RULING OVERTURNS REDONDO MEDICAL MARIJUANA DECISION

A pot bust in a Redondo Beach motel room led to a precedent-setting
ruling this week in the ongoing effort to decipher conflicting and
controversial medicinal marijuana laws.

Three justices from the 2nd District Court of Appeals decided
Wednesday that state law does not require "a patient to periodically
renew a doctor's recommendation regarding medical marijuana use."

In addition, the justices ruled that it should be left to a jury to
determine if the amount of marijuana a patient possesses is related
to their medical needs or exceeds the law.

"It was an obvious result to me," said attorney Matthew Surlin, who
represents Christopher Windus.

Windus, 39, was arrested Dec. 14, 2004, after police officers
searched his room at the Palos Verdes Inn and found approximately 1.6
pounds of marijuana.

At his preliminary hearing, a detective testified that he believed
Windus, who is from out of state, intended to sell the narcotic
because of the large amount he had on hand.

Before his trial began, Windus tried to convince Torrance Superior
Court Judge Andrew Kauffman that he should be allowed to present a
defense based on California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

The CUA, passed as Proposition 215 by voters, legalizes the
possession and cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes.

In 2003, the state Legislature clarified the law to allow qualified
patients or caregivers to have no more than 8 ounces of dried
marijuana with a doctor's recommendation.

Dr. William Eidleman told the judge that he consulted with Windus in
1999 and 2001, and gave him written recommendations for the medical
use of marijuana for chronic back pain.

Eidleman said Windus ingested marijuana, which requires four to eight
times more of the drug than smoking it. He said it would be
appropriate for Windus to have 3 to 6 pounds of marijuana in his possession.

Also testifying on his behalf was an AIDS patient who said Windus was
a caregiver who occasionally gave him marijuana.

After hearing from the witnesses, the judge said he found Windus was
legitimately a medical marijuana patient, but that no physician had
recommended he possess more than 8 ounces of the drug at any time.

He also rejected Windus' contention that he was a caregiver and,
therefore, authorized to have more than 8 ounces.

Based on his findings, Kauffman barred Windus from using the
Compassionate Use Act as a defense.

Kauffman predicted that, without the evidence, Windus would likely be
convicted of possession of marijuana for sale.

He allowed Windus to plead no contest to the charge in exchange for
32 months in prison - but remain free on bail while the case was appealed.

This week's decision overturned Kauffman's ruling and sends the case
back to the trial court level.

The opinion follows a May ruling from the same court that found the
legislators' guidelines violated the state constitution, which
prohibits the Legislature from amending an initiative statute like
the Compassionate Use Act.

Prosecutors have asked the state Supreme Court to review the
appellate justices' opinion, and to remove its status as a
"published" opinion so it can't be cited in other cases.

Kris Hermes, a spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, said the
Windus ruling and the earlier one are "unchartered territory" for the
state's high court.

"The main theme and lessons drawn from these two cases is that these
guidelines that the state has established, if they are to be
legitimate at all, need to be considered 'thresholds' not 'limits,'"
Hermes said.

"That's important because the legislation, at least the intent of the
legislation, was never meant to cap the amount patients could
cultivate or possess - the intent was to set guidelines that were
helpful to law enforcement, but not set limits," he said.

The Windus decision came just one day before a ruling from an
appellate court that said San Diego and San Bernardino counties must
issue medical marijuana identification cards for doctor-approved patients.

The counties had refused, saying the cards are akin to government
approval of drug use, which violates federal law.

While medical marijuana advocates were celebrating the ruling
Thursday, federal drug enforcement agents were raiding a dispensary
near Culver City - a stark illustration of how state and federal laws
continually clash.