Laserfiche WebLink
and served search warrants on several medical marijuana locations. In addition to <br />marijuana many weapons were recovered, including a stolen handgun and an M-16 <br />assault rifle.4' The National Drug Intelligence Center reports that marijuana growers are <br />employing armed guards, using explosive booby traps and murdering people to shield <br />their crops. Street gangs of all national origins are involved in transporting and <br />distributing marijuana to meet the ever increasing demand for the drug.4? Store-front <br />medical marijuana businesses are very dangerous enterprises. <br />C. Liability Issues <br />With respect to issuing business licenses to medical marijuana store-front <br />facilities a very real issue has arisen: counties and cities are arguably aiding and abetting <br />criminal violations of federal law. Such actions clearly put the counties permitting these <br />establishments in very precarious legal positions. Aiding and abetting a crime occurs <br />when someone commits a crime, The person aiding that crime knew the criminal offender <br />intended to commit the crime, and the person aiding the crime intended to assist the <br />criminal offender in the commission of the crime. <br />The legal definition of aiding and abetting is easily applied to counties and cities <br />allowing medical marijuana facilities to open. A county that has been informed about the <br />Gonzales v. Raich decision knows that all marijuana activity is federally illegal. <br />Furthermore, such counties know that individuals involved in the medical marijuana <br />business are subject to federal prosecution. When an individual in California cultivates, <br />possesses, transports, or uses marijuana he is committing a federal crime. <br />A county issuing a business license to a medical marijuana facility knows that the <br />people there are committing federal crimes. The county also knows that those involved <br />in providing and obtaining medical marijuana are intentionally violating federal taw. <br />This very problem is why some counties are re-thinking the presence of medical <br />marijuana facilities in their communities. There is a valid. fear of being prosecuted for <br />aiding anal abetting federal. drug crimes. Presently, two counties have expressed concern <br />that California's medical marijuana statutes have placed them in such a precarious legal <br />position. Because of the serious criminal ramifications involved in issuing business <br />permits and allowing store-front medical marijuana businesses to operate within their <br />borders, San Diego and San Bernardino Counties have filed a lawsuit against the state. <br />They seek to prevent California from enforcing the medical marijuana statutes which <br />subject them to criminal liability. <br />Conclusion. <br />In light of the United States Supreme Court's decision and reasoning in Gonzales <br />v. Raich, the United States Supremacy Clause renders California's Compassionate Use <br />Act of 1996 and Medical Marijuana Program. Act of 2004 illegal. No state has the power <br />to grant its citizens the right to violate federal law. People have been, and continue to be, <br />federally prosecuted for marijuana crimes. We conclude that medical marijuana is not <br />legal under federal law, despite the current California scheme. <br />Furthermore, store-front medical marijuana businesses are prey for criminals and <br />create easily identifiable victims. The people growing the marijuana are looking to and <br />75A-72 <br />