NEW POT RULING OLD HAT IN KETCHIKAN

Ketchikan law enforcement officials don't anticipate any changes as a
result of a recent appeals court decision upholding an adult's right
to possess small amounts of marijuana at home.

That's because Ketchikan Superior Court Judge Michael Thompson upheld
that right almost 10 years ago.

On Oct. 29, 1993, Thompson ruled that the 1990 voter initiative to
recriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana in private
homes didn't change the state Constitution, which guarantees privacy.

"Since Judge Thompson's ruling, in this one jurisdiction, our rules of
engagement have been exactly the same as required in this (recent
Alaska Court of Appeals) ruling," Ketchikan Police Chief Grant Sirevog
said Thursday. Sirevog worked many drug cases in the 1990s and
recalled that he couldn't get a warrant to search a house for a small
amount of marijuana.

Ketchikan District Attorney Stephen West and Alaska State Troopers Lt.
Kurt Ludwig agreed that the Court of Appeals ruling won't change
anything here.

The Alaska Supreme Court ruled in the 1975 Ravin vs. State case that
the Constitution's privacy clause protects the right of adults to
possess small amounts of marijuana at home.

Thompson wrote in his 1993 ruling that "the voters cannot change the
Constitution simply by carrying the polls on a given day. Ravin
was founded in the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Alaska
Constitution. The Legislature, nor for that matter the people through
the initiative, cannot `fix' what is disliked in an interpretation of
that document by legislation."

Thompson's ruling was the result of a motion to suppress evidence in
the case of a Klawock man charged with possession of marijuana and
possession of cocaine.

Although the voters recriminalized the use of marijuana in people's
homes, Thompson said Thursday that the Ravin decision "was never out
of effect. This is just the first time it reached the Court of
Appeals. It's just the first time they had a chance to look at it."
The judge said he believes that neither police officers nor
prosecutors have felt very restricted by the Ravin case, which he said
affected one small area of marijuana law.

"They've got bigger fish to fry," Thompson said. "They've got
assaults, they've got LSD, they've got methamphetamine crimes to
prosecute. When you put (personal use marijuana) on a list of what
they've got to deal with, this is way down on the list."