JUDGE TOSSES COUNTY'S MEDICAL MARIJUANA CHALLENGE

SAN DIEGO -- Medical marijuana advocates declared victory and San
Diego County officials mentioned the word "appeal" Wednesday when a
Superior Court judge rejected -- for the second time -- the county's
controversial challenge to overturn California's "Compassionate Use" act.

Superior Court Judge William R. Nevitt, reaffirming the tentative
ruling he issued Nov. 16, rejected the county's argument that
California's voter-approved Compassionate Use act should be
pre-empted by federal law.

Federal law says marijuana has no medicinal value and its use is
illegal in all situations.

San Diego County supervisors, in a move that angered local medical
marijuana patients and national advocacy groups, voted to try to
overturn the law in December 2005. Supervisors said the Compassionate
Use act was "bad law" and would promote drug abuse.

But Judge Nevitt, in his final ruling Wednesday, said the county
failed to prove that the state law was in legal conflict with the
federal law. He also ruled the state law did not "require" people to
break the federal law, as the county's pre-emption argument claimed.

Nevitt said the county's pre-emption argument failed because a
corollary to the U.S. Constitution's "Supremacy Clause" -- which says
federal law should be "supreme" over state laws -- says state laws
could take precedence over federal laws in some cases.

John Sansone, the county's top lawyer, said Wednesday afternoon that
supervisors would meet in closed session Tuesday to decide whether
they want to appeal Nevitt's ruling.

Bill Horn, the county board's chairman, did not return calls Wednesday.

Sansone, meanwhile, said he would advise the supervisors that he
believed an appeal could be successful.

Medical marijuana advocacy groups, however, said Nevitt's ruling was
clear. They called on the county to immediately obey California's law
by issuing identification cards to valid medical marijuana users.

Meanwhile, one local medical marijuana patient, Vista resident Craig
McClain, was clearly ecstatic when he received the news of Nevitt's ruling.

"Wow, man, that's good news," said McClain, a spinal cord injury
victim. "I can't believe it. I'm just so pleased to hear that, God.
I'm ecstatic. It just goes to show you, you gotta hang tough."

McClain, whose spine was crushed several years ago in a
construction-related accident, said he has used marijuana for several
years to ease the severe, chronic spasms the injury has left him with.

McClain and other medical marijuana patients have said they have
found it increasingly difficult to get marijuana this summer, after
the county and local law enforcement worked with federal drug agents
to essentially close down medical marijuana dispensaries.

Adam Wolf, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union -- which
successfully sued to intervene in the county case to defend the
patients -- said he now expected the counties of San Diego, San
Bernardino and Merced to begin issuing medical marijuana
identification cards to patients. San Bernardino and Merced counties
joined San Diego's lawsuit challenge last year.

"We hope that San Diego sees the wisdom of the court's ruling and
agrees to abide by the law," he said, "to stop its ill-founded,
unconstitutional challenge, and begin issuing ID cards."

The Compassionate Use act that voters approved in 1996 did not
require counties to issue the medical marijuana ID cards, but the
state Legislature did by passing Senate Bill 420 in 2003.

San Diego County's challenge to overturn the Compassionate Use act
began in November 2005 with a split vote by supervisors to defy SB
420 -- which legislators said would help state police officers tell
who legitimate medical marijuana patients are.

The county's lawsuit, filed against California Department of Health
Services Director Sandra Shewry and the San Diego chapter of the
National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, sought to
overturn both SB 420 and the Compassionate Use act.

Teresa Shilling, a spokeswoman for state Attorney General Bill
Lockyer, said Wednesday that it was not the attorney general's
position to compel counties to comply with the law. Shilling said
that historically, when laws need "to be tested," lawsuits force the
courts to compel governments to comply.

Sansone, meanwhile, said he believed that Nevitt did a thorough job
analyzing the lawsuit's "complicated" legal arguments. However,
Sansone said he believed that Nevitt's ruling left "very strong room"
for a successful appeal.

"I think we anticipated all along that this was going to be decided
at a higher level," Sansone said. "Where we go? It's up to the board."

William Dolphin, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, a medical
marijuana advocacy group that also sued to intervene in the county
lawsuit, said the group was very happy with Nevitt's ruling.

But Dolphin said he was disappointed to hear that San Diego County
could decide to appeal.

"I hope not," Dolphin said. "The legal argument cannot be clearer or stronger."

Meanwhile, McClain said he also hoped that county supervisors would
drop their challenge and give him -- and other medical marijuana
patients -- their ID cards.

"I've been waiting to get that," he said. "To me, that's protection.
I've already got a doctor's prescription. I just want something I can
hold in my hand. That's what we voted for.

"It may seem silly to some people," McClain said. "But that's like
having a driver's license, or your Social Security number. It means
I'm doing things the right way."