Recent Raids….Ugh
By Breezy Kiefair
MMAG’s president asked me to write on 2 federal stories this week, and I set out to write two separate stories for MMAG’s blog, but as I did my research and my due diligence, I realized I was really researching one issue, with two strong and recent examples.
The first federal raid story I came across is from Saginaw, Michigan. Where U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents partnering with the Saginaw County Sheriff’s Department raided Edwyn W. Boyke Jr.’s house on April 15, 2010. They irreparably damaged his grow room equipment, proceeded to confiscate a lot of his property, his cash on hand, his plants and seedlings, along with Boyke’s Michigan medical marijuana card. Boyke still hasn’t been charged with a crime, and he is legally allowed to grow and use marijuana under a law Michigan voters passed in a landslide vote in 2008.
For more on this story please see:
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2010/05/legal_michigan_patients_property_destroyed_in_mari.php
What we are really discussing here is federal and state held drug forfeiture laws that have long fed the coffers of our police departments and by extension our government by the persecution of peaceful cannabis gardeners. These forfeiture laws are also employed in other drugs, but drug forfeiture laws enforcement is particularly lucrative for LEO to use this tactic against medicinal growers because there is some expectation on the part of the grower that they are obeying the laws of their particular state and are therefore more compliant when faced with LEO at their door.
Here is a quick background of what I mean when I speak of drug forfeiture laws:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/forfeiture
Although forfeiture laws have existed in the United States since the colonial period, they have not always been favored. Early cases of forfeiture usually involved extraordinary circumstances, such as the seizure of pirate ships or warring ships. After the Civil War, forfeitures were used for tax-revenue violations, but government-imposed forfeiture was a rarity.
In 1970, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act (21U.S.C.A. § 881), also known as the Forfeiture Act. The Forfeiture Act authorized federal prosecutors to bring civil forfeiture actions against certain properties that were owned by persons who had been convicted in federal court of dealing drugs. This act was seldom used because it limited forfeiture to the property of persons who had been convicted of participating in continuing criminal enterprises.
In 1978, Congress amended the Forfeiture Act to allow the forfeiture of anything of value used or that was intended to be used by a person to purchase illegal drugs (Psychotropic Substances Act of 1978 [Pub. L. No. 95-633, tit. III, § 301(a), 92 Stat. 3768, 3777 (codified as amended at 21 U.S.C.A. § 8821(a)(6))]). This change expanded the Forfeiture Act to allow the forfeiture of all proceeds and property that were traceable to the purchase of an illegal drug. Under the 1978 amendments, the federal government was authorized to proceed in rem against property. In rem forfeiture actions are taken against the property itself, not against its owner. In such proceedings, the guilt or innocence of the property owner regarding any criminal activity is irrelevant. Thus, under the Forfeiture Act, the government may remove property from persons it suspects of a crime, without ever charging them with a crime. The basis of this kind of forfeiture is traced back to the deodand doctrine of the English common law.
The other story I would like to feature on this issue is from Pittsfield, Maine — James P. Fowler, 44, was charged with cultivating marijuana and possession of marijuana after a March 19 raid. Mr. Fowler said that, “Based on figures used by drug investigators to value marijuana plants, he is owed up to $38,000.” Mr. Fowler’s home was raided by drug agents seized 19 marijuana plants that he says he was growing in compliance with Maine’s medical marijuana law.
“If they can use $2,000 a plant against me, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” said Fowler, “I want some sort of compensation.”
Fowler maintains growing operation in his home to supply himself and three other patients who have deemed him a “designated caregiver” under the state’s medical marijuana law. That means Fowler can possess up to 2.5 ounces of processed marijuana and six plants for each patient — for a total of 24 plants and 10 ounces of pot.. Investigators found 25 plants in the March 19 raid, but Fowler said some of the plants were male juveniles, which he said are not considered marijuana plants under the law.
For more on this story, please see my source text:
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/144384.html?comment_result=posted#comments
Breezy says, “We need to end this abuse of people who are merely trying to make the world better and ease the suffering of others under the laws of their states. If we were to reschedule Cannabis, the Federal Agents would no longer have this drug forfeiture law to hide behind and fill their pockets.”
