First time marijuana seller gets 55 years

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
This explains every post.  Say no more.  

Karaya

Well, but of COURSE!! There HAS to be SOME explination if others don't think exactly as you do! It must be brain damage from drug abuse!! It could not POSSIBLY be that someone could have a difference of opinion than YOU, because...YOU are always RIGHT!!

FWIW you have no idea what I do- but one thing I used to do is write law enforcement and PAL grants. What I do now required a DoJ background check and  State licensing. Getting pulled over with alcohol on my breath, or a roach in my astray, by the CHP (who still arrests for pot in motor vehicles) and I lose my State license to operate my business.

[GRUNHERZ]

Being a homeless bum and sleeping in dumpsters on the beach requires licensing???



What do you do Airhead?

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Airhead
Well, but of COURSE!! There HAS to be SOME explination if others don't think exactly as you do! It must be brain damage from drug abuse!! It could not POSSIBLY be that someone could have a difference of opinion than YOU, because...YOU are always RIGHT!!

FWIW you have no idea what I do- but one thing I used to do is write law enforcement and PAL grants. What I do now required a DoJ background check and  State licensing. Getting pulled over with alcohol on my breath, or a roach in my astray, by the CHP (who still arrests for pot in motor vehicles) and I lose my State license to operate my business.

Wrong, you post for shock value.  I am NOT always RIGHT, but thanks for taking the easy way out.

Karaya

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Uh, I have a buddy who is CHP.  The moron sold to an undercover officer, who probably DID NOT have a CCW for an ankle holster with a revolver (prolly .38).   You are truly a tool, if you think the "Non-Parking Ticket California Officer" would NOT arrest.   You're off your rocker man.   Just set the crack pipe down and step backwards.  My buddy said he'd be looking at 5 years MINIMUM.  

You are confusing "Medicinal Use" with "Drug Trafficing" or "Posession of Illegal Substance with the Intent to Distribute".  I

Again, I OBEY the laws of the land.  

Karaya

Uh, I have several buddies who are CHP- one of my cousins is CHP, and I have an uncle who's retired CHP.
I also have a nephew who is Ukiah PD. I've known the North Section Watch Commander for Mendocino co. Sheriffs Dept., Tom Allman, for over 20 years. I've known the Sheriff for 20 years, and worked with both the Ukiah POA and Mendocino County Deputy Sheriffs Association many times when we published program books for celebrity basketball fund raisers. My sister is engaged to a Deputy DA who prosicutes drug charges. I volunteer work on grant and ordinance writing, and am currently working on a draft to get Ukiah another K-9 unit.

In Ukiah, if a Cop sees a nickel bag pot transaction, he will maybe investigate for weapons or other drugs- if none are present he may, or may not, confinscate the pot, depending upon the attitude of the perp.

Now you can sit on your fat bellybutton in front of your monitor and call me a liar if you like, but if you're willing to come up here I'd be more than happy to set up an interview with our law enforcrment community and our DA's office and you can hear what I'm saying directly from them.

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Wrong, you post for shock value.  I am NOT always RIGHT, but thanks for taking the easy way out.

Karaya

I agree- you're often wrong, but more than that you're also offensive and insulting and incapable of rational debate without resorting to name calling. It's one thing to call me names because you don't like my opinions, especially in the lack of a reasoned response, and it's another to challange a statement (like you did with Reagan) because I'll do a Google and, if in error, admit it and stand corrected- but what you do, in the day-to-day conversations here, is insult, name call and denegrate anyone that has a difference of opinion with you.

And then you accuse ME of posting for shock value? At least I can engage people in a rational debate without resorting to profanity or name calling. I haven't seen you do that yet.

[1Klink]

Sounds like both of you are doin the same thing.

Ones the Pot,and ones the Kettle.

You guys decides who's what,either way you cut it,don,t carry a gun concealed while in the act of selling DOPE.

Thats how the law stipulates,How many Law Enforcement officers
do you know that feel better knowing wether the dope dealer has a gun or doesn,t have have a gun.

[Airhead]

Our District Attorney, Norm Vrooman, and our County Sheriff, Tony Craver, were both elected by pledging to uphold this ordinance. Like I said- here the Narcs are busy with the crank labs and don't have time to bust for dime bags.


MARIJUANA ORDINANCE FOR MENDOCINO COUNTY
Section 1: FINDINGS.

The people of Mendocino County find as follows:

* WHEREAS Cannabis sativa (marijuana) is a beneficial plant with a respectable heritage and hundreds of well-known industrial, medicinal and recreational uses;

* WHEREAS two decades of marijuana law enforcement in Mendocino County has not stopped cultivation here but has unnecessarily marginalized a large number of otherwise law abiding citizens who grow and use marijuana;

* WHEREAS those who grow for personal use are not responsible for violent incidents sometimes associated with marijuana cultivation, but are vulnerable to theft;

* WHEREAS The Institute of Medicine has found that marijuana has bona fide medical uses and is not a gateway to hard drug addiction;

* WHEREAS law enforcement has carried out investigations, confiscations, and arrests against persons cultivating and using medical marijuana under Proposition 215 in Mendocino County;

* WHEREAS the cities of Berkeley and San Francisco have longstanding ordinances which instruct police to minimize the priority of marijuana enforcement.

Section 2: PURPOSE

The ordinance codified in this chapter will:

A. Instruct the county government to support all efforts toward the decriminalization of marijuana;

B. Instruct the county sheriff and district attorney to make marijuana enforcement their lowest priority with respect to other crimes;

C. Establish a maximum limit of plants and weight for cultivation and possession of marijuana for personal use in Mendocino County, and prohibit the expenditure of public funds for enforcement of marijuana laws against cultivators and users in possession of quantities below that limit.

