News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Case Involving Medical Use Of Marijuana Results In Plea |
Title: | US CA: Case Involving Medical Use Of Marijuana Results In Plea |
Published On: | 1999-11-24 |
Source: | New York Times (NY) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-28 17:55:19 |
CASE INVOLVING MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA RESULTS IN PLEA
Two advocates of the medicinal use of marijuana pleaded guilty today
to growing more than 6,000 plants and selling the drug, saying their
only hope was to ask for a judge's mercy after they were precluded
from raising medical issues in their defense.
The two men, Peter McWilliams and Todd McCormick, intended to tell
jurors about the state law passed by voters in 1996 allowing marijuana
use for medical purposes, its purported benefits and their own health.
Mr. McWilliams has AIDS, and Mr. McCormick has fused vertebrae from
childhood cancer treatments.
But Judge George H. King of Federal District Court here barred them
from raising those issues in the courtroom after prosecutors contended
that doing so would confuse and mislead jurors.
At the heart of the dispute was whether a ''medical necessity
defense'' saying they broke the law because their health required it
could be used when Congress had classified the drug in question as
having no legitimate use.
''Given the judge's logic, that the medical necessity defense does not
exist, someone in Peter's situation has only two remedies to prevent
him from going to jail,'' said Tom Ballanco, a lawyer for Mr. McWilliams.
''One is prosecutorial discretion, and the other is compassion on the
part of the judge,'' Mr. Ballanco said. ''Here, obviously, the
prosecutors chose to prosecute, so it's all up to the judge to
demonstrate there is some compassion in the federal law. I am hoping
that he will.''
Both pleaded guilty to charges of conspiring to manufacture and
distribute marijuana. In doing so, they capitulated to a set of facts
that they continued to dispute outside the courtroom. Based on letters
Mr. McCormick wrote to Mr. McWilliams, prosecutors maintained the men
were planning to sell marijuana to cannabis clubs where ill people go
to use the drug.
But the defendants maintained they were growing the plants for
personal use and for a book Mr. McCormick was writing about medical
marijuana. Mr. McWilliams, a book publisher, acknowledged growing 300
of his own plants but insisted the roughly $100,000 he gave Mr.
McCormick was a book advance, not financing for the growing operation.
The case also highlighted a conflict in federal law. Despite
Congress's stance, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit allowed a cannabis club in Oakland to resume providing
marijuana to patients in September, saying medical necessity could be
used as a defense against a court injunction obtained by the Clinton
administration.
Mr. McWilliams, who faces up to five years in prison under his plea,
waived his right to appeal on that issue. But Mr. McCormick will
appeal Judge King's ruling on the medical necessity defense. If he
loses, he will face five years in prison.
''I felt this was the smartest way to protect my health and my
well-being,'' Mr. McCormick told reporters outside court afterward.
Two advocates of the medicinal use of marijuana pleaded guilty today
to growing more than 6,000 plants and selling the drug, saying their
only hope was to ask for a judge's mercy after they were precluded
from raising medical issues in their defense.
The two men, Peter McWilliams and Todd McCormick, intended to tell
jurors about the state law passed by voters in 1996 allowing marijuana
use for medical purposes, its purported benefits and their own health.
Mr. McWilliams has AIDS, and Mr. McCormick has fused vertebrae from
childhood cancer treatments.
But Judge George H. King of Federal District Court here barred them
from raising those issues in the courtroom after prosecutors contended
that doing so would confuse and mislead jurors.
At the heart of the dispute was whether a ''medical necessity
defense'' saying they broke the law because their health required it
could be used when Congress had classified the drug in question as
having no legitimate use.
''Given the judge's logic, that the medical necessity defense does not
exist, someone in Peter's situation has only two remedies to prevent
him from going to jail,'' said Tom Ballanco, a lawyer for Mr. McWilliams.
''One is prosecutorial discretion, and the other is compassion on the
part of the judge,'' Mr. Ballanco said. ''Here, obviously, the
prosecutors chose to prosecute, so it's all up to the judge to
demonstrate there is some compassion in the federal law. I am hoping
that he will.''
Both pleaded guilty to charges of conspiring to manufacture and
distribute marijuana. In doing so, they capitulated to a set of facts
that they continued to dispute outside the courtroom. Based on letters
Mr. McCormick wrote to Mr. McWilliams, prosecutors maintained the men
were planning to sell marijuana to cannabis clubs where ill people go
to use the drug.
But the defendants maintained they were growing the plants for
personal use and for a book Mr. McCormick was writing about medical
marijuana. Mr. McWilliams, a book publisher, acknowledged growing 300
of his own plants but insisted the roughly $100,000 he gave Mr.
McCormick was a book advance, not financing for the growing operation.
The case also highlighted a conflict in federal law. Despite
Congress's stance, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit allowed a cannabis club in Oakland to resume providing
marijuana to patients in September, saying medical necessity could be
used as a defense against a court injunction obtained by the Clinton
administration.
Mr. McWilliams, who faces up to five years in prison under his plea,
waived his right to appeal on that issue. But Mr. McCormick will
appeal Judge King's ruling on the medical necessity defense. If he
loses, he will face five years in prison.
''I felt this was the smartest way to protect my health and my
well-being,'' Mr. McCormick told reporters outside court afterward.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...