Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
News (Media Awareness Project) - US CO: Marijuana Case to Go to Trial
Title:US CO: Marijuana Case to Go to Trial
Published On:2005-05-13
Source:Daily Sentinel, The (Grand Junction, CO)
Fetched On:2008-01-16 13:22:09
MARIJUANA CASE TO GO TO TRIAL

GLENWOOD SPRINGS - Prosecutors plan to proceed to trial with a case against
an alleged medical marijuana grower next month, despite a recent ruling
that tossed out some evidence and criticized a regional drug task force for
wrongfully destroying most of the marijuana seized in the arrests of four
people in Rifle last year.

Assistant District Attorney Vince Felletter told Judge Dan Petre Thursday
the ruling by Judge James Boyd would not be appealed.

"Not all the evidence was eliminated," he said.

A four-day trial is scheduled to begin June 14 for [name deleted].

Ryan has said she was allowed to grow the plants for patients with medical
needs and under doctor's orders.

Two of those arrested in August 2004 by the Two Rivers Drug Enforcement
Team, [names and towns deleted] had arraignment hearings continued until
June 23 by Petre.

[name deleted] is charged with growing and possessing marijuana with the
intent to distribute. He has claimed he is allowed to smoke marijuana to
deal with a chronic esophagus ailment that can lead to cancer. Justin
Brownlee is charged with unlawful cultivation.

Family friend Drew Gillespie, 19, of Lakewood, pleaded guilty last year to
cultivation charges and is on two years probation.

Boyd's ruling criticized TRIDENT officers for destroying most of the 131
plants they found, uprooted and smashed before they knew the state's
medical marijuana law required them to preserve the plants until the case
was resolved. Then, after they learned about it, they buried the plants in
a landfill.

[name deleted] allegedly had five state caregiver certificates, which would
have allowed her to have 30 plants, under the terms of the voter-approved
2000 amendment that legalized medical marijuana.

"To the extent TRIDENT's actions arose from ignorance of the constitutional
provision, nearly four years old at the time of the investigation in this
case, TRIDENT's actions were not an innocent or good faith mistake," Boyd
wrote. "At the time the evidence was taken to the landfill, TRIDENT knew or
should have known the number of plants would be important in determining
whether or not a crime occurred."
Member Comments
No member comments available...