[Weird]

https://www.demonews.org/colorado-cou...a-convictions/



When President Obama gave the green light for states to set their own marijuana laws, he set in motion what is becoming unprecedented and much-needed change in our country’s antiquated and harshly counterproductive drug laws. Not only has Colorado and Washington State succesfully legalized recreational use of marijuana, other states are now exploring with similar legislation.
The amount of people behind bars because of possession of small amounts of marijuana has increased drastically since the War on Drugs was instituted by President Nixon in 1971. In Colorado alone, 9,000 residents a year were imprisoned prior to Amendment 64, the amendment that legalized marijuana in the state. Without a doubt, the criminalization of marijuana in America has become a very serious human rights issue, but one that Pres. Obama and states like Colorado are well on their way to fixing.
The easing of the drug laws is presenting Colorado with a complicated issue surrounding those who have been arrested after the passage, but prior to the implementation of, Amendment 64. Thankfully, in a historic ruling, Colorado judges have decided to retroactively apply the law to those incarcerated.

A panel of three Colorado Court of Appeals judges unanimously ruled in favor of allowing some state citizens who have been convicted of possessing small amounts of marijuana prior to the implementation of Dec. 2012′s Amendment 64 to request their convictions be overturned.

The judge’s decision centered around Brandi Jessica Russell, who was convicted of “possession of one gram or less of methamphetamine, marijuana concentrate possession and possession of less than one ounce of marijuana.”

“The general presumption of prospective application, however, is subject to a doctrine established by our General Assembly and Supreme Court enabling a defendant to benefit retroactively from a significant change in the law,” Judge Mary Hoak said in her 16-page opinion.

The decision could ultimately affect hundreds of people currently serving time for possession, so long as their case was under appeal when Amendment 64 took effect in December 2012.
Poor minorities, as well as many poor whites, have been ravaged by America’s drug laws. During an interview in January, President Obama acknowledged the disproportionate amount of blacks and Latinos being arrested throughout the country for marijuana possession.

“Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do,” he said. “And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties.”

President Obama has been upfront with his past use of marijuana. His comments came as a breath of fresh air from a President, and put a spotlight on a very disturbing topic not often discussed in the mainstream.
President Obama’s speech echoed the sentiment of an ACLU report that was published last year.

Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union issued a report that found African Americans are four times as likely as whites to be arrested for marijuana, even though both groups use the drug at similar rates. (In Washington, D.C. specifically, African Americans are eight times more likely to be arrested.) This is not an abstraction. Under federal law and in most states, marijuana offenses go on a person’s criminal record and carry jail time. That can make it harder if not impossible to find a job or to vote and often results in the revocation of professional licenses, the loss of education, financial aid or public benefits, and can event prevent a person from adopting a child. More people are arrested for marijuana-related offenses than for violent crime, meaning police resources are sucked away from addressing the latter.

Marijuana has existed in a quasi-legal state for several decades. While some may be let go for a small amount of marijuana, others are thrown behind bars for the same exact amount. President Obama is aware, more than anybody, that if he would have been arrested for marijuana in his youth, he would not be where he is today.
No matter where you stand on marijuana, there has to be an understanding that the issue extends further than just teens wanting to get high. Lives are being destroyed, families are being torn apart and for-profit prisons becoming rich off of their misery.
President Obama and Eric Holder had two options when Colorado and Washington passed their recreational marijuana laws. They could have either stepped in and forced them to abide by federal law or sat back and see what develops. Thankfully, they correctly chose the latter, and America will be a more humane society because of it.
Video
SecularTalk discusses Colorado’s decision to reverse convictions for those who’s cases were under appeal when Amendment 64 took effect.

[Sativa King]

That is some great news!! There will be alot of happy people out there!!

[D. B. Doober]

:watchplan t::thank s:

[Stoner4Life]

wtg Colorado! very awesome news, this is actual cannabis reform.

[stoned-trout]

its about time.... free the weed prisioners...maybe Washington will follow suit

[trichrider]

Washington state bill would forgive all minor marijuana convictions

By Stephen C. Webster
Thursday, February 21, 2013 16:41 EDT

Washington state Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon (D) has a novel idea: now that marijuana is legal in the state, he wants people convicted of minor, state-level marijuana offenses to get a clean slate.

Fitzgibbon introduced H.B. 1661 on Feb. 5, a bill that he told Raw Story was inspired by Washington prosecutors who dropped all of their pending misdemeanor marijuana cases in December following legalization’s passage at the ballot box.

“That got me thinking of the thousands of Washingtonians who have a misdemeanor marijuana conviction on their record, and if there wasn’t something we could do to help them out, help them get a fresh start with their lives,” he said.

Many times a marijuana conviction can disqualify one for numerous jobs, public housing opportunities and educational financing: harms Fitzgibbon hopes to undo by allowing prior offenders to petition for their charges to be vacated.

“Since the voters of Washington clearly believe that possession of small amounts of marijuana is not something that’s a crime in our state, I thought that maybe we can offer a second chance to people who have that crime on their record,” he said.

The Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys isn’t so keen on Fitzgibbon’s bill, which was presented at hearings on Wednesday and Thursday, warning that letting people with prior marijuana convictions off the hook would send the wrong signal: they were breaking the law at the time, after all.

Seattle Weekly noted that the bill could also have an impact on future marijuana offenses as well. The state’s legalization initiative approves possession of up to 28 grams, while up to 40 grams remains in misdemeanor territory. Prosecutors are concerned the law does not specify that it applies only to past offenses, potentially leaving a loophole for individuals in the future.

“Prosecutors, as always, don’t like anything that lessens their ability to charge people with crimes,” Fitzgibbon said. “That’s the disagreement that we have.

Though he’s hopeful the bill could pass the Democratic-controlled House, the Republican Senate in Washington may have different ideas. “For now, I think the feedback has been pretty good and I think this is [a bill] we’ve got a pretty good shot at,” he concluded.

seems logical...

[Skip]

This is a big step in the right direction.

The Feds should do the same, but I'm not holding my breath.

In California, the Jack Herer Initiative will also free all the non-violent cannabis offenders.

Unfortunately I don't think that Initiative will make it to the ballot... :(

[trichrider]

end the madness!

free the oppressed.

[Eighths-n-Aces]

great news and a great article. i just wish i believed that the guys who are against (and have been from the beginning) anything to do with 64 were not going to take this little tidbit and run with it

Originally Posted by Weird

The judge’s decision centered around ............. who was convicted of “possession of one gram or less of methamphetamine

ken buck and friends have pretty much made it clear that he/they do not and will not care about what anybody trying to iron the kinks out of 64 wants or what anybody voted for. i hope i'm wrong , but my guess is he is going to try to get all the spin on this that he can.

on the other hand it's the only time it will be funny to watch a drowning man grasping at straws

[D. B. Doober]

Could you imagine doing time for growing? Fuck that. Glad it hardly happens but in California not sure what was going on