this should REALLY WORRY Center owners

[copobo]

The Associated Press: Federal court in Colorado bars marijuana defense

Federal court in Colorado bars marijuana defense
(AP) â?? 5 hours ago
DENVER â?? A Colorado pot grower facing federal drug charges after he bragged about his marijuana business to a TV station won't be allowed to use the state's medical marijuana law in his defense.
U.S. District Judge Philip Brimmer has sided with federal prosecutors in their case against Chris Bartkowicz (BART-ko-wits).
Federal drug authorities raided Bartkowicz's suburban Denver home and he was indicted in May with a federal charge of cultivating marijuana. Bartkowicz says he was following state medical marijuana rules.
Federal prosecutors said Bartkowicz had more plants than the state permits, but also said state laws on marijuana wouldn't matter in a federal court.
Marijuana activists say growers are being targeted by federal authorities despite state laws.

copobo Reviewed by copobo on 08-19-2010. this should REALLY WORRY Center owners The Associated Press: Federal court in Colorado bars marijuana defense Federal court in Colorado bars marijuana defense (AP) â?? 5 hours ago DENVER â?? A Colorado pot grower facing federal drug charges after he bragged about his marijuana business to a TV station won't be allowed to use the state's medical marijuana law in his defense. U.S. District Judge Philip Brimmer has sided with federal prosecutors in their case against Chris Bartkowicz (BART-ko-wits). Federal drug authorities Rating: 5

[copobo]

Prosecutors want to disallow medical-marijuana defense for Highlands Ranch man - The Denver Post

Prosecutors are asking a federal judge to eliminate Chris Bartkowicz's medical-marijuana defense before his upcoming federal trial on marijuana-cultivation charges.

In a motion filed Tuesday, prosecutors contend Bartkowicz should not be allowed to use Colorado's medical-marijuana laws as a defense or try to argue that he was singled out or didn't know he would be subject to prosecution.

"The provisions of state law cited in the Government's brief demonstrate the quagmire of Colorado state law and its medical marijuana provisions, and further demonstrates that none of those provisions have relevance to the federal prosecution of the Defendant," the motion says.

Bartkowicz was indicted on charges of possessing marijuana with intent to distribute 100 or more plants, using a place to manufacture a controlled substance, and distributing marijuana within 1,000 feet of a Highlands Ranch elementary school.

The charges came in February after Bartkowicz did an interview with 9News in which he discussed his marijuana-growing operation.

He faces life in prison because he has prior felony convictions.

Defense attorney Joseph Saint-Veltri would not comment on the government's motion until he had a chance to read it.

Saint-Veltri has filed his own motion to dismiss the case, arguing that his client didn't know he was breaking the law because the Justice Department issued instructions to federal prosecutors to use their resources to go after drug traffickers and not medical-marijuana users who are complying with state law.

The October 2009 Justice Department memo is commonly referred to as the "Holder Memorandum."

"The defendant was acting pursuant to Amendment 20 to the Colorado Constitution and the so-called Holder Memorandum," the motion to dismiss says. "The defendant's good faith belief that he was complying with the law, as it was understood by him, should have been submitted to the Grand Jury, especially because, upon best information and belief, this is the first federal prosecution involving Amendment 20."

Saint-Veltri also expressed concern over the amount of prison time Bartkowicz is facing, calling it "cruel and unusual punishment."

"A sentence of ten years or twenty years or sixty years or, as the government propounds, life imprisonment is not only unconscionable but grotesque," he wrote.

Prosecutors say Bartkowicz had more plants â?? 224 of them â?? than allowed per patient and he was out of compliance with not only federal law but Colorado's medical-marijuana laws.

[HighPopalorum]

Umm.... how is this news? We already knew he wouldn't be allowed to use A20 as a defense in Federal Court. Hell, I knew that before he even got arrested.

[Zedleppelin]

Agreed. There are quite a few people that are in federal prison that were nailed in Cali, I don't think any one of them were allowed to mention MMJ at their trial.

[copobo]

so, should the DEA decide to take out a Center, who has paid all of their fees to the state and their city and has given up all of their rights during the application process....

what happens when you guys have all this money in this business, and Obama is voted out? What happens if the next president has a different view, and issues a different directive to the justice dept?

[senorx12562]

so, should the DEA decide to take out a Center, who has paid all of their fees to the state and their city and has given up all of their rights during the application process....

what happens when you guys have all this money in this business, and Obama is voted out? What happens if the next president has a different view, and issues a different directive to the justice dept?

And best of all, you've already confessed when you filled out the paperwork. One more reason to stay underground until this all shakes out.

[TheReleafCenter]

Then it all goes away. That was always the risk getting involved in this business.

I just hope they charge the state as an accomplice. They've taken enough of our "drug money" by now to be tried as one.

[funkfingers]

Doesn't anyone know what "jury nullification" Is??? Why is this never ever used in court... Are people not aware of what it is??? Jury nullification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[FlyinPolynesian]

Doesn't anyone know what "jury nullification" Is??? Why is this never ever used in court... Are people not aware of what it is??? Jury nullification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BINGO!!!

[copobo]

^^ 2 posters who at least have heard about freedom! I heard that's often a disqualifying question when picking a jury. I have a theory that registered Libertarians are not called for jury duty. I could be wrong.