California prosecutors must prove nonmedical purpose

People v. Mower 

“We conclude that, under general principles of California law, the burden of proof as to the facts underlying the section 11362.5(d) defense may, and should, be allocated to a defendant, but the defendant should be required merely to raise a reasonable doubt as to those facts rather than to prove them by a preponderance of the evidence.” … “As we shall explain, we believe that section 11362.5(d) reasonably must be interpreted to grant a defendant a limited immunity from prosecution, which not only allows a defense at trial, but also permits a motion to set aside an indictment or information prior to trial.”

Continue reading California prosecutors must prove nonmedical purpose

Localities can ban cannabis collectives, dispensaries

Inland Empire Patients, et al., v Riverside

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA: “The issue in this case is whether California‘s medical marijuana statutes preempt a local ban on facilities that distribute medical marijuana. We conclude they do not.”

Continue reading Localities can ban cannabis collectives, dispensaries