• Menu
  • Skip to right header navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Before Header

Free Initial Consultations – Call today (559) 222-5800

dui lawyer fresno

Fresno DUI Attorney & Criminal Defense Lawyer

  • Practice Areas
    • DUI Defense
      • Boating Under the Influence
      • Marijuana DUI Defense
      • Underage DUI Defense
    • Criminal Defense
    • Personal Injury
      • Motor Vehicle Accident
    • Domestic Violence
    • Drug Crimes
    • Expungement
  • About
  • Resources
    • California DUI Laws
    • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Practice Areas
    • DUI Defense
      • Boating Under the Influence
      • Marijuana DUI Defense
      • Underage DUI Defense
    • Criminal Defense
    • Personal Injury
      • Motor Vehicle Accident
    • Domestic Violence
    • Drug Crimes
    • Expungement
  • About
  • Resources
    • California DUI Laws
    • Blog
  • Contact Us

California Lawmakers Considering New Rules for Medical Marijuana

Home / Blog / California Lawmakers Considering New Rules for Medical Marijuana

May 28, 2013 //  by Gregory Fox

A pair of bills that would enhance the legal standing of medical marijuana providers have advanced in the Legislature following this month’s landmark court ruling that affirmed the rights of local governments to ban dispensaries.

The bills are two components of the ongoing and often passionate arguments between Californians who support brick-and-mortar marijuana dispensaries and those who oppose such storefront operations as “pot shops” that often provide marijuana to people lacking serious medical problems.

On one side, two of the Legislature’s leading Democrats are backing the bills in the face of opposition from Republicans and law enforcement leaders. The California Police Chief’s Association has pledged to oppose the bills, which would create new regulations and protections for medical marijuana providers within state law. The federal government’s ban on marijuana would remain in force.

The more ambitious of the two bills, from San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Friday. Ammiano’s bill would establish Division of Medical Marijuana Regulation within the state’s Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The new bureaucracy would have power to set standards for growing, transporting and selling medical marijuana. Providers would be able to register with the state and marijuana products would be required to meet labeling and quality standards.

The bill, A.B. 473, can now be considered by the entire Assembly.

“I think we’re turning a corner on marijuana regulation,” Ammiano said in a statement Friday.

The second bill, from Senate President pro tem Darrell Steinberg, would give marijuana collectives that operate according to the state Attorney General’s guidelines immunity from prosecution for selling or possessing marijuana. The bill would also allow dispensary operators and employees to receive “reasonable compensation,” but would not overturn local governments’ power to ban dispensaries.

Steinberg’s bill, S.B. 439, passed a Senate floor vote on Monday over opposition from the chamber’s Republican minority. A hearing date has yet be scheduled in the Assembly Public Safety Committee, which Ammiano chairs.

The California Police Chiefs Association will lobby against both bills as they continue to move through the Legislature, said Kim Raney, the group’s president.

Raney, chief of the Covina Police Department since 2001, said he and other chiefs are concerned by the lack of clarity between the state law and the federal prohibition of marijuana, as well as the ease of which some people can obtain medical marijuana recommendations without necessarily having serious medical conditions.

“If you’re going to have serious conversation about marijuana, in a medical forum, it needs to be done through a legitimate medical process,” Raney said.

As opposed to Alcoholic Beverage Control, Raney said medical marijuana policies could be better overseen by the state’s medical or pharmacy boards, which respectively bear the responsibilities to license and regulate physicians and pharmacists who practice in California.

Americans for Safe Access, which lobbies in support of medical marijuana, is supporting both bills. The group would also prefer that Alcoholic Beverage Control would not be the agency placed in charge of medical marijuana regulation, although its reasons are different from those of police chiefs.

Don Duncan, California director for Americans for Safe Access, said Alcoholic Beverage Control is perceived as an enforcement-focused agency. He suggested the state departments of Public Health or Consumer Affairs as superior options.

“We don’t want to see it regulated like alcohol, or tobacco, because there are issues like patient rights,” he said.

Although Duncan acknowledged he was unsure if the Legislature would accept such a major amendment to Ammiano’s bill, he said he is optimistic both bills will become law.

California’s medical marijuana laws have beset law enforcement and patient advocates alike with several uncertainties since voters approved Proposition. 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act in 1996.

That law exempted medical marijuana patients and their doctors from punishment, and campaign supporters advocated for medicinal marijuana use as a way to relieve the sufferings of patients suffering from diseases like cancer, AIDS and glaucoma.

The 2004 Medical Marijuana Program made it possible for patients to obtain identification cards and collectively grow marijuana with other patients and caregivers for medical purposes.

But state laws, however, did not provide a crystal clear definition of what a proper medical marijuana collective would be. Confusion over the law allowed numerous storefront dispensaries to establish themselves over the past few years and even operate openly in cities where their existence is illegal under local ordinances.

The state Supreme Court ruled early this month in a unanimous decision that cities have an absolute right under existing law to forbid dispensaries. In San Bernardino, for example, officials quickly followed the ruling raiding and shutting down dispensaries.

In Los Angeles, by contrast, city voters decided in the May 21 election to allow the city to regulate and tax as many as 135 dispensaries. Although the measure would allow dispensaries to exist in the state’s largest city, there are hundreds of other marijuana providers who could be shuttered as a result of the ballot measure.

—

Full Article

Category: Blog

Previous Post: « Drunk Driving Laws in California
Next Post: Boating Under the Influence »

Primary Sidebar

Search posts

Request your free initial consultation

If you have any questions or would like to schedule your free initial consultation please call (559) 222-5800 or fill out this form and we will contact you as soon as possible.











    Related Posts

    California Medical Marijuana Regulation Bill Passes State Assembly Committee, Medical Marijuana, California Supreme Court Deals Massive Blow to Medical Marijuana Industry, San Francisco Medical Marijuana Licensing Program Resumes
    This website provides general information only. It should not be relied upon as legal advice. The law is constantly changing and differs from location to location. Applicability of the law is dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each case. You should consult an attorney about your particular situation. Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute an attorney–client relationship between the sender and receiver. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

    If you have any questions, or would like to schedule your free initial consultation, please contact us today at (559) 222-5800. Hablamos español.

    Footer

    About

    Gregory W. Fox provides DUI, criminal defense, and personal injury representation throughout Fresno and the greater Central Valley of California including Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Tuolumne counties.

    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter

    Contact Us

    The Law Office of Gregory W. Fox
    191 West Shaw Avenue, Suite 208
    Fresno, California 93704

    Phone: (559) 222-5800

    FAX: (559) 222-5801

    Hours:

    1. Monday–Thursday 8AM–5PM
    2. Friday 8AM–12PM
    3. Saturday–Sunday 9AM–4PM

    Get Directions

    Practice Areas

    • DUI Defense
    • Criminal Defense
    • Drug Crimes
    • Domestic Violence
    • Expungement
    • Personal Injury

    Site Footer

    • Top Criminal Defense Attorney in Fresno
    • Lawyer Gregory Fox | Featured Attorney Criminal Defense

    • Copyright © 2023
    • The Law Office of Gregory W. Fox
    • Privacy Policy