEA custody will ever again be forced to endure such treatment," she wrote.

On Thursday, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-San Diego), head of the House Government Oversight Committee, called for in investigation, and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-San Diego County) sent a letter to DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart asking for a full accounting of Chong's detention, processes in place for accounting for detained individuals, and the steps the DEA is taking to ensure it doesn't happen again.

"The situation involving Chong may in fact be an isolated incident," Hunter wrote. "Regardless, my concern is that this situation could also be a symptom of a bigger problem, with errors in procedure and oversight possibly extending to the division's law enforcement function."

Chong is "still recovering" from his ordeal, San Diego attorney Gene Iredale, who is representing him, said at a press conference last Wednesday. "He thought he was going insane," Iredale added.

Iredeale filed preliminary papers for the $20 million law suit last Wednesday. The suit alleges Chong was treated in a way that constitutes torture under US and international law.

"He is glad to be alive," Iredale said of Chong. "He wants to make sure that what happened to him doesn't happen to anyone else."

back to top

Pelosi Condemns Medical Marijuana Crackdown

US House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) issued a statement last Wednesday condemning the federal campaign against medical marijuana businesses operating in compliance with state law. The prominent Democrat's statement is a clear shot across the bow for President Obama and his Justice Department, which is leading the charge against dispensaries and associated medical marijuana enterprises.

"I have strong concerns about the recent actions by the federal government that threaten the safe access of medicinal marijuana to alleviate the suffering of patients in California, and undermine a policy that has been in place under which the federal government did not pursue individuals whose actions complied with state laws providing for medicinal marijuana," Pelosi said.

The House Minority Leader said access to medical marijuana is "both a medical and a states' rights issue" and that it has "proven medical uses," including alleviating the suffering of AIDS patients.

"I have long supported efforts in Congress to advocate federal policies that recognize the scientific evidence and clinical research demonstrating the medical benefits of medicinal marijuana, that respect the wishes of the states in providing relief to ill individuals, and that prevent the federal government from acting to harm the safe access of medicinal marijuana provided under state law," Pelosi said. "I will continue to strongly support those efforts."

Pelosi's statement came the same day that the Alameda County (Oakland) Democratic Party unanimously adopted a resolution "decrying the federal raids on dispensaries and calling for the US Department of Justice to refrain from future expenditure of public resources on any act that contradicts the will of the California voters regarding medical marijuana" and just days after the San Francisco Democratic Party passed a similar resolution.

The Bay Area Democrats are responding to a coordinated crackdown on the medical marijuana industry by federal prosecutors in the state that began last fall and has led to the forced closing of dozens of California dispensaries and related businesses, including such well-respected institutions as the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana and the Berkeley Patients Group, as well as last month's raid that crippled Oaksterdam University.

The toll includes five dispensaries in San Francisco itself. Another four San Francisco dispensaries or their landlords have received similar threatening letters from US Attorney for Northern California Melinda Haag.

The politicians are being prodded by San Francisco United for Safe Access, an ad hoc group of patients, patient advocates, dispensaries, and other stakeholders led by Americans for Safe Access (ASA). The coalition was formed to mobilize political opposition to the Obama administration's crackdown.

"We applaud Pelosi's leadership in urging President Obama to address medical marijuana as a public health issue," said ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer. "Rather than defending a policy of intolerance, President Obama should end his unnecessary and harmful attacks once and for all."

There have been more than 200 SWAT-style raids on dispensaries, growers, and associated businesses since Obama took office in January 2009. Most of them have taken place since the administration unleashed its offensive in March 2011 with a series of DEA raids in Montana that decimated that state's until-then booming medical marijuana industry.

back to top

Dutch "Weed Pass" Plan Hitting Bumps

One week after being rolled out in southern border cannabis cafes, the conservative Dutch government's effort to restrict foreigners from the coffee shops by making them members-only and requiring a "weed pass" for entry is off to a rocky start.

The plan was met last week with street protests and civil disobedience in Maastricht, and this week, numerous coffee shops remain closed there in protest. Meanwhile, the largely Belgian and German "drug tourists" at whom the ban is aimed have responded by simply driving further into Holland to buy their marijuana since the ban is only in place on the border.

Even Dutch police seem less than enthused. Police in Eindhoven said they were still undergoing training on how to check for weed passes, while police in other border towns, such as Den Bosch, Oss, and Uden told Agence France-Presse "cannabis controls are not a priority."

"It takes time to put everything in place," conceded Justice and Safety Ministry spokeswoman Charlotte Menten.

Police in Maastricht, the largest city now living under the weed pass regime, have taken a tougher line, shutting down Marc Josemann's Easy Going cannabis café after he flouted the law by selling to foreigners, but at least 14 more cannabis cafes there have also shut down to protest the law as discriminatory and bad for business.

Before flouting the law by selling to foreigners, Josemann's first obeyed the law, refusing to sell to some foreigners, who then, in accordance with his wishes, filed a discrimination against him with local authorities. That complaint became the basis of Josemann's ongoing legal challenge to the law.

"Now, we're going to court," Josemanns told AFP. "We were only waiting for one thing: the municipality to close us down."

Villem Vugs, head of the coffee shop association in Tilburg said that problems blamed on drug tourism -- traffic jams, rowdiness, street dealing -- were largely a Maastricht problem. "The government wants to implement a nationwide solution to address a local problem in Maastricht," he complained. There is "little or no nuisance" from the trade in his city, he added.

The weed pass plan is supposed to go into effect nationwide next year, affecting all 670 cannabis coffee shops in the county, but right now, it only affects 80 cafes in the south. There, the cannabis cafes are only supposed to sell to Dutch residents who have signed up for the weed pass.

Now, the foreign drug tourists are showing up further in the Dutch interior, in cities such as Nijmengen, about 90 miles from Maastricht.

"In recent days, we are spotting cars with Belgian plates in the city center, who are clearly there for the coffee shops," Nijmegen police spokeswoman Florian Vingerhoeds told AFP. "Before, we never saw Belgian plates."

back to top

Did You Know? Legal Drinking Age 138 Countries, from ProCon.org

When marijuana is legalized, states across the country as well as Congress will look at what regulations they want to implement as part of that, with age limits for currently legal drugs like alcohol a likely topic.

Did you know the legal drinking age in 138 countries varies from totally banned at one end to no age limits at the other? Read the details on drinkingage.procon.org, part of the ProCon.org family.

Follow Drug War Chronicle for more important facts from ProCon.org over the next few weeks, or sign up for ProCon.org's email list or RSS feed. Click here for last week's Chronicle Did You Know segment.

ProCon.org is a web site promoting critical thinking, education, and informed citizenship by presenting controversial issues in a straightforward, nonpartisan primarily pro-con format.

back to top

Medical Marijuana Update

The national battle over medical marijuana is heating up, Connecticut is about to become the 17th medical marijuana state, and state and local battles continue. And so do the DEA raids. Busy, busy, busy. Let's get to it:

National

Last Wednesday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi criticized the federal crackdown on medical marijuana. Listening to her home town constituents, the San Francisco representative called on the administration to back off from the raids and prosecutions. In doing so, she joined the San Francisco and Alameda County Democratic Party organizations, and various state and local elected officials.

Last Saturday, 34 groups opposing medical marijuana sent a letter to President Obama urging him to "continue to enforce federal drug laws in states that allow 'medical marijuana.'" The effort was organized by the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America and the signees were mostly law enforcement, treatment industry, and community anti-drug groups.

This week, drug reform and medical marijuana advocacy groups mobilized in support of an amendment to the Justice Department appropriations bill that would cut funding for the agency's offensive against medical marijuana. The amendment failed on a voice vote Wednesday night.

California

Last Tuesday, the Milpitas city council voted to reaffirm its ban on dispensaries. City leaders had been considering allowing them in order to create tax revenues, but decided to hold off pending clarification of state laws by the Supreme Court.

Also last Tuesday, Yuba County adopted a medical marijuana nuisance ordinance on a 4-1 vote by the board of supervisors. The ordinance creates limits on how big a space people with valid medical marijuana cards could use to grow plants, depending on the size of the parcel. Earlier, there were loud objections about the 100 square foot limit on grows on parcels of less than an acre. Growers are threatening a lawsuit.

Last Wednesday, the DEA raided a Santa Barbara dispensary. The raiders hit Pacific Coast Collective, but no arrests were made. A sign posted on the door that same day read: "Due to a raid by the federal government, we will be closed until further notice. We are sorry for any inconvenience this has caused."

Also last Wednesday, the LAPD raided an Eagle Rock dispensary. The American Eagle Collective was hit and police on the scene said it would be permanently shut down. The collective is one of more than two dozen that are being sued by the city of Los Angeles for allegedly violating city zoning laws. Two other Eagle Rock dispensaries have been sued for operating within 600 feet of a school. The city plans to seek a preliminary injunction against American Eagle on May 31.

Last Thursday, the DEA and local police hit a medical marijuana grow in Santa Barbara. It was part of a declared war on dispensaries in the county by federal prosecutors. "All known marijuana stores in Santa Barbara County are now the subject of federal enforcement actions," according to a statement from the US Attorney's Office. The feds also filed three asset forfeiture lawsuits, two against dispensaries and one against the grow up.

Last Friday, the DEA raided a Glendora dispensary. The raiders hit the Glendora Healing Clinic and arrested two customers on outstanding warrants. Agents seized money and marijuana, but did not arrest the operators. The dispensary had only been open a few weeks.

Also last Friday, Vallejo police raided their fifth dispensary since February. They hit Nature's Love and arrested at least one person. The identity of the man taken into custody Friday, and if anything was seized from the dispensary was not immediately known.

On Tuesday, protestors picketed the Garden Grove city council over the city's recent talks with federal authorities about helping them crack down on dispensaries. They also gave council members an earful once the meeting got underway.

Also on Tuesday, Tulare County amended its code enforcement measures for medical grows. Now, for the first time, the county can use administrative code enforcement proceedings that could lead to a series of penalties that include $100-a-day fines for each violation of the county's medical marijuana ordinance.The ordinance specifies where medical marijuana can be grown and distributed, along with other requirements, which include requiring the plants be grown in enclosed buildings with security.

Also on Tuesday, the Palm Springs city council approved a fourth dispensary. Three permitted dispensaries already operate in the city, as do at least a half dozen unlicensed ones, clustered in an area known as "Little Amsterdam."

Also on Tuesday, Nevada County approved marijuana cultivation ordinances on a 4-1 vote of the board of supervisors. The ordinances limit cultivation to 100 square feet in parcels smaller than two acres, 300 square feet in parcels smaller than five acres, 400 square feet in parcels less than 10 acres, and 600 square feet in parcels smaller than 20 acres. Unhappy residents shouted that supervisors should be voted out, and growers are threatening a lawsuit over the restrictions.

Also on Tuesday, the Vallejo city council retreated from plans to regulate dispensaries. They cited uncertainty under state law and fears of federal prosecution if they regulate. Residents accused the council of cowardice, but the council was not swayed. 

Also on Tuesday, Lake County came out against a June ballot measure that would give "right to farm" privileges to medical marijuana growers. The board of supervisors voted to oppose Measure D, which would also allow medical pot growers to cultivate up to 12 mature plants in residential backyards of less than a half acre outside of city limits in Lake County. More plants could be grown on larger parcels, with a maximum of 84 plants allowed on properties that are seven acres or more. The ballot measure is opposed by county and police officials, the local Sierra Club, the Chamber of Commerce and state and local farm bureaus. Opponents say it will lower property values and increase pot-related crime.

Colorado

On Monday, a Denver attorney reported she had lost her liability insurance because part of her practice involves representing medical-marijuana businesses. Ann Toney's insurance company, Hanover Insurance Group, explained that her practice "does not meet current underwriting guidelines because of the following risk factors: Area of practice involving medical marijuana." This is believed to be the first time in the nation an attorney has lost her insurance because of doing medical marijuana-related work.

Also on Monday, 25 more dispensaries were ordered to close by federal prosecutors. All of the targeted dispensaries are within 1,000 feet of schools, which does not violate Colorado law, but which federal prosecutors are using as an arbitrary benchmark for targeting them.

On Wednesday, the state legislature adjourned without passing a drugged driving bill that would have criminalized drivers solely on the basis of having five nanograms or more of THC per milliliter of blood in their systems. The bill had passed the Senate, but didn't get a floor vote in the House.

Connecticut

Last Saturday, the state Senate approved a medical marijuana bill. The measure had already passed the House, and Gov. Dan Malloy (D) has already said he will sign it. Connecticut will become the 17^th medical marijuana state.

Iowa

On Sunday, news came that three out of four state Democratic district platforms support medical marijuana.

