T
The420Guy
Guest
When a Fairbanks judge last month dismissed a local man's conviction for
marijuana possession based on a claim that he has a state constitutional
right to possess small amounts of pot in his home, the man's argument was
far from original.
Ever since voters in 1990 passed an initiative to criminalize possession of
any amount of marijuana in any location, attorneys, defendants and privacy
advocates have asserted that the law is unconstitutional as determined by
the 1975 state Supreme Court decision made in Ravin v. State.
The initiative, which then-drug czar William Bennett traveled to Alaska to
campaign for, passed by a 55 percent to 45 percent vote, striking down a
15-year-old right for adult Alaskans to possess pot for personal use in a
private place, a policy that was widely regarded as the most liberal in the
nation.
However, marijuana users and privacy advocates immediately vowed to fight
back, proclaiming that the initiative could not override the privacy
guarantee contained in the Alaska Constitution. In Anchorage, a group
calling itself Alaskans for Hemp Awareness scheduled an "Iditatok"
marijuana smoking session in a hotel and invited police to make arrests to
test the new law in court.
Eventually, the debate came to light in cases in the state's two highest
courts, the Alaska Court of Appeals and the Alaska Supreme Court.
But both of those courts have thus far avoided directly addressing whether
the marijuana laws enacted after the initiative conflict with the Ravin
decision. In the 2000 Supreme Court case of Brown v. Ely, a defendant tried
to use the Ravin decision to argue that federal Fish and Wildlife Service
officers violated his constitutional rights when they searched his home for
marijuana.
The justices, however, ruled that because federal law prohibits marijuana
use, the Ravin argument did not apply to the conduct of federal officers.
They did acknowledge in the opinion that "we have yet to address any
conflict between Ravin" and Alaska's marijuana laws.
The Court of Appeals, which is one step lower than the Supreme Court, has
also heard cases involving the Ravin argument, but has thus far never
declared that there is a conflict between the state constitution and
marijuana laws, ruling in one appeal that they could not consider the Ravin
issue because the defendant possessed more than the personal use amount
purportedly protected by the constitution.
It will likely take the courts to sort out the matter, according to a 1991
opinion by Assistant Attorney General Kathleen Strasbough. The opinion
offered then-Lt. Gov. John B. Coghill advice on whether to certify two
voter initiatives so they could go to the ballot.
Strasbough alluded to the Ravin decision in her letter to Coghill, writing
that it was appropriate for the initiative to go to voters even though a
possible conflict with the constitution existed.
"(The lieutenant governor) may not deny certification because a law not yet
enacted may be unconstitutional; the courts will make such a determination
when the matter is ripe, that is, if and when the law passes," Strasbough
wrote.
Strasbough still works in the Attorney General's office but was not at work
Friday and unavailable for comment.
While the courts sort out legal battles, several activists in recent years
have tried to get initiatives passed that would legalize all or some forms
of marijuana possession.
A group is trying to get an initiative on the November 2004 ballot that
would decriminalize and regulate the use of cannabis products, including
hemp and marijuana.
The measure would make legal the possession, cultivation, distribution and
consumption of marijuana and other hemp products for industrial, medicinal,
nutritional or private personal use.
It would also allow for the regulation of hemp products "in a manner
similar to alcohol or tobacco." Lt. Gov. Loren Leman would have to certify
the initiative before voters could decide on the measure.
Pubdate: Sun, 20 Jul 2003
Source: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner (AK)
Copyright: 2003 Fairbanks Publishing Company, Inc.
Contact: letters@newsminer.com
Website: newsminer.com | The voice of Interior Alaska
marijuana possession based on a claim that he has a state constitutional
right to possess small amounts of pot in his home, the man's argument was
far from original.
Ever since voters in 1990 passed an initiative to criminalize possession of
any amount of marijuana in any location, attorneys, defendants and privacy
advocates have asserted that the law is unconstitutional as determined by
the 1975 state Supreme Court decision made in Ravin v. State.
The initiative, which then-drug czar William Bennett traveled to Alaska to
campaign for, passed by a 55 percent to 45 percent vote, striking down a
15-year-old right for adult Alaskans to possess pot for personal use in a
private place, a policy that was widely regarded as the most liberal in the
nation.
However, marijuana users and privacy advocates immediately vowed to fight
back, proclaiming that the initiative could not override the privacy
guarantee contained in the Alaska Constitution. In Anchorage, a group
calling itself Alaskans for Hemp Awareness scheduled an "Iditatok"
marijuana smoking session in a hotel and invited police to make arrests to
test the new law in court.
Eventually, the debate came to light in cases in the state's two highest
courts, the Alaska Court of Appeals and the Alaska Supreme Court.
But both of those courts have thus far avoided directly addressing whether
the marijuana laws enacted after the initiative conflict with the Ravin
decision. In the 2000 Supreme Court case of Brown v. Ely, a defendant tried
to use the Ravin decision to argue that federal Fish and Wildlife Service
officers violated his constitutional rights when they searched his home for
marijuana.
The justices, however, ruled that because federal law prohibits marijuana
use, the Ravin argument did not apply to the conduct of federal officers.
They did acknowledge in the opinion that "we have yet to address any
conflict between Ravin" and Alaska's marijuana laws.
The Court of Appeals, which is one step lower than the Supreme Court, has
also heard cases involving the Ravin argument, but has thus far never
declared that there is a conflict between the state constitution and
marijuana laws, ruling in one appeal that they could not consider the Ravin
issue because the defendant possessed more than the personal use amount
purportedly protected by the constitution.
It will likely take the courts to sort out the matter, according to a 1991
opinion by Assistant Attorney General Kathleen Strasbough. The opinion
offered then-Lt. Gov. John B. Coghill advice on whether to certify two
voter initiatives so they could go to the ballot.
Strasbough alluded to the Ravin decision in her letter to Coghill, writing
that it was appropriate for the initiative to go to voters even though a
possible conflict with the constitution existed.
"(The lieutenant governor) may not deny certification because a law not yet
enacted may be unconstitutional; the courts will make such a determination
when the matter is ripe, that is, if and when the law passes," Strasbough
wrote.
Strasbough still works in the Attorney General's office but was not at work
Friday and unavailable for comment.
While the courts sort out legal battles, several activists in recent years
have tried to get initiatives passed that would legalize all or some forms
of marijuana possession.
A group is trying to get an initiative on the November 2004 ballot that
would decriminalize and regulate the use of cannabis products, including
hemp and marijuana.
The measure would make legal the possession, cultivation, distribution and
consumption of marijuana and other hemp products for industrial, medicinal,
nutritional or private personal use.
It would also allow for the regulation of hemp products "in a manner
similar to alcohol or tobacco." Lt. Gov. Loren Leman would have to certify
the initiative before voters could decide on the measure.
Pubdate: Sun, 20 Jul 2003
Source: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner (AK)
Copyright: 2003 Fairbanks Publishing Company, Inc.
Contact: letters@newsminer.com
Website: newsminer.com | The voice of Interior Alaska
