News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Father, Son Acquitted In Pot-Grow Case |
Title: | US CA: Father, Son Acquitted In Pot-Grow Case |
Published On: | 2010-06-23 |
Source: | Chico Enterprise-Record (CA) |
Fetched On: | 2010-06-24 02:59:53 |
FATHER, SON ACQUITTED IN POT-GROW CASE
OROVILLE -- A jury on Tuesday acquitted two Concow men of criminal
charges in a medical marijuana grow on their property.
Jurors said after the verdict they agreed Michael Edmond Kelly, 29,
and his father Sean Joseph Kelly, 57, were part of a lawful medical
marijuana collective.
The Kellys were found not guilty of two counts each of possession of
marijuana for sale and illegal cultivation.
The son, who was acquitted in an unrelated 2003 medical marijuana
trial, was found guilty of a misdemeanor Fish and Game violation for
diverting or obstructing a stream to irrigate one or more of the gardens.
Michael Kelly said he felt the verdict was a victory for all medical
marijuana collectives.
"I've been terrorized -- me, my family and my community. We proved
our innocence and the jurors spoke for the people," he said outside of court.
He and his father were twice arrested over a six-month period, first
in October 2008 when Butte County sheriff's officers seized 35
recently harvested plants from a grow site on their Paiute Drive
property in Concow.
Officers testified they confiscated an additional 377 small pot
"clones" and several additional plants the following June from the
Paiute site and a second parcel owned by the son off Jordan Hill Road.
During the two-week trial, several witnesses testified they had
helped plant and tend to the grows as part of a loosely organized
16-member medical marijuana collective.
Judge William Lamb had initially refused to instruct the jury on the
law pertaining to collectives, saying he believed there was evidence
of impermissible sales.
The younger Kelly's attorney, Jodea Foster, charged outside of court
the judge was violating his client's rights acting as "a 13th juror"
by deciding issues of fact in the case.
Reversing himself Tuesday, the judge decided to ask the jury first to
make findings whether either defendant intended to sell or give away
marijuana to those outside the group of medical marijuana patients.
When the jury returned after 25 minutes, answering a resounding "no"
to both questions, the judge gave the collective instruction sought
by the defense and the attorneys delivered their closing summations.
Assistant district attorney Helen Harberts pointed to the amount of
marijuana seized as proof the defendants were growing in excess of
what was needed to meet medical needs.
During the trial, Butte County Sheriff's detective Jacob Hancock had
quoted Michael Kelly as saying he planned to sell any excess pot to a
cannabis club to help recoup their costs.
But the younger Kelly's attorney argued the defendant was only
responding to a "hypothetical" question posed, and pointed out all
members of the collective consistently had denied there was any
excess marijuana, and didn't discuss selling or giving any away to others.
Neither was there any evidence associated with drug sales, such as
packaging material, cash or "swanky homes and lavish cars," the
father's attorney, Robert Radcliffe noted.
Radcliffe reminded the jury that when Sean Kelly was questioned, he
told police "they were not in it for the money, but for the medicine."
The jurors deliberated nearly two hours more before acquitting the
defendants on the two felony marijuana counts, finding Michael Kelly
guilty of the stream alteration.
Jurors said afterward they believed the defendants were attempting to
follow the law governing medical marijuana collectives.
"The prosecution did not show any evidence it was being sold or going
to be sold. It just wasn't there," said Chico juror Cecil Pennock.
The amount of marijuana being grown by the collective was an issue
for some jurors, he said.
"I think they were using quite a bit of pot and I personally hate to
see that, but they were following the law," Pennock added.
Fellow juror Matthew Johnson, also of Chico, said they were hampered
about much medical marijuana can be grown within a collective.
"The law is so vague it doesn't say anything about amounts," the
juror noted. "The law should definitely be elaborated so there's
more, like, stepping stones for people, so they know what they can
do," the juror added.
Following the verdict, Michael Kelly vowed to sue the sheriff's
detective who "stole my medicine" and to file a motion in court
asking all the pot be returned to the members of the Concow collective.
OROVILLE -- A jury on Tuesday acquitted two Concow men of criminal
charges in a medical marijuana grow on their property.
Jurors said after the verdict they agreed Michael Edmond Kelly, 29,
and his father Sean Joseph Kelly, 57, were part of a lawful medical
marijuana collective.
The Kellys were found not guilty of two counts each of possession of
marijuana for sale and illegal cultivation.
The son, who was acquitted in an unrelated 2003 medical marijuana
trial, was found guilty of a misdemeanor Fish and Game violation for
diverting or obstructing a stream to irrigate one or more of the gardens.
Michael Kelly said he felt the verdict was a victory for all medical
marijuana collectives.
"I've been terrorized -- me, my family and my community. We proved
our innocence and the jurors spoke for the people," he said outside of court.
He and his father were twice arrested over a six-month period, first
in October 2008 when Butte County sheriff's officers seized 35
recently harvested plants from a grow site on their Paiute Drive
property in Concow.
Officers testified they confiscated an additional 377 small pot
"clones" and several additional plants the following June from the
Paiute site and a second parcel owned by the son off Jordan Hill Road.
During the two-week trial, several witnesses testified they had
helped plant and tend to the grows as part of a loosely organized
16-member medical marijuana collective.
Judge William Lamb had initially refused to instruct the jury on the
law pertaining to collectives, saying he believed there was evidence
of impermissible sales.
The younger Kelly's attorney, Jodea Foster, charged outside of court
the judge was violating his client's rights acting as "a 13th juror"
by deciding issues of fact in the case.
Reversing himself Tuesday, the judge decided to ask the jury first to
make findings whether either defendant intended to sell or give away
marijuana to those outside the group of medical marijuana patients.
When the jury returned after 25 minutes, answering a resounding "no"
to both questions, the judge gave the collective instruction sought
by the defense and the attorneys delivered their closing summations.
Assistant district attorney Helen Harberts pointed to the amount of
marijuana seized as proof the defendants were growing in excess of
what was needed to meet medical needs.
During the trial, Butte County Sheriff's detective Jacob Hancock had
quoted Michael Kelly as saying he planned to sell any excess pot to a
cannabis club to help recoup their costs.
But the younger Kelly's attorney argued the defendant was only
responding to a "hypothetical" question posed, and pointed out all
members of the collective consistently had denied there was any
excess marijuana, and didn't discuss selling or giving any away to others.
Neither was there any evidence associated with drug sales, such as
packaging material, cash or "swanky homes and lavish cars," the
father's attorney, Robert Radcliffe noted.
Radcliffe reminded the jury that when Sean Kelly was questioned, he
told police "they were not in it for the money, but for the medicine."
The jurors deliberated nearly two hours more before acquitting the
defendants on the two felony marijuana counts, finding Michael Kelly
guilty of the stream alteration.
Jurors said afterward they believed the defendants were attempting to
follow the law governing medical marijuana collectives.
"The prosecution did not show any evidence it was being sold or going
to be sold. It just wasn't there," said Chico juror Cecil Pennock.
The amount of marijuana being grown by the collective was an issue
for some jurors, he said.
"I think they were using quite a bit of pot and I personally hate to
see that, but they were following the law," Pennock added.
Fellow juror Matthew Johnson, also of Chico, said they were hampered
about much medical marijuana can be grown within a collective.
"The law is so vague it doesn't say anything about amounts," the
juror noted. "The law should definitely be elaborated so there's
more, like, stepping stones for people, so they know what they can
do," the juror added.
Following the verdict, Michael Kelly vowed to sue the sheriff's
detective who "stole my medicine" and to file a motion in court
asking all the pot be returned to the members of the Concow collective.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...