Michigan

Last Thursday, the House passed a package of four medical marijuana bills that advocates don't think very much of. The Marijuana Policy Project said it is "opposed to the package because of concerns that the bills would compromise patients’ privacy and subject medical marijuana to more onerous restrictions than those that apply to more dangerous prescribed narcotics." It is urging supporters to voice their objections to House bills 4834, 4851, and 4856.

Montana

On Monday, advocates suing to repeal Montana's restrictive medical marijuana law said they need more donations to continue. The Montana Cannabis Industry Association said the case has cost about $150,000 and it needs another $100,000 to take the case to the state Supreme Court.

Also on Monday, the number of medical marijuana patients had dropped below 11,000, continuing a steep decline since the number of card-holders peaked at more than 31,000 at the end of last May. The number of providers has also declined by more than 90%, to slightly more than 400. This in the wake of a federal crackdown and the state legislature passing very restrictive legislation.

Rhode Island

On Wednesday, the state Senate approved a compromise dispensary bill. It would restrict dispensaries to 1,500 ounces of usable marijuana at one time and limit cultivation to 150 plants. Patients and caregivers would be able to sell their excess to the dispensaries. The bill now must be approved by the House. Dispensaries had been stalled after Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) quailed in the face of federal threats; this compromise legislation should assuage his worries.

Wisconsin

Late last month, the Wisconsin Medical Society voted to adopt a new position on medical marijuana. It calls for further controlled studies on medical marijuana and a review of the plant's Schedule I status.

back to top

Connecticut to Become 17th Medical Marijuana State

The Connecticut Senate gave final approval to a medical marijuana bill early Saturday morning, and Gov. Dannel Malloy (D) said in a statement later that same day that he will sign it. The bill, House Bill 5389, passed the House last week.

Medical marijuana is already legal in 16 states and the District of Columbia.

The middle-of-the-night final vote came only after medical marijuana foe Sen. Toni Boucher (R-Wilton) filibustered for most of the 10 hours of debate. She fruitlessly introduced various amendments in a bid to derail it, but none of them passed.

Boucher mixed statistics and stories as she argued that marijuana isn't medicine, that illegal use among youth would expand, that licensed dispensaries are "little more than dope dealers with licenses," and that federal non-recognition of medical marijuana could expose anyone involved in it to civil or criminal liability. But hers was a decidedly minority view.

"We can probably find a study that will contradict every single study Senator Boucher has cited this evening," said Sen. Eric Coleman (D-Bloomfield) co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

The tightly crafted bill would allow patients with specified diseases and conditions to obtain a written certification from a physician allowing them to use medical marijuana. The marijuana would be grown indoors at one of no more than 10 licensed grows and sold at one of no more than 10 licensed dispensaries. It will be sold by specially trained pharmacists, who must be on staff at the dispensaries.

Gov. Malloy, whose office helped craft the law, said it was designed to avoid conflict with the federal government, which has been cracking down on medical marijuana distribution in states where it is more loosely regulated.

"We don't want Connecticut to follow the path pursued by some other states, which essentially would legalize marijuana for anyone willing to find the right doctor and get the right prescription. In my opinion, such efforts run counter to federal law. Under this proposal, however, the Department of Consumer Protection will be able to carefully regulate and monitor the medicinal use of this drug in order to avoid the problems encountered in some other states," he said in the Saturday statement.

"This legislation is about accomplishing one objective: providing relief to those with severe medical illnesses. I look forward to signing the bill when it reaches my desk."

back to top

Connecticut Bill to Strengthen Racial Profiling Ban Passes

The Connecticut House Monday passed a bill to strengthen the state's 12-year-old racial profiling reporting, which some senators said was not being followed by police. The bill, Senate Bill 364, passed the Senate last month. Gov. Dannel Malloy (D) said in statement Monday he would sign it into law.

]"More than 10 years ago, as the mayor of Stamford, I was proud to stand with the men and women of the Stamford Police Department on Martin Luther King Day to announce that we did not tolerate racial profiling and would lead the efforts to ensure its elimination. As governor, I will continue to insist that every effort is taken to protect individual rights in every community and that racial profiling is eliminated," Malloy said. "This is a real problem that deserves a real solution, and my administration is committed to carrying out the spirit and letter of this law. I look forward to signing the bill when it arrives at my desk."

The original racial profiling law was pushed by then-Senator Alvin Penn, who spoke out loudly against the practice. Penn said he himself had been stopped by police for no reason except for his skin color. Penn died of pancreatic cancer in 2003.

