All Cannabis Sales Illegal: Gascon in San Francisco

[Payaso]

In another twist in the battle for legalization for medical use, San Francisco's District Attorney George Gascón has stated that all of the City’s 21 licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are illegal.

The City’s 21 licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are all illegal, according to a court filing by District Attorney George Gascón that could portend a seismic shift in San Francisco cannabis policy.

City law allows medical marijuana to be bought in businesses called dispensaries and delivered to patients who have been prescribed marijuana by a licensed physician. Dispensaries must acquire business licenses and seller’s permits from the state Board of Equalization before receiving city Department of Public Health permits to sell marijuana.

Yet in December, a woman was arrested for making a delivery on behalf of Mr. Nice Guy, a city-licensed dispensary whose storefront was shut down under pressure from the federal Justice Department. Police said the woman was arrested with $631 in cash, more than 100 plastic bags of dried marijuana buds and hashish, and 48 “edibles” — marijuana-laced cookies, brownies, or other treats.

Despite being presented with paperwork showing that the woman and buyer were licensed patients and that she was working on behalf of a registered dispensary, the DA charged her with two felony counts for marijuana possession and sales, said her attorney, former District Attorney Terence Hallinan.

In a legal brief, Gascón argued that the law is not on her side.

“While California’s medical marijuana laws may be complex, the law is clear that all sales of medical marijuana are illegal,” Gascón wrote. “The ... shell game that continues to be played with medical marijuana immunities does not change that conclusion.”

Gascón’s office cites the 1996 Compassionate Use Act as well as state court decisions to make his argument, which says medical marijuana patients must “participate directly in the cultivation of marijuana” to enjoy protection under the law.

“This means that people with AIDS have to be out digging in the dirt to enjoy protection under the law,” countered former District Attorney Terence Hallinan, who is representing the woman in court. “This is impossible.”

...

The inconsistent policies — with one county agency calling illegal what another one issues permits for — is “emblematic of the ongoing disconnect in San Francisco with regard to the city’s approach to medical cannabis,” complained Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco.

Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2012/03/gasc-n-all-sales-marijuana-are-illegal#ixzz1qNb5ROpO

 

[greenluv707]

funny most people in san fran dont even have space to grow the amount they need......crazy.........gonna keep my eyes on this for sure.

 

[resinryder]

The shell game. Looks like the DA wants to control the marble.

 

[RetroGrow]

These guys never quit.
I'm surprised no one has taken one of them out.

 

[astartes]

The shell game. Looks like the DA wants to control the marble.

Nah, too much work. They'll just grab the bets off the table in the middle of the game and run for the hills.

a.

 

[SeaMaiden]

WHERE in either the CUA or MMPA does it say that patients must be involved in the cultivation, or specifies that sales are outlawed? I've been absolutely PORING over the H&S code of late, and while I found a section that outlines what certain UC schools will do with cannabis research should they decide to take up the banner, I don't recall reading anything that even suggests what Gascon is saying it is. The only thing he can really point to are recent court decisions, which, as he knows as well as any other county counsellor, are in an extreme state of flux.

And, what about the Lake decision?

I got to bring that up yesterday.

 

[vince514]

gotta love the screwed up laws in cali..."either shit or get off the pot" already...its legal one day and then the next some tight ass decides to raid compassion clubs and denied patients their medicine..and to make sick people dig holes themselves to be protected by the "law" come on ..what a farce.....imho

 

[Grass Lands]

Its not the laws...the laws are very clear as to what can and cannot be done...the folks enforcing the laws are where its flawed.

However there are numerous folks who abuse and will twist the law to make a buck, sad but true we are all labeled within that group within the eyes of the enforcers.

 

[Grendelkhan]

Sounds like a certain DA has an election coming up....

 

[Payaso]

Sea Maiden, are you referring to Lake County's recent fiasco with the board of stupids?

I keep an eye on those clowns...ever since the days of Eddy Lepp I have been watching this torrid drama unfold before my very eyes.

 

[Yes4Prop215]

so does this protect personal home growers better than? if im ever raided for cultivation, i can say that since dispensary sales are illegal and cite the same thing gascon cited, that we must cultivate our own marijuana"....

the state is so stupid, they are basically willing to give up all the tax cash they make and drive everything back underground...good for the dealers though!

 

[Lebniis]

From experience, one delivery service in SF was bringing in 10k-20k even 30k on 4/20 in sales per day. They were licensed, taxed, inspected and put excess money in the bank. Most of what money didn't go to cover operational costs went into paying for after work parties and dinners. Every employ was paid cash for that days work at the end of the day.

One employ was pulled over while doing a delivery and was searched and had to provide paperwork saying the person was an employ and that they were making a delivery to a patient. 2 police and their sergeant let the employ go after citing them for a traffic violation.

I guess what I am saying, like Yes4Prop215, is that they would be stupid to let the tax money go when the dispensaries have been well established for awhile now. Keep regulating, no need to back step any more and put pot underground.

 

[Andyo]

shoot him

shoot him

If someone shot him in the arse he,d be screaming for his legal "pharma " pain killers
And charges against the assailant .
One twisted mind.A

 

[bruceinpacifica]

Herb Caen used to say of San Francisco, 'The city that knows how.
Herb must be turning over in his grave.
Being born & raised there I can only quote Forest Gump, 'Stupid is as stupid does'.
They're obviously taking their lead from a bigger bunch of morons, the ones in Washington DC.

