Cannabis News DrugSense
  Nevada's Distribution Law Unconstitutional
Posted by CN Staff on March 03, 2012 at 17:50:58 PT
By The Associated Press 
Source: Associated Press 

medical Las Vegas -- In a decision destined for appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court, a state court judge has ruled the state's medical marijuana distribution law is unconstitutional.

At the same time Friday, Clark County District Judge Donald Mosley dismissed drug trafficking charges against two men who operated a storefront pot dispensary in Las Vegas.

In his order, Mosley concluded the law frustrates the intent of a voter-approved state constitutional amendment by failing to clear the way for a patient to legally obtain marijuana, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported.

"It is apparent to the Court that the statutory scheme set out for the lawful distribution of medical marijuana is either poorly contemplated or purposely constructed to frustrate the implementation of constitutionally mandated access to the substance," the judge wrote in his decision.

Mosley, who retired from his judgeship Friday, stressed that he isn't a medical marijuana proponent, but was sworn to uphold the state's constitution.

He threw out charges Sept. 12 against the same two men, Sin City Co-Op owners Nathan Hamilton and Leonard Schwingdorf, but prosecutors obtained new indictments against them two days later.

Prosecutors did not return a phone call seeking comment about his latest ruling.

Attorney Bob Draskovich, whose firm represents Hamilton and Schwingdorf, was not available for comment, his office said. A news conference was scheduled for Monday.

Mosley's ruling came five months after another Clark County District Court judge reached a different conclusion in a separate but similar medical marijuana criminal case.

In September, Judge Doug Smith allowed an indictment to stand against six people arrested in a police raid of a dispensary called Jolly Green Meds.

But while Smith rejected a challenge of the state's medical marijuana laws, he noted that state law fails to provide a way for patients with a doctor's prescription to legally obtain marijuana.

The state Supreme Court is expected to hear appeals and resolve the clash of legal opinions.

Draskovich has said the only way a patient now can legally possess marijuana in Nevada is to first commit a crime to obtain it. He also has accused the Legislature of failing to abide by the state constitutional amendment that led to enactment of the law.

Mosley agreed, saying the law falls short in providing a "realistic manner" in which qualified buyers and distributors of medical marijuana can operate.

Under the amendment ratified by Nevada voters in 2000, the Legislature was charged with passing a law regarding "appropriate methods" for distribution of marijuana to authorized patients.

One state law allows medical marijuana cardholders to possess, deliver or produce minute amounts of marijuana for pain relief, while other state laws make it illegal to buy or sell marijuana.

By disallowing any payment for the herb, patients must rely on the good will of others to obtain the substance, which Mosley found ludicrous.

"It is absurd to suppose that from an unspecified source 'free' marijuana will be provided to those who are lawfully empowered to receive it," he wrote.

Mosley also criticized the amount of medical marijuana allowed to be produced and possessed. The law allows someone registered to possess 1 ounce, three mature plants and four immature plants at one time.

"This arrangement is of course ridiculous and in effect would make impossible any commercial distribution of medical marijuana," the judge wrote.

More than a dozen defendants in several cases are facing criminal charges for distributing medical marijuana.

Authorities have closed down nearly all local dispensaries that distribute marijuana to state-registered patients, claiming the cooperatives violate state law.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Published: March 3, 2012
Copyright: 2012 The Associated Press

CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives
http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help    Share on Facebook Share on stumbleupon digg it Share on reddit Share on del.icio.us

 
Comment #10 posted by FoM on March 06, 2012 at 07:58:44 PT
CropReport
I never was in Vegas but I was in Reno. I remember them going around offering free drinks (I don't drink either) and I thought that is how they make you be foolish when gambling. I just walked around feeling quite fine and wouldn't drink but watched people doing dumb things all tore up on alcohol. I went with $35 and said when I blow it I am done. I played the nickle slots for hours and left with $35 and had fun. They don't like common sense in those places so they don't like cannabis since it helps people have more common sense.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #9 posted by CropReport on March 06, 2012 at 07:25:52 PT
Hope and FoM
I don't drink, not for over five years, nor do I gamble, but Vegas is still fun. Even more so when you can take in the whole calamity with an elevated head.

I can't imagine what cannabis would do for their flagging music and entertainment ticket sales. I predict :)

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #8 posted by The GCW on March 05, 2012 at 13:03:48 PT
Guns but not cannabis
Remember reading how sick people can not have cannabis on school campuses??? Not high schools, grade schools or colleges?

Now in Colorado it is ok, though, to carry a concealed gun.

Colorado Supreme Court affirms that CU students can carry licensed guns on campus

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20104814

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #7 posted by Hope on March 05, 2012 at 11:11:04 PT
comment 5
That poll doesn't look like I thought it would.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #6 posted by museman on March 05, 2012 at 07:05:39 PT
disvet
They've been lawurinating all over the constitution since they superimposed the British "Bar" over the intended system of fair and impartial justice that had as it's 'First Premise' that everyone is "Innocent until proven guilty."

