For some stupid reason. 
Posted on 01/06/2003 9:53:14 AM PST by MrLeRoy
Donovan No Runner walked out of the San Luis Obispo Police station all smiles Friday, holding the bag of marijuana authorities had returned to him.
A local Superior Court judge had ordered the city to return the marijuana it confiscated from No Runner last summer, ruling the 23-year-old Grover Beach man had a valid doctor's recommendation.
But police were concerned that handing the pot over to No Runner would violate a federal law prohibiting the distribution of controlled substances.
As a result, the City Council considered appealing the court's ruling during a last-minute meeting Friday, but instead it decided to give up the fight.
"The city is an agency of the state, and we're following state law and a court order," Interim City Attorney Gil Trujillo said.
Shortly after the city decided not to appeal the case, No Runner went to the police station, where his 8.4 gram bag of marijuana was returned -- still in good condition.
While smoking marijuana is illegal under federal law, California's Proposition 215 makes it legal for those with a doctor's recommendation.
"For the time being, people are protected under state law, not under federal law," said Bruce Mirken, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, which advocates the decriminalization of marijuana use.
While state voters legalized medicinal marijuana, law enforcement can still confiscate pot until it is proven that a doctor's recommendation is legitimate.
No Runner's difficulty arose because state law does not specify what is supposed to happen to medicinal marijuana once confiscated.
In court last month, No Runner's attorney, Lou Koory, cited an Oregon case in arguing that police are immune from federal prosecution, though no such case exists in California.
Trujillo said that ultimately, the issue will be resolved in a higher court.
With no clear guidelines for such a case in the state, No Runner's case could have become a precedent on appeal.
But the city also decided it was not feasible to pay attorneys' fees at a time when it is experiencing a $5 million deficit.
Koory said he and his client were ready to fight the issue if an appeal had been sought.
"We're just happy that common sense prevailed," he said.
No Runner said his doctor recommended marijuana to combat the effects of bipolar disorder.
He was lighting a water pipe near SLO Brewing Co., between a trash can and a tree, when he was stopped by a police officer in August.
No Runner told the officer he had a doctor's recommendation, but he was cited anyway, and his marijuana was taken.
Once the recommendation was verified, the District Attorney's Office dismissed criminal charges. But police would not return the pot or the pipe.
Last month, Superior Court Judge Barry LaBarbera, intending to set a local precedent, said the police had to return the marijuana within 30 days.
Koory said the police could have faced a contempt of court charge had they not returned the pot by Friday's deadline.
Despite the difficulty in getting his pot returned, No Runner said he wanted to set an example for others who need medicinal marijuana -- particularly those who have greater needs than he does.
"I'm glad this happened to me," he said. "I'm physically able to fight this."
Without a clear guideline, he said, police could confiscate marijuana merely to keep legitimate users from smoking it.
"They can't just go around taking medication from sick people," he said.
Is it one of those, um, special cookies?
Hold muh weed...
How do you keep it lit?
Your sleazy personal attack has been reported to the admin.
You say that the drug issue doesn't violate another's rights. That is among the biggest lies ever posted on FR.
#1 The cost to the public in health care as they spread AIDS, die from cancers and other diseases related to using is high. The costs goes from thousands to perhaps millions for the one with AIDS. This affects what you call "OTHERS". So much for that total BS you posted.
Needle drug use causes one to GET AIDS not to transmit it. And society was not forced but has democratically CHOSEN to bear the costs of AIDS (a stupid choice, in my opinion).
And note that needle-sharing is a RESULT of the illegality of drugs and needles; that cost is CAUSED by the War On Some Drugs.
#2 Liability to employ even "unknown" illegal drug users. They cause liability enough to in some cases close businesses down and create a loss of jobs for others clean of drugs. Employers are open to all kinds of lawsuits if they have an illegal drug user working for them. Even if they were not known to be there, if they hurt themselves or others the liability to the employer is sky high.
If that's true (and you provide no evidence), that's a violation of rights by our civil law, not by the users.
By your "logic" on drugs, ALL petroleum should be banned because SOME of it funds terrorists.
You tell me. Many of your pro-potter Libertarian buddies have stated "culinary" uses of cannabis many times on FR.
Although IMO, they were probably using oregano(thinking it was cannabis).
Oh well, A sucker is born every day(P.T. Barnum)
I bet you took an oath to the Constitution, Gil. Look it up.
You're the only one I've ever seen make reference to pork tenderloin. As far as my "pro-potter Libertarian buddies", I think they only do that to piss off your jack-booted statist thug comrades.
For some stupid reason.
None of my rights have ever been violated by another's use of drugs. Illegal or legal.
#1 The cost to the public in health care as they spread AIDS, die from cancers and other diseases related to using is high.
We ARE talking about marijuana, aren't we?
I think you are practicing the politics of addiction and could care less about the actual facts. That is my opinion based on what you posted to me. If you were honest, you could not deny the cost ever again in another pro-use thread.
You are scary.
Heavens, NO! Don't even think like that! You could cause numerous posters out here extreme bloviations of the anus, and have to live with that guilt.
Oh sheesh, since around spring 2001 when I first entered the debate on these pro-pot Libertarian niche of threads on FR, I have made this point about the differences between pot and alcohol in culinary and cultural uses.
Wine is a well respected igriedient in cooking. Wine and beer are also used as an accompiant to a good meal(i.e food which keeps every human alive).
Champagne is used to celebrate joyous events(i.e a wedding). Oh BTW, a wedding where the couple shared a communal bong would be quite a hoot, IMO. The management who rented the hall to the cannabis partakers should be sure they have their vending machine fully stocked with potato chips, or there would be hell to pay by the cannabis crowd.
Anyway to make a long story short one of your pro-potter Libertarian buddies stated that pork tenderloin rolled in cannabis was quite tasty and hip gourmet. I guess he/she got his/her culinary palate from the eptiomie of cannabis culture, High Times.
Wine is a well respected igriedient in cooking. Wine and beer are also used as an accompiant to a good meal(i.e food which keeps every human alive).
Ah, yes. The "alcohol is food" argument. Amazing the difference a few calories, obtained at the expense of toxifying your liver, seem to carry in your view. As far a the "cultural" issues go, isn't that what it's always been about?
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
Harry J. Anslinger, testimony to Congress, 1937
I don't think I would like that. But I sure do love fried pork chops.
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
Harry J. Anslinger, testimony to Congress, 1937
Well at least Tactic, you have thrown off your mask and shown that your cause is all about pot.
Too bad your fellow Libertarian brethren don't have the politcal courage you have, such as using Hillary tactics of the race card while ignoring the fact that pot is a major component of the present day drug culture.
Kudo's to you Tactic, as Hillary would say. You are doing, IMO, your Lord's(Hillary) work, with your above italicized passage.
OK, thanks for telling us you don't pay taxes I guess.
It's certainly true that when stoned, one of the last things one feels like doing is running. But changing one's name because of it seems a bit much. He could've just as easily changed it to Donovan No Worker as well. ...Or perhaps something positive ....like Donovan Yes Slacker, or Yes Toker, or Yes Baker, Yes Listener To The Band Yes.
Invoking Hillary's name will do you no good. This is a conservative site, and the people that frequent such places have too much respect for reason and logic to be taken in by such ploys.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.