BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA

ANNAPOLIS - Marijuana users who rely on the drug to relieve nausea or
other effects of chronic illness would gain some protection against
punishment for possession in Maryland under three bills backed by a
bipartisan group. Top Stories

Proposals to decriminalize marijuana for medical use died in the House
in 2000 and in the Senate last year, and lawmakers often avoid
controversial bills in an election year. But the issue got a boost
this week from results of a statewide poll.

In a telephone poll of 833 registered voters likely to cast ballots in
November's election, 37 percent of respondents said they would be more
likely to support a candidate who backs allowing patients to use
marijuana if they have a physician's approval.

Forty percent said a candidate's position on medical marijuana would
not affect their vote, 18 percent said they'd be less likely to
support such a candidate and 5 percent were undecided.

A medicinal-marijuana law garnered the highest support from
independents, at 48 percent. Republicans were split almost evenly,
with 29 percent more likely to support a pro-medicinal marijuana
candidate and 26 percent less likely.

Among Democrats, 39 percent were more likely to back such a candidate
and 13 percent were less likely. The largest percentage of members of
both parties - 45 percent of Democrats and 35 percent of Republicans -
said a candidate's position on medicinal marijuana would not affect
their votes.

The poll was conducted by Gonzales/Arscott Research and Communications
between Jan. 9 and 12 and has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.

Defendants found guilty of possessing marijuana would be guaranteed
the right to raise medical necessity as a mitigating factor during
sentencing under a bill offered by Delegate Thomas E. "Tim" Hutchins,
Charles County Republican. Mr. Hutchins, a retired state trooper and
former commandant of the state police training academy, voted against
decriminalizing marijuana when it came before the House Judiciary
Committee in 2000.

But he said he was moved by what he'd heard about patients' suffering
and the relief marijuana gave those not helped by other palliatives.
Mr. Hutchins said he was also encouraged to learn that a judge he
respected had allowed medicinal use to be considered in a trial.

"It's still a crime, but it won't take anything away from judges, and
it's the right thing to do," Mr. Hutchins said.

Delegate Dana Dembrow, Montgomery County Democrat, a lawyer who has
backed decriminalizing marijuana for medical need, is sponsoring
legislation that would allow medical necessity as a defense at trial.

Juries or judges, as finders of fact, would decide in each case
whether marijuana was needed.

Delegate Donald E. Murphy, a Republican who represents Howard and
Baltimore counties, said he will file a bill to decriminalize
medicinal use again this year. But he said he plans to add a provision
that the measure is not a step toward legalization, nor is it meant to
advocate recreational marijuana use.

Eight states have passed laws that allow patients to use marijuana
when other drugs don't help such debilitating effects as nausea and
weight loss.

Last year, in a case targeting California's marijuana-buyers clubs,
the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government can enforce
federal prohibitions on marijuana.

But federal authorities have never arrested a patient or caregiver in
states where medicinal use of marijuana is approved, said Billy
Rogers, director of state policies for the D.C.-based Marijuana Policy
Project.