That law required police departments to report on each traffic stop, noting the driver's race and the reason for the stop. In the first six months the law was in effect, police wrote 315,000 reports, and a 2001 study of those reports found that blacks accounted for only 8% of the state's population, but 12% of the traffic stops.

Still, the state's top prosecutor said at the time that the numbers did not suggest racial profiling.

"We did not find a pattern of racial profiling,'' said then Chief State's Attorney John M. Bailey. "Minority drivers do not appear to be treated systematically any different than non-minority drivers.''

In the decade since then, the issue has quietly festered while police departments quietly quit reporting. According to Senate Democrats, only 27 of the state's 92 police departments are complying with the law.

Last month, the head of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, Douglas Fuchs, told the Hartford Courant that most departments were complying with the law. He added that racial profiling data does not "accurately portray how Connecticut law enforcement across the state conducts business,'' although he did not explain why not.

But former state Rep. Michael Lawlor, who is now Gov. Malloy's (D) chief criminal justice advisor, disagreed. "The fact of racial profiling is very real. Almost every African-American has a story like that [of profiling], and very few white people do. It's real.''

Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams (D) also disagreed, saying, "Racial profiling is a problem in Connecticut and throughout the United States… It's time to strengthen' the law."

Malloy said his administration hadn't waited for the law to pass to start working on its provisions.

"Our administration has already begun taking some of the steps required under the legislation," he said. "Last year, I instructed the Office of Policy and Management, with the help of Central Connecticut State University, to create the advisory group called for in the bill, and they have begun to develop standardized methods and guidelines to improve collection of racial profiling data."

back to top

Colorado Per Se Drugged Driving Bill Dies

A bill that would make it illegal to drive with more than a certain amount of THC in one's system has died in the state legislature. The bill, Senate Bill 117, passed the Senate last Tuesday and was approved by the House Judiciary Committee last Thursday, but failed to make it to a House floor vote before the session ended Wednesday.

Under the bill, drivers found with more than five nanograms of THC per milliliter in their blood are automatically presumed to be driving under the influence of drugs, even if they can show they were not impaired. That makes it a "per se" drugged driving law, where the presence of a set amount of a specified chemical is enough to win conviction.

Per se laws currently apply to drunk driving, where a blood alcohol content of 0.08% is all the evidence needed to convict someone for that offense. Per se drugged driving laws have also been passed in a number of states, but the science around the effects of marijuana on drivers is much less settled, and that's leading some to cry foul.

A similar bill nearly passed last year, winning approval in the House, but was derailed in the Senate at the last minute, at least in part thanks to Westword marijuana columnist William Breathes, who underwent drug and driving tests the day after smoking marijuana. Breathes demonstrated that his ability to drive was unimpaired, even though the THC level in his blood was three times that which would have gotten him convicted of DUID.

The bill barely made it out of the Senate this week. It appeared ready to die on a voice vote, but then bill sponsor Sen. Steve King (R-Grand Junction) called for a roll call vote, and it passed 18-17.

The bill faced similar drama in the House Judiciary Committee, where it was also approved by a single vote. There, Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling), sat silently for almost an entire minute when called to cast his vote. He then voted in favor of the bill, while signaling that he didn't really support it.

"I have issues with the bill," Sonnenberg said. "The truth is I think it needs a full hearing in front of the house... I had made the commitment to make sure that hearing happens."

Foes of the bill said it is almost certain to result in people being convicted of impaired driving when they are not impaired. They also noted that, unlike alcohol, there is no practical way for people who have used marijuana to test their blood levels.

"You really can't be sure every time you step in your car if you're going to be convicted as a result of it," said Rep. Daniel Kagan, (D-Cherry Hills Village) before voting against the measure.

While the bill easily passed the House last year, opponents early this week still hoped to kill or amend it either in the Appropriations Committee or on the House floor. The Marijuana Policy Project was asking that the bill be amended to make the five nanogram limit presumptive instead of per se, so that a driver's having exceeded that limit could be used as evidence of impairment, but would not result in an automatic conviction. It was also asking for an amendment to exempt medical marijuana patients from the law.

But now, the bill is dead--for the second year in a row.

back to top

New Hampshire Marijuana Decriminalization Bill Killed

A bill to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana died last Wednesday in the New Hampshire Senate. The Senate voted without debate to kill the bill, which had passed the House by one vote in March, but faced a veto threat from Gov. John Lynch (D).