D. Remove the fear of prosecution and the stigma of criminality from people who harmlessly cultivate and/or use marijuana for personal medical or recreational purposes.

E. Extend police protection to those growing or possessing marijuana for personal use;

F. Provide for the continued enforcement of marijuana laws against those who cultivate, transport and possess marijuana for sale.

THEREFORE: the purpose of this chapter is to establish Cannabis enforcement policy for Mendocino County.

Section 3: DECRIMINALIZATION OF CANNABIS IN CALIFORNIA

It is the desire of the people of Mendocino County that the cultivation for personal use of Cannabis be decriminalized in California. In this context, the board of supervisors is directed to lobby state and federal governments for the immediate decriminalization of the personal use of Cannabis, specifically by repealing Sections 11357, (possession), 11358, (transportation), and - 11359, (cultivation), of the California Health and Safety Code. The people also urge the Sheriff and District Attorney to publicly support such decriminalization.

Section 4: LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY OF CANNABIS

Through its budgetary authority, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors shall seek to ensure that the Sheriff's Office and the District Attorney give lowest priority to the enforcement and prosecution of marijuana laws.

Section 5: SHERIFF OFFICE ARRESTS AND CITATIONS

The Board of Supervisors shall use its budgetary authority to ensure that the Sheriff's Office makes no arrests and issues no citations for violations of the above state Health and Safety Code sections in any single case involving 25 or fewer adult flowering female marijuana plant or the equivalent in dried marijuana.

Section 6: DISTRICT ATTORNEY PROSECUTIONS

The Board of Supervisors shall use its funding authority to ensure that the District Attorney shall not prosecute any violations of the above state Health and Safety Code sections nor seize any property in any single case involving 25 or fewer adult flowering female marijuana plants or the equivalent in dried marijuana.

Section 7: EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR CANNABIS ENFORCEMENT

Neither the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, nor the Sheriff, nor the District Attorney shall spend or authorize the expenditure of any public funds for the investigation, arrest, or prosecution of any person, or the seizure of any property in any single case involving 25 or fewer adult flowering female marijuana plants or the equivalent in dried marijuana, nor shall the Auditor Controller or the Treasurer- Tax Collector approve any such requests for such expenditures of public funds, or authorize or approve the issuance of any form of payment should such expenditures be made.

Section 8: REPORTING

The Board of Supervisors shall instruct the Sheriff's Office and District Attorney to report on December 1 of each year regarding marijuana law enforcement and prosecution activities engaged in by themselves and by state, federal, and/or other law enforcement agencies within the County of Mendocino.

Section 9: SERVERABILITY

The people of Mendocino County intend that in case a court of competent jurisdiction should find one or more of the above Sections illegal, the remaining Sections remain in full force and effect.

[Mini D]

I vote against mandatory sentancing whenever a ballot is presented.  It almost always shows itself to be excessive.

That said... I find the article quoted at thes start of this thread laughable.  Why is it that people can't let cases stand on unbiased merit?

"Small amount of marijuana": 3 sales of 1/2 lb each.  They then found 3 additional pounds in his home as well as 2 "suckers" of an opiate material.

At 2 of the sales, he brandished the weapon: had it on the console next to his hand once, and lifted his pant leg to show it to the buyer on the second purchase.  The third purchase is unknown if he had the gun or not, so no charges were pressed.

When they searched his home, they also found a stolen firearm in addition to the large amounts of marijuana.

This person was offered a 15 year plea deal (most likely out by 6 1/2 with that type of sentance) and turned it down.

[Mini D]

BTW, for anyone that want's to read the judge's summary:

http://www.utd.uscourts.gov/reports/angelos.pdf

The sentance was excessive, but the article quoted was incredibly misleading in order to make it look worse.

[Suave]

Yeah, he should've gotten in trouble for the fentanyl suckers, but nothing for pot and the firearms.

For all I know some of my firearms could've been stolen. And if somebody wants to sell pot, or any other agriculture products and carry a gun while doing it, it's well within his constitutional rights.

[1Klink]

* WHEREAS those who grow for personal use are not responsible for violent incidents sometimes associated with marijuana cultivation, but are vulnerable to theft;

Have u ever grown POT?

If i caught someone stealin my crop,Damn straight they are gettin shot at.

[Suave]

Originally posted by Mini D
BTW, for anyone that want's to read the judge's summary:

http://www.utd.uscourts.gov/reports/angelos.pdf

The sentance was excessive, but the article quoted was incredibly misleading in order to make it look worse.

Angelos carried a handgun to two $350 marijuana deals; the third when police found several additional handguns at his home when they executed a search warrant. For thses three acts of possessing (not using or even displaying) these guns, the government insists that Mr. Angelos should essentially spend the rest of his life in prison......
The court believes that to sentence Mr.Angelos to prison for the rest of his life is unjust, cruel, and even irrational.

This is quoted from the pdf that mini linked.

[Mini D]

Read further suave.  The judge had a meaning of "displaying" that meant something other than "showing".  He contradicts himself somewhat further down when he describes the individual incidents.

[Mini D]

BTW... that summary is a very good read. It shows the process by which the 55 year sentance was derived. It's a gnarly combination of the senate and the Supreme Court. There's no one guilty party, and there's no direct agenda. This is all coming from 36 year old legislation. That and a series of USSC desions on how to interpret "gun used during a crime".

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Mini D
There's no one guilty party, and there's no direct agenda.

Weldon Angelos is guilty...