 

[VirginHarvester]

I'm confident this SOB DA believes what he's doing is right after discussing it with a couple cronies over doubles of expensive scotch.

 

[VirginHarvester]

Anyone know why Sacramento shut down their dispensaries? Geez.

 

[vta]

In another twist in the battle for legalization for medical use, San Francisco's District Attorney George Gascón has stated that all of the City’s 21 licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are illegal.



Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2012/03/gasc-n-all-sales-marijuana-are-illegal#ixzz1qNb5ROpO

Sounds like he didn't get the news...

In a Recent Letter, the Originator of SB 420(Sen. Vasconcellos) Clarifies That Medical Cannabis Providers Can Make a Profit.

Here is the full read.....


Medical Marijuana Profit Is Allowed Under California Law

By Robert A. Raich

There is a widely held misconception that businesses in the California medical cannabis industry are prohibited from making a profit. In reality, no California law prohibits cannabis-related businesses from making a profit.

Opponents of medical cannabis, however, have done a masterful job of spreading disinformation since SB 420 was signed into law in 2003. That disinformation has become so prevalent that it is affecting safe access to medical cannabis by patients around the state and has prompted retired state Senator John Vasconcellos to release a letter [PDF] debunking the widely held misinterpretation that profit is not permitted for medical cannabis providers under California law.

Sen. Vasconcellos co-chaired Attorney General Bill Lockyer's Medical Marijuana Task Force that drafted what eventually became SB 420, which was passed by the California Legislature in 2003.

​As stated in his letter, Sen. Vasconcellos is "deeply concerned that in the nine years since we passed SB 420, certain people have evidently been advocating a marked misinterpretation of ... SB 420 - with regard to whether 'making a profit' is somehow not permitted for medical cannabis providers under state law."

The confusion stems from a passage in SB 420, codified at Section 11362.765(a) of the Health and Safety Code, stating as follows: "... nor shall anything in this section authorize any individual or group to cultivate or distribute marijuana for profit."

Sen. Vasconcellos denotes a self-evident fact about the language quoted above, namely, "Nothing in that section prohibits profit. Nothing in that section explicitly authorizes profit either. But I must point out that nobody is required to obtain an 'authorization' from the Legislature to make a profit in California."

In the most direct terms possible, his letter states that SB 420's "language does not in any respect purport to prohibit profit -- if that had been the intent, the language would have so stated clearly. It obviously does no such thing."

This misinterpretation arose because the words in SB 420 were "the result of intensive and laborious compromise and consensus." The issue of profit in the California medical cannabis industry was one over which opinions differed on the Task Force. "Although certain members of our Task Force did advocate for a prohibition on profit-making, that position was firmly rejected by the Task Force" in favor of the compromise language used in the bill.

The problem is that opponents of medical cannabis, for reasons of their own (having nothing whatsoever to do with the safety or efficacy of cannabis), having not achieved their goal in the language of SB 420, instead spread disinformation as a way to try to make it more difficult for California patients to get access to medicine. Sen. Vasconcellos' letter is an attempt to overcome that propaganda.

As with many aspects of California's medical cannabis law, there will be no definitive resolution of an issue until the California Supreme Court directly decides it. For the foregoing reasons, I expect the Court to concur with Sen. Vasconcellos' analysis if the question ever reaches the Court. In addition, a few local ordinances do purport to prohibit profit or "excessive profit" by cannabis providers, but those provisions are of questionable legality under our state Constitution, and under any circumstance, they have no relevance to the statewide applicability of SB 420.

There may be many good reasons for cannabis providers to operate on a nonprofit or not-for-profit basis, but adherence to California law is not necessarily one of them. For example, a cannabis provider may feel it can enhance its image by portraying itself as a not-for-profit entity, but that consideration is a public relations issue, not a legal imperative.

###

Robert A. Raich specializes in medical cannabis law. He is the attorney who took both of the medical cannabis cases to the United States Supreme Court. He served on the Attorney General's Medical Marijuana Task Force, where he was Chairman of the Caregiver Issues Subcommittee and was a member of the SB 420 Drafting Subcommittee. His website is www.robertraich.com.

 

[monkey5]

vta, Good read! You post some of the best stuff I have been reading about cannabis! Thank you for posting this! monkey5

 

[SeaMaiden]

VTA, no one got that memo. Otherwise, why would Sara Herrin, et alia, be being prosecuted as they are in Tuolomne County? I truly feel for them.

Sea Maiden, are you referring to Lake County's recent fiasco with the board of stupids?

I keep an eye on those clowns...ever since the days of Eddy Lepp I have been watching this torrid drama unfold before my very eyes.

No, but I know what you're talking about. I'm referring to the City of Lake Forest decisions... and now I'm drawing a blank on the collective's name, but there were two cases heard on that, one involving an individual bringing cannabis to the club who was arrested with the cannabis (1-2lbs, IIRC), and the collective itself being zoned out and declared a per se nuisance.

so does this protect personal home growers better than? if im ever raided for cultivation, i can say that since dispensary sales are illegal and cite the same thing gascon cited, that we must cultivate our own marijuana"....

the state is so stupid, they are basically willing to give up all the tax cash they make and drive everything back underground...good for the dealers though!

I can practically guarantee this is a result of federal pressure. And the threat of having federal funding removed is significant, far more than what can be brought in with pot sales.

Exhibit A: Mendocino County's new guidelines.

 

[greenmatter]

i wonder how many people voted for the DA ....... and how many MORE people voted for MMJ

democracy at work. ......... or at least our version of democracy. sad!