The bill, House Bill 1526, would have made possession of less than a half-ounce of pot a violation punishable by a $250 fine. A second offense would garner a $500 fine, and subsequent offenses would be considered misdemeanors punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1000 fine.

Under current New Hampshire law, possession is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine.

While the Senate did not debate the bill Wednesday, it had a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee last month. There, familiar tropes were trotted out on both sides of the issue, with opponents saying it would send the wrong message to kids and supporters saying saddling young people with criminal records over pot would harm them.

"This would undermine the fundamental message in the schools and that parents try to teach, and this is that using marijuana is a bad choice, is the wrong choice," said Assistant Attorney General Karin Eckel, who was also speaking on behalf of the state police chiefs association.

But the current law is not proportionate to the crime, retorted Claire Ebel, executive director of he New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union. "The effect of marijuana convictions on young people includes the inability to be employed in most government agencies or to join the military. It means they can't get student loans," she said.

New Hampshire's stance on decriminalization is increasingly a minority one in the region. Pot is already decriminalized in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York. Possession remains a misdemeanor only in Vermont and Rhode Island, along with the Granite State.

back to top

Charlottesville Says Decriminalize or Regulate Marijuana

The Charlottesville, Virginia, city council approved a marijuana-related resolution Monday night calling on the governor and the legislature "to revisit the sentencing guidelines that merit jail terms for simple possession, do away with rules that suppose intent to distribute without evidence and give due consideration to sponsored state bills that would decriminalize, legalize or regulate marijuana like alcohol."

[Editor's Note: To find the actual resolution, click on the link above, select "May 7, 2012 (with background)," then scroll to the very end of the PDF file.]

Under current law, possession of marijuana is classified as a misdemeanor carrying punishment of up to 30 days in jail and/or fines of up to $500. Subsequent convictions carry a jail sentence of up to a year and/or fines of up to $2,500.

The council had been presented with two resolutions, the version that passed and one that also included language making marijuana possession the lowest law enforcement priority, but councilors balked at the lowest priority language, saying they feared it would send the wrong message to children. Two of the five-member council supported the lowest priority language, but they dropped that in order to pick up a third vote on the decriminalization and regulation language.

"I think it's perfectly legitimate for us to say as an elected body that there are other priorities and that we're going the wrong direction when it comes to the war on drugs," said Councilor Dave Norris in remarks reported by the Charlottesville Daily Progress.

"Obviously, we don't have the power to decriminalize marijuana, but I think it does send the message actually in support of those who can," said Councilor Dede Smith.

"I think that decriminalization has more to with regulation and control than it does with saying it's okay," said Councilor Kristin Szakos, the swing vote who suggested the one-paragraph compromise.

Two council members, Mayor Satyendra Huja and Councilor Kathy Galvin, voted against any reform resolution.

"I think passing such a resolution... would detract from community health, safety and welfare of our citizens," said Huja.

"I honestly cannot think that this bully pulpit can be used to send such mixed messages to our children," said Galvin. "We are spending a lot of time talking about state and federal law. This is not something we should be spending local time doing."

City police lobbied against the lowest priority language, saying that marijuana possession is already a low priority, accounting for only about 100 arrests a year out of the 5,000 made by police, and that many of those busts were incident to arrest on other charges.

"The officers in the police department are duty bound to enforce the laws of the city, state and federal governments. However, all police departments must balance the pressing enforcement needs of a community with their resources," read a memo to councilors from City Manager Maurice Jones and city Police Chief Timothy Longo. "The Charlottesville Police Department has done exactly that by utilizing its funding to appropriately address higher priority crimes in our city than marijuana possession. Knowing this, staff believes it is unnecessary to include a directive from council to de-prioritize the enforcement of personal marijuana use."

Public comment at the meeting was mixed, with the first six speakers opposing the resolution. Some referred to their own struggles with addiction, while others described it as an insidious drug that robs addicts of true happiness.

"Charlottesville will become the city of potheads," warned city resident Melanie Roberts.

But local attorney Jeff Fogel supported the resolutions, including the lowest priority language, and called the war on drugs "a colossal failure" that led to violence. "I don't think we elected the police department to make policy or law in this community," Fogel said. "And you know what, I'm not sure the police department does either."

The resolution was citizen-initiated, brought to the council by Jordan McNeish. Formerly involved with Occupy Charlotte, the 23-year-old activist has since founded a local NORML chapter. He said he had been busted for pot possession in the past.

Charlottesville is now on the record for marijuana reform. Where are Norfolk and Newport News, Roanoke and Richmond?

back to top

LEAP Hiring Speakers Bureau Director (Applications Due Tomorrow!)

[Sorry for the late notice -- we just heard about this!]

Job Posting: Speakers Bureau Director (Full Time)
http://www.leap.cc/hiring-speakersbureaudirector/

Application Deadline: Friday, May 11, 2012 Start Date: May 28, 2012

Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area (preferred)

LEAP is an international nonprofit educational organization created to give voice to law-enforcers who believe the US war on drugs has failed and who wish to support alternative policies that will lower the incidence of death, disease, crime, and addiction. The Speakers Bureau Director performs a combination of duties including policy advocacy, team management, recruiting and training, and cold calling various venues to suggest a LEAP speaker. This position reports to the Executive Director.

Speakers Bureau Director responsibilities include but are not limited to:

• Coordinating the speaking engagements for LEAP speakers across the full spectrum of venues, including colleges and universities; civic, professional, and religious organizations; legislative hearings; conferences; and more. Booking is done both directly and through the management of teams of staff and volunteers. It includes pitching venues, arranging all details and making sure all parties have them, and occasionally organizing transportation and lodging. The speakers bureau team is also responsible for obtaining funding from organizations to cover LEAP's speaking expenses and honoraria when possible.
• Managing the activities of the speakers bureau. This includes recruiting speakers, coordinating the vetting process, initially training speakers, collecting and providing feedback, and making sure that current speakers have all the resources they need to represent LEAP. As part of this management, the speakers bureau director is responsible for reviewing the application process, running the speakers' training web site, writing new speakers' bios, and being available to answer any and all questions and concerns from current speakers.
• Drafting and keeping up-to-date various internal and external policy documents including testimony, speeches, slide presentations, handouts, fact sheets, and summaries for speakers to use in educating the public. The speakers bureau director is also responsible for staying current on drug policy issues and making sure that the members of the speakers bureau have access to the latest statistics and other preparation and materials.
• Collaboration both within and outside the organization. LEAP supports reform in dozens of states in partnership with organizations nationwide. The speakers bureau director will work with local and state campaigns in order to coordinate LEAP's role in providing law enforcement support. He/she will also work closely with LEAP's media, outreach and finance directors and office managers to ensure that speakers' activities are covered in the press, reimbursed, and recorded accurately in the organization's records.

Required qualifications include:

• At least three years of relevant policy advocacy or organizing experience;
• Excellent communications skills, both written and oral;
• Excellent interpersonal skills;
• Demonstrated ability to manage and mentor teams;
• Enthusiasm, optimism, and a sense of humor;
• Flexibility and an ability to work in a rapidly-changing environment
• Demonstrated commitment to social justice issues, preferably drug policy reform;
• Familiarity with Google Mail and Google Docs;
• Comfort with selling ideas over the phone and by email;
• Comfort with frequent conference calls; and
• Spanish language fluency a plus but not required.

More Information About LEAP

Who we are: Established in 2002 by one Canadian and four American cops, LEAP has become an international organization of law enforcement professionals (police officers; parole and corrections staff; judges; prosecutors; prison wardens; DEA, Homeland Security and FBI agents) with over 60,000 supporters throughout 80 countries. LEAP has over 150 speakers.

What we believe: We believe that drug prohibition is the true cause of much of the social and personal damage that has historically been attributed to drug use. It is prohibition that makes marijuana worth more than gold, and heroin worth more than uranium -- while giving criminals a monopoly over their supply. Driven by the huge profits from this monopoly, criminal gangs bribe and kill each other, law enforcers, innocent civilians and children alike. Their trade is unregulated and they are, therefore, beyond our control. We thus believe in a legal, regulated and controlled system for drugs.

What we do: LEAP has established a speakers bureau of knowledgeable current and former law enforcement professionals who educate diverse audiences about the negative impacts of our current drug policies.

Compensation

Salary based on experience. Benefits include paid vacation, paid sick leave and healthcare package.

To Apply

Applicants should email a resume and cover letter describing the applicant's interest in this position to Shaleen Title at [email protected].

back to top