POT CASE COULD ALTER DRUG LAW

TORONTO -- Clifford Long's constitutional saga began in September 2005
when he was a passenger in a car stopped by police for a seatbelt infraction.

The officers conducted a search, allegedly found $40 worth of
marijuana and Long joined the ranks of the more than 40,000 people
still charged each year across Canada for simple possession of cannabis.

Nearly three years later, the heavily tattooed 30-year-old man
appeared irritated by and bewildered at a bizarre and often comic
court proceeding Wednesday in which the federal government is seeking
to overturn a ruling in his case that could change the country's
marijuana possession laws.

"I don't care about this charge anymore," said Long, who is in custody
on unrelated and more serious offences. "I don't want to have to deal
with this."

While the defendant expressed indifference, his case is significant
for the federal government.

Long was acquitted in July 2007 when provincial court Justice Howard
Borenstein accepted an argument by Long's lawyer that Canada's
marijuana possession laws were unconstitutional because of flaws in
the medical marijuana regulations.

Earlier this year, a Federal Court of Canada judge also found the
medical marijuana regulations to be unconstitutional, a decision that
is under appeal.

While Borenstein's decision is not binding, other provincial court
judges in Ontario have been refusing to accept guilty pleas in
marijuana possession cases, federal prosecutor Lisa Csele told
Superior Court Justice Eva Frank Wednesday. "It has affected the
administration of justice," she said.

The federal government quickly filed an appeal of Borenstein's ruling
last summer, but Long's former lawyer is under administrative
suspension by the body that regulates the profession in Ontario. "I
have been told he no longer practices law," Long said.

Meanwhile, his current lawyer, retained to represent him on the
charges that led to him being in custody, isn't returning his calls.
"I want to fire him," the defendant said.