THESE ARE JURY INSTRUCTIONS I USED IN A CASE IN WHICH I SECURED A NOT GUILTY VERDICT. OF COURSE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO BOTH HAVE THESE INSTRUCTIONS AND TO HAVE A LAWYER THAT KNOWS HOW TO USE THEM!
Qualified patients claiming protection under the law may possess an amount of marijuana that is reasonably related to their current medical needs.
“Non medical purpose” means any purpose other than a medical purpose including recreational use or sales to people outside the collective.
The question of whether the medical use of marijuana is appropriate for a patient’s illness is a determination to be made by a physician. A physician’s determination on this medical issue is not to be second-guessed by jurors who might not deem the patient’s condition to be sufficiently “serious.”
Medical marijuana patients have the right to transport marijuana from the place they obtain it to the place that they intend to use it if the amount transported is reasonably related to their current medical needs.
Qualified patients who collectively associate in order to cultivate marijuana for other members of the collective may transport their collectively grown marijuana to other members of the collective. The marijuana transported must be reasonably related to the collective members’ current medical needs.
Only marijuana grown by a qualified patient may lawfully be transported by, or distributed to, other members of a collective. The collective may allocate marijuana to other members of the group.
Qualified patients who associate within the State of California in order to collectively cultivate marijuana for medical purposes, shall not solely on the basis of that fact be subject to criminal sanctions for either transportation nor possession for sale of marijuana. Collectives may receive reimbursement for marijuana and the services provided in conjunction with the provision of that marijuana; however, collectives may not make a profit beyond those permitted expenses and service costs. The making of a profit is an unlawful sale of marijuana.
The burden is on the defendant to merely raise a reasonable doubt that their conduct was lawful as stated above.
However, once the defendant raises that reasonable doubt the People have the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants were not acting lawfully
At Jay Leiderman Law, we have proven results over years of practice, and we are uniquely qualified to represent you in your time of need. We are situated in Ventura, California but we handle cases throughout the state. We have the expertise, experience and skill to handle numerous types of legal matters. Jay Leiderman is one of only a few CERTIFIED CRIMINAL LAW SPECIALISTS in the area. He handles every kind of criminal law case. He is famous for defending medical marijuana cases and computer hacking cases, though the bulk of his practice is a generous mix of those cases plus serious felonies and misdemeanors. Read more at his Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Leiderman or his homepage www.jayleiderman.com
This post does not create an attorney-client relationship and does not constitute legal advice. Moreover, the law changes over time. Always consult an attorney before determining what motion s to file and what the current law is as to any particular topic.
Criminal defense attorney and author Jay Leiderman, a California State Bar Certified Criminal Law Specialist can be contacted through the contact page of this website: https://www.jayleiderman.com/contact/
Legalize it, don’t criticize it!