|
Home | Legal
Issues | Jason Lauve Case | Videos
| Archives | About
Us | Contact Us | Links
Colorado Court of Appeals Hears Medical Cannabis Case
Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2009
Oral Arguments
1:30 pm
Open to the Public: Supporters are encouraged to attend
Where:
Colorado Court of Appeals
2 E. 14th Ave., Third Floor, Denver
(On 14th and Broadway across from the State Capitol)
List of Briefs
[Denver] -- On Sept. 22, the Colorado Court of Appeals will hear oral
arguments in one of the first appeals concerning a medical cannabis
conviction in Colorado. One of the key issues in this appeal is whether
a person can act as a "primary caregiver" for a patient without
having met the patient in person. Stacy Clendenin, a medical cannabis
patient and caregiver, was convicted of felony possession and distribution
of marijuana in October 2006 in Boulder County. Stacy served as a cannabis
primary caregiver for multiple patients. The trial court ruled that
none of Stacy's patients would be allowed to testify in court if they
did not have personal contact with Stacy while she was serving as their
caregiver. Stacy was convicted by a jury on all charges.
Rob Corry, one of the state's top experts on medical cannabis law,
is asking the Court of Appeals to overturn Ms. Clendenin's conviction
on several grounds. Article XVIII, Section 14 of the Colorado Constitution
(Colorado's Medical Marijuana Law) defines "primary caregiver"
simply as a person having "significant responsibility for managing
the well-being of a patient." Corry argues that there is no Constitutional
provision or law that requires the primary caregiver to have face-to-face
contact with the patient and that the trial court erred by making an
arbitrary decision to prevent patient witnesses from testifying. Corry
will argue that Ms. Clendenin had significant responsibility for the
well-being of several patients, all of whom should have been allowed
to testify to the jury.
"An analogy is a pharmacist who dispenses medicine manufactured
by a drug company: there is no need for the individuals who produce
the medicine at a drug company far away to personally meet the patients
who ultimately use the medicine," Corry writes in his opening brief.
"Any contrary rule unreasonably restricts a beneficial, life-saving
medicine from those who need it to survive but who are incapable of
producing it on their own, and unreasonably punishes those like Ms.
Clendenin who generously help suffering people."
The Colorado State Board of Health recently supported Corry's interpretation
of the law, in new rules adopted on July 20, which state that "significant
responsibility" could mean simply providing a patient with medical
marijuana.
Rob Corry will also ask the Court of Appeals to review other issues
from Ms. Clendenin's trial, including the validity of the search warrant
and the denial of the "end user" defense by the trial court.
###
|
