|
Learn the Business of I-28
Portlandsterdam University
| |
Feds: No more arrests for pot-smoking patients
New guidelines will apply in 14 states allowing medical use
of marijuana
updated 8:02 a.m. PT,
Mon., Oct . 19, 2009
WASHINGTON - Pot-smoking patients or their sanctioned suppliers should
not be targeted for federal prosecution in states that allow
medical
marijuana ,
prosecutors were told Monday in a new policy memo issued by the Justice
Department.
Under the policy spelled out in a three-page legal memo, federal
prosecutors are being told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people
who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state law.
View News Video at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/29814551#29814551
Official Memorandum
http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
*MEMORANDUM FOR SELECTED UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS*
*FROM:* David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General
*SUBJECT:* Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use
of Marijuana
This memorandum provides clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors in
States that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana. These
laws vary in their substantive provisions and in the extent of state regulatory
oversight, both among the enacting States and among local jurisdictions within
those States. Rather than developing different guidelines for every possible
variant of state and local law, this memorandum provides uniform guidance to
focus federal investigations and prosecutions in these States on core federal
enforcement priorities.
The Department of Justice is committed to the enforcement of the Controlled
Substances Act in all States. Congress has determined that marijuana is a
dangerous drug, and the illegal distribution and sale of marijuana is a serious
crime and provides a significant source of revenue to large-scale criminal
enterprises, gangs, and cartels. One timely example underscores the importance
of our efforts to prosecute significant marijuana traffickers: marijuana
distribution in the United States remains the single largest source of revenue
for the Mexican cartels.
The Department is also committed to making efficient and rational use of its
limited investigative and prosecutorial resources. In general, United States
Attorneys are vested with "plenary authority with regard to federal criminal
matters" within their districts. USAM 9-2.001. In exercising this authority,
United States Attorneys are "invested by
statute and delegation from the Attorney General with the broadest discretion in
the exercise of such authority." /Id./ This authority should, of course, be
exercised consistent with Department priorities and guidance.
The prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including
marijuana, and the disruption of illegal drug manufacturing and trafficking
networks continues to be a core priority in the Department's efforts against
narcotics and dangerous drugs, and the Department's investigative and
prosecutorial resources should be directed towards
these objectives. As a general matter, pursuit
of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on
individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing
state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.
For example,
prosecution of individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use
marijuana as
part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or
those caregivers in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law who
provide such individuals with marijuana, is unlikely to be an efficient use of
limited federal resources. On the other hand, prosecution of commercial
enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana for profit continues to be
an enforcement priority of the Department. To be sure, claims of compliance with
state or local law may mask operations inconsistent with the terms, conditions,
or purposes of those laws, and federal law enforcement should not be deterred by
such assertions when otherwise pursuing the Department's core enforcement
priorities.
Typically, when any of the following characteristics is present, the conduct
will not be in clear and unambiguous compliance with applicable state law and
may indicate illegal drug trafficking activity of potential federal interest:
*unlawful possession or unlawful use of firearms;
*violence;
*sales to minors;
*financial and marketing
activities inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of state law,
including evidence of money laundering activity and/or financial gains or
excessive amounts of cash inconsistent with purported compliance with state or
local law;
*amounts of marijuana inconsistent with purported compliance with state or local
law;
*illegal possession or sale of other controlled substances; or
*ties to other criminal enterprises.
Of course, no State can authorize violations of federal law, and the list of
factors above is not intended to describe exhaustively when a federal
prosecution may be warranted. Accordingly, in prosecutions under the Controlled
Substances Act, federal prosecutors are not expected to charge, prove, or
otherwise establish any state law violations. Indeed, this memorandum does not
alter in any way the Department's authority to enforce federal law, including
laws prohibiting the manufacture, production, distribution, possession, or use
of marijuana on federal
property. This guidance regarding resource allocation does not "legalize"
marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law, nor is it
intended to create any privileges, benefits, or rights, substantive or
procedural, enforceable by any individual, party or witness in any
administrative, civil, or criminal matter. Nor does clear and unambiguous
compliance with state law or the absence of one or all of the above factors
create a legal defense to a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Rather,
this memorandum is intended solely as a guide to the exercise of investigative
and prosecutorial discretion.
Finally, nothing herein precludes investigation or prosecution where there is a
reasonable basis to believe that compliance with state law is being invoked as a
pretext for the production or distribution of marijuana for purposes not
authorized by state law. Nor does this guidance preclude investigation or
prosecution, even when there is clear
and unambiguous compliance with existing state law, in particular circumstances
where investigation or prosecution otherwise serves important federal interests.
Your offices should continue to review marijuana cases for prosecution on a
case-by-case basis, consistent with the guidance on resource allocation and
federal priorities set forth herein, the consideration of requests for federal
assistance from state and local law enforcement authorities, and the Principles
of Federal Prosecution.
cc: All United States Attorneys
Lanny A. Breuer
Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division
B. Todd Jones
United States Attorney
District of Minnesota
Chair, Attorney General's Advisory Committee
Michele M. Leonhart
Acting Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration
H. Marshall Jarrett
Director
Executive Office for United States Attorneys
Kevin L. Perkins
Assistant Director
Criminal Investigative Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation
|