It took them some time, because America was/is BIG compared to their little kingdoms and nations that they sought to transplant here, but the same tools that the people use to enhance their lives, like mass communication, internet, fast traveling vehicles, have been used as infrastructure to create a Lawuri-nation.

Orwell warned us. Huxley warned us. J.R.R. Tolkein warned us. And let us not forget other older warnings that have been totally hijacked and misconstrued by the powers that be; specifically prophetic, wrapped in centuries of regiosity and it's attending ignorance.

Of course, while we were in school, (if there were any real teachers not slaves to the Lawyer-created systems of 'correct behavior' -in relation to the state, not necessarily to other people, the evidence of their existence is slim) history was taught at such a slant, the truth just slid off. So my generation, for example grew up with a huge percentage not having a clue about many things, because what was taught was statistical manipulations of pieces of the truth, while denying the most important aspects, like LOVE!

We were taught many erroneous things about our country, it's history, and the reasons why a society that spouts "Equality" has the most inequal system of laws and governances irregardless of their twisted 'legaleze' re-write of the english language.

I am a vet. I volunteered with some idea that I got from school and TV about patriotism. VietNam, and its peripheral actions gave me (and many other vets) my first glimpse at hard core reality.

Yes, I have noticed how people fail to recognize the various catch22's that have been set up by the lawurinators - I like that term, it seems so appropriate- like the fact that they all get wages for doing their job, yet they have all these fees and charges for the very services they are supposed to be paid for by OUR TAXES!

I have noticed how people fail to notice how, even though the 'burden of proof' is constitutionally (or at least it was before the people of america endorsed Bush and the Patriot Act) on the state, the people have to come up with all the energy; money, time, etc., while the "justice" system literally sits on its ass.

Yes, I've noticed how the people seemed to have missed the fact that for a country/government supposedly run by 'the people' there sure is one hell of a monopoly of those pissy lawyers filling all the positions- and they run for office again and again and again.

In a nation governed exclusively by lawyers, is it any wonder they are all wealthy?

The "Rule of Law" is as corrupt a notion as was ever voiced, particularly where the modern practitioners are concerned, and needs to be abolished.

The Law of Love will abide, it will flourish, in every heart that chooses it. Suffice it to say there isn't much room in the hearts of evil people -like most lawyers, if not all, for THAT law doesn't serve the selfish purposes and agendas of the politicians, and corporate lawurinators.

Yes they've been setting up this New World Order for some time, and they think they just about have every thing in place, a block for every liberty -unless you cough up the cash, a 'law' controlling every action -including 'intent'.

But it will avail them nothing in the end.

Some have said to me, here as a matter of fact, that 'it will never happen' and that I 'live in a fantasy world' to think that it could.

Those voices are nothing more than the hollow echoes of a dying consciousness, and my original anger at their stupidity has morphed to pity. Because after the dust clears, if any of those foolish -but full-of-themselves people are still left standing, they will be naked and alone. Truly pitiful.

So we need a new revolutionary flag;

"Don't Lawurinate on me!"

LEGALIZE FREEDOM

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by The GCW on March 05, 2012 at 04:51:29 PT
POLL: What's your take on marijuana?
This poll is in My local newspaper.

What's your take on marijuana?

http://www.summitdaily.com/

*It should be legal for anyone over 18 or 21

*It should be completely illegal as in the past

*It should be legal for medicinal uses only

*It should be somewhat legal but not as readily available as alcohol

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by disvet13 on March 05, 2012 at 03:50:29 PT:

lawurinatin
notice how the lawyers took it upon themselves to refile the charges, even tho the judge recognized the voter mandate. the lawyers never get done lawurinatin, following their own agenda's...spending your tax dollars. they never get done playing adversarial process bureaucracy, it's what they teach them in college, spending your tax dollars. it's a thought process cancer that eats every tax dollar it can find, a self imploding end to the Constitution. the element that has invaded our government. woodrow wilson.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by Hope on March 04, 2012 at 18:25:25 PT
Hey CropReport
I agree... but FoM is probably right.

Alcohol does blur the judgment and it's been my experience that cannabis can make things clearer... like why you shouldn't blow your last dollar in a slot machine.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by FoM on March 04, 2012 at 07:52:06 PT
CropReport
I believe alcohol blinds them. People that drink can get careless when gambling. People that only smoke Cannabis and go to a casino would be more reserved and know better when to stop. So I guess it's all about the money.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #1 posted by CropReport on March 04, 2012 at 06:42:36 PT
Silly Nevada :)
In Nevada you can pay a woman for sex, rent machine guns and gamble on cards, dice and sports. How legal access to cannabis has escaped the notice of the overseers of revenue in that state is beyond comprehension.

Personally, I think it should be available in the mini-bar, right next to the booze, cigarettes, cigars and the eleven dollar pistachios.

[ 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 March 03, 2012 at 17:50:58