Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
Nine marijuana dispensaries in Fresno must shut their doors while attorneys battle in court over whether city zoning laws banning dispensaries can trump the state laws that allow them.
Fresno County Superior Court Judge Alan Simpson made his ruling Wednesday while upholding a temporary restraining order sought by the city. He set a trial date for January.
Attorneys vowed to appeal in their effort to keep the dispensaries open until a full trial is staged to determine if they violate land-use regulations and pose a nuisance.
"We were more or less anticipating it," said attorney Richard D. Runcie, one of the state's most accomplished marijuana law litigators. "It's a well-thought opinion, but we disagree with some of the conclusions."
The medical marijuana debate is raging throughout California, with pot opponents trying to close or limit the number of shops and supporters seeking to win legalization through proposed ballot initiatives.
Considering Fresno's conservative politics, the 10 attorneys who argued in court last week knew they faced a tough time persuading the judge to change his stance. He had already issued one ruling in favor of the city.
Calls to dispensaries were greeted by recordings saying they were closed. One sarcastically ended with, "Thank you, city of Fresno."
Arguments centered on three points: whether city zoning laws can supersede state laws; how the Obama administration's new policy against pursuing medical marijuana cases factors into the situation; and whether a notice of appeal would stay the judge's decision and allow the dispensaries to remain open.
The Fresno City Council made it clear in 2006 it was attempting to ban marijuana dispensaries when it passed an ordinance saying the facilities must meet all state and federal laws.
The federal government still says the drug is illegal, even though 14 states have passed laws allowing the prescribed use of medical marijuana.
"Maybe they should move to San Francisco," council member Lee Brand said of Fresno residents who use pot for health reasons.
The judge's decision affirms the city's right to control its land-use issues, said Deputy City Attorney Douglas Sloan. Owners of dispensaries that fail to close would be subject to fines or jail time if convicted of contempt of court.
Wednesday's hearing was the first California courtroom argument about pot since the U.S. attorney general issued its directive about medical marijuana earlier this month.
Attorney Kenneth Clark argued the federal memo is evidence the nation's top attorney believes Congress was not considering medical uses for marijuana when it wrote drug laws in the 1970s.
"These guidelines show that the federal government is acknowledging states' rights as separate from the federal law on marijuana trafficking," Clark said. "The federal statute was drafted to prevent the illegal distribution of marijuana."
The federal policy change did not alter federal law, Sloan argued.
Judge Simpson agreed with Sloan that state law does not pre-empt enforcement of zoning laws.
He ultimately ruled that the dispensaries violate federal law, which make them in violation of local zoning ordinances.
"While this was an interesting development," Simpson wrote of the federal policy, "it's impact was strictly limited to prosecutorial discretion."
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: washingtonpost.com
Author: TRACIE CONE
Copyright: 2009 The Associated Press
Contact: (washingtonpost.com)
Website: washingtonpost.com
Fresno County Superior Court Judge Alan Simpson made his ruling Wednesday while upholding a temporary restraining order sought by the city. He set a trial date for January.
Attorneys vowed to appeal in their effort to keep the dispensaries open until a full trial is staged to determine if they violate land-use regulations and pose a nuisance.
"We were more or less anticipating it," said attorney Richard D. Runcie, one of the state's most accomplished marijuana law litigators. "It's a well-thought opinion, but we disagree with some of the conclusions."
The medical marijuana debate is raging throughout California, with pot opponents trying to close or limit the number of shops and supporters seeking to win legalization through proposed ballot initiatives.
Considering Fresno's conservative politics, the 10 attorneys who argued in court last week knew they faced a tough time persuading the judge to change his stance. He had already issued one ruling in favor of the city.
Calls to dispensaries were greeted by recordings saying they were closed. One sarcastically ended with, "Thank you, city of Fresno."
Arguments centered on three points: whether city zoning laws can supersede state laws; how the Obama administration's new policy against pursuing medical marijuana cases factors into the situation; and whether a notice of appeal would stay the judge's decision and allow the dispensaries to remain open.
The Fresno City Council made it clear in 2006 it was attempting to ban marijuana dispensaries when it passed an ordinance saying the facilities must meet all state and federal laws.
The federal government still says the drug is illegal, even though 14 states have passed laws allowing the prescribed use of medical marijuana.
"Maybe they should move to San Francisco," council member Lee Brand said of Fresno residents who use pot for health reasons.
The judge's decision affirms the city's right to control its land-use issues, said Deputy City Attorney Douglas Sloan. Owners of dispensaries that fail to close would be subject to fines or jail time if convicted of contempt of court.
Wednesday's hearing was the first California courtroom argument about pot since the U.S. attorney general issued its directive about medical marijuana earlier this month.
Attorney Kenneth Clark argued the federal memo is evidence the nation's top attorney believes Congress was not considering medical uses for marijuana when it wrote drug laws in the 1970s.
"These guidelines show that the federal government is acknowledging states' rights as separate from the federal law on marijuana trafficking," Clark said. "The federal statute was drafted to prevent the illegal distribution of marijuana."
The federal policy change did not alter federal law, Sloan argued.
Judge Simpson agreed with Sloan that state law does not pre-empt enforcement of zoning laws.
He ultimately ruled that the dispensaries violate federal law, which make them in violation of local zoning ordinances.
"While this was an interesting development," Simpson wrote of the federal policy, "it's impact was strictly limited to prosecutorial discretion."
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: washingtonpost.com
Author: TRACIE CONE
Copyright: 2009 The Associated Press
Contact: (washingtonpost.com)
Website: washingtonpost.com
