SEIZED MARIJUANA A DILEMMA WHEN STATE, FEDERAL LAWS CLASH

San Francisco --- The conflict between California and federal law over
medicinal marijuana is forcing the courts to sort out an unexpected problem
for police --- whether officers could be prosecuted if they return pot
seized from users who beat criminal charges.

Proposition 215, approved by California voters in 1996, legalized growing
and using marijuana for medical purposes with a doctor's recommendation.
But under federal law, marijuana used for any purpose is illegal.

In at least three cases in Northern California, police have balked at
returning marijuana to people who successfully pleaded that they shouldn't
be prosecuted because their pot use was covered under Proposition 215.
Giving back the pot, police argue, could leave them liable to prosecution
under federal laws against distributing illegal drugs.

Yuba County Sheriff Virginia Black defied an order by a judge last week to
return 37 medicinal marijuana plants to Doyle and Belinda Satterfield. They
were arrested in August, but marijuana charges against them later were
dismissed.

"If I deliver marijuana to the Satterfields, technically I place myself in
violation of federal law, and I'm not inclined to do that," Black said. "So
I find myself in a Catch-22."

Jesse Choper, a constitutional law professor at the University of
California, Berkeley, agreed with the sheriff. "I think it's pretty clear
to me that they could be charged under federal law."

That leaves the Satterfields wondering whether they'll get their marijuana
back. Doyle Satterfield, 52, said he uses marijuana for insomnia and
arthritis and his wife has used it to ease chemotherapy treatments for
breast cancer.

Under state law, controlled substances are usually destroyed after trial,
or if charges are dismissed, unless they are found to be "lawfully
possessed" by the defendant. That supports the return of medicinal marijuana.

Defense attorneys say police are protected from prosecution by a federal
law that exempts law enforcement officials from liability if they are
"lawfully engaged in the enforcement of any law or municipal ordinance
relating to controlled substances."