Will Bonnie Dumanis walk her talk on marijuana?

by on November 4, 2011 · 10 comments

in Civil Rights, Election, Health, Popular, San Diego

by Alex Kreit / Two Cathedrals / November 4, 2011

As you may have seen, Bonnie Dumanis issued a statement Wednesday “clarifying [her] position on medical marijuana.” (This was linked to a page on Ms. Dumanis’ website that has since been removed) The statement articulates a reasonable — even admirable — position that seems designed to appeal to the moderate voters she’s trying to court. In it, Dumanis claims that she “absolutely support[s] the legitimate, legal use of marijuana for medicinal purposes” and even cites personal examples of “known friends suffering from debilitating, and sometimes fatal, diseases whose only relief from nausea or lack of appetite was marijuana.”

Unfortunately, Dumanis’s actions on this issue do not match her words. To put it mildly.

Words: In her statement, Dumanis pledges: “As Mayor, I will bring all levels of government together, trying to coordinate a lasting, legal solution [on medical marijuana.] I will leverage my long-standing relationships with law enforcement, business leaders and community activists to bring differing ideas and viewpoints to the table.”

Actions: The City has already been engaged in a 2-year-long effort to “coordinate a lasting, legal solution” on this issue. Dumanis has not just been absent from the effort, she has refused invitations to become involved.

In 2009, the San Diego City Council established a one-year task force on medical marijuana. The task force was comprised of 11 members of the community from all walks of life. It included a physician, a retired San Diego police officer, a small business owner, a medical marijuana patient, and a Reverend, among others. The task force literally brought together “law enforcement, business leaders and community activists” to recommend a “lasting, legal solution” to City Council. I was honored to be appointed to chair the task force.

One of the very first things I did as task force chair was to reach out to Bonnie Dumanis’s office to invite her, or someone from her office, to participate in our effort. Shortly before our first meeting in October 2009, I emailed Bonnie Dumanis’s Narcotics Division Chief and Assistant Chief outlining our planned meeting dates and inviting a representative from the District Attorney’s office to participate in person or via writing. Over the next several months, I extended additional invitations on behalf of the task force to a number of people from Dumanis’s office in person, by phone, and by email.

Her office did not take up our invitation. I was never given an explanation as to why Dumanis and her office refused to participate in the effort to craft regulations. By contrast, representatives from the San Diego Police Department accepted our invitation to participate and graciously offered their time and expertise to the task force.

Words: In her recent statement, Dumanis says she believes that “it’s important” that medical marijuana patients “are provided with legitimate access” to medical marijuana.

Actions: As District Attorney, Bonnie Dumanis’s office has refused to issue badly needed prosecutorial guidelines to enable medical marijuana cooperatives to comply with the law and provide “legitimate access.”

In June, 2010, the San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report (PDF) on medical marijuana in response to complaints it received about “the lack of clear and uniform guidelines under which qualified medical marijