Cannabis News Stop the Drug War!
  Initiative On Pot Won't Pass Muster
Posted by FoM on July 06, 2001 at 17:08:32 PT
By Doug Caruso, Dispatch City Hall Reporter 
Source: Columbus Dispatch 

cannabis Ask Dennis Pusateri about an initiative seeking to remove criminal penalties for the misdemeanor possession of marijuana in Columbus, and you'll hear the conflict in the defense lawyer's voice.

On the one hand, he believes Ohio and federal drug laws are too harsh. And there's a personal element: The leader of the initiative campaign, Kenneth Schweickart, is the son of Gary Schweickart, who died in 1990 after a career of taking controversial cases and is a legend among Columbus' criminal-defense lawyers.

On the other hand, Pusateri said, even if it makes the ballot and passes, the initiative is likely to make no legal difference.

"It's just not written in a clear, enforceable way,'' Pusateri said. "You've got a well-meaning political organization that probably hasn't gotten the proper legal advice.''

Pusateri isn't alone in his assessment. Other defense lawyers yesterday agreed that although the initiative could spur much-needed debate on the reform of marijuana laws, it likely will mean nothing to people arrested for possessing the drug in Columbus.

On Tuesday, Schweickart and his group, For a Better Ohio, turned in 10,179 signatures on a petition that seeks to end criminal penalties and prosecution for the possession of up to 7 ounces of marijuana. If at least 7,213 of those signatures are valid, the issue would go before Columbus voters in November.

Schweickart said yesterday that he's certain the initiative will hold up to legal scrutiny if it passes.

"If the voters enact this, it's the will of the people,'' he said. "If it's passed into law, it will be the law.''

Not if it violates the state constitution.

"I sort of hate going against Kenny,'' said Don Ruben, a lawyer who said he stopped defending drug cases in the early 1990s after mandatory minimum sentencing made it too frustrating. "His heart's in the right place, but I just think it's sort of silly because it conflicts with the home-rule provision under the Ohio Constitution.''

Cities have home-rule powers to set their own laws, Ruben said, but they can't overturn state criminal codes.

"You can increase the penalties, but you cannot do away with the crime or decrease the penalties,'' he said.

Schweickart, who is pursuing a social-work degree at Ohio State University, said his research shows otherwise.

Cities cannot change felony laws, he said, but they can reduce misdemeanor penalties.

"They may not be familiar with examples of cities superseding the state,'' Schweickart said of his critics. "There are case studies that prove we can reduce misdemeanor law.''

He points to the city of Delaware, where a city code similar to the state's drug possession law does not require the revocation of an offender's driver's license. A state law requires that anyone convicted under state drug codes must lose his or her driver's license for at least six months.

But Peter Ruffing, city prosecutor in Delaware, said the city's code does not conflict with state law. When the state legislature passed its license-revocation law, he said, it did not require that cities with similar laws also revoke driver's licenses. Had the state required cities with similar codes to follow the revocation law, Ruffing said, Delaware would have no choice but to follow it.

The situation is different, he said, than what Schweickart proposes: a city law that tells city prosecutors and police officers not to enforce the state's misdemeanor marijuana law.

"I don't think a city code could say you're not allowed to uphold a particular state law,'' Ruffing said.

Even if the initiative isn't thrown out, any prosecutor worth his salt could find a way around it, said J. Elliot "Skip'' Van Dyne, who has practiced criminal-defense law since 1972.

"It's not for me to tell the prosecutors how to get around it,'' he said, "but even they're smart enough for that.''

Van Dyne, who taught law to Schweickart's father at Capital University, said the initiative is good for one thing.

"I think it can accomplish a debate,'' he said. "It's absolutely good for that.''

Note: State code would overrule local law.

Complete Title: Initiative On Pot Won't Pass Muster, Some Lawyers Say

Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Author: Doug Caruso, Dispatch City Hall Reporter
Published: Friday, July 6, 2001
Copyright: 2001 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact: letters@dispatch.com
Website: http://www.dispatch.com/

Related Articles & Web Site:

For a Better Ohio
http://www.ohiohemp.org/

Group Seeking Ballot Issue To Legalize Possession
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10217.shtml

Marijuana Issue May Go On Ballot
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10197.shtml

The Campaign To Decriminalize Pot
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10132.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #1 posted by meagain on July 13, 2001 at 07:40:49 PT
Say what?
Well then explain to me how Ann Arbors law supercedes state law and if anyone knows how did the Ann arbor law come to be???

[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on July 06, 2001 at 17:08:32