Judge Patel Supports Medical Cannabis, But Lepp's Release Still Uncertain

Judge Patel Supports Medical Cannabis, But Lepp's Release Still Uncertain

Ann Harrison HempEvolution.org

San Francisco, CA Mar 23, 2005 - Charles "Eddy" Lepp's appearance in Federal Court yesterday on cannabis cultivation charges revealed Judge Marilyn Patel's support for medical cannabis use by defendants already out on bail. But it is still unclear whether the judge's sympathies will result in Lepp's release from jail.

After dispensing with requests from Lepp's former attorney Dennis Roberts to be released from the case, and discharging Lepp's former federal defender David Fermino, Judge Patel turned her attention to Lepp's new attorney Shari Greenberger.

Greenberger is representing Lepp together with Tony Serra and Omar Figueroa. But Greenberger said the attorneys needed two weeks to pull together their motion for Lepp's release on bail. Greenberger also asked Patel if Lepp could be transferred to the federal detention center from the Santa Rita jail where he has been held since his arrest. She said Lepp has been placed in the general population at the jail and feared for his safety. Lepp was also struggling with health problems, said Greenberger.

"If only he could get his marijuana," laughed Patel who suggested that Lepp could possibly be transferred to the North County Jail. The judge said she would discuss the request with the marshals and set another bail hearing for Tuesday, May 31 at 10 pm.

When Harris Tabak, the attorney for Lepp's co-defendant, Daniel Barnes, asked whether his client could use medical cannabis while out on bail, Patel surprised the court by suggesting that Tabak take the matter up with pre-trial services. Prosecutor David Hall objected saying the government opposed the use of medical cannabis for defendants on pre-trial release because "it is against the law."

"Whose laws?" asked Patel. "What about state laws?"

"That will be taken up in this case," replied Hall.

Patel told Tabak that pre-trial services should determine whether Barnes has a current recommendation for medical cannabis. "In accordance with California law, he is entitled to a certain amount of medical cannabis in compliance with state law," said Patel. The judge added that Barnes would be entitled only to personal use amounts, "If he's running around with gobs of it in his pocket or throwing up a forest of it somewhere, that will not be allowed."

"What ever happened to state's rights, huh?" said Judge Patel. The audience in the courtroom bust into spontaneous applause, but the judge admonished them. "This is not appropriate, this is not a talk show," said Patel.

In regard to Lepp's request for bail, Patel rejected Robert's argument that pre-trail services had not revoked Lepp's standing bail on the earlier August charges. Patel noted that the new charges stemming from the February DEA raid on Lepp's property, had resulted in a superseding indictment and the former bail arrangements did not apply.

Patel added that she had not yet seen the detention order from Magistrate Maria-Elena James which denied Lepp's release. James argued during Lepp's detention hearing that he had violated the terms of his release from earlier charges stemming from an August DEA raid on Lepp's property. James concluded that Lepp was a "danger to the community" due to the high probability that he would re-offend by growing cannabis again.

During an earlier hearing in front of Patel on March 14 to discuss items that federal authorities had seized from Lepp's home during the February raid, Lepp complained that Roberts had refused to submit a request for an injunction to protect his cannabis grow as had been filed in the WAMM case in Santa Cruz. "There seems to be a lack of trust," said Lepp.

The crucial distinction between the two cases, however, is that the WAMM collective had stopped cultivating when they appealed for their injunction which was granted by the judge only after it had been reviewed by an appellate court. "Your attorney was using his best judgment," said Patel. "We are not at that stage in this case."

"Why is he in custody?" Patel then asked the attorneys. "Is he all of a sudden more of a flight risk?"

Lepp then jumped in attempting to explain why he had been growing cannabis. After Lepp's arrest for 32,000 cannabis plants last August, federal authorities claim they seized another 6,000 plants in the most recent February raid. "Hall alleged on the ongoing criminal indictment that 1,600 of the plants seized did not even have roots," said Lepp. "I'm a row farmer and patients have to be assured that they will have plants for the next growing season. That's why I wanted the injunction."

"But one of the conditions of your release was that you weren't going to grow any more," said Patel.

"This is not an ongoing criminal enterprise," pleaded Lepp. "You let me go to Amsterdam and I had offers from three people who offered to help me run. But I came back. I gave my word not to plant until I had my injunction, but I have to take care of my family and my patients."

"This is ongoing activity," said Prosecutor Hall.

"Have you had a meeting with pre-trial services," Patel asked Lepp.

"Pre-trial services all like Mr. Lepp," replied Roberts.

"We all like him," replied Patel. "The question is whether what he has been doing is legal or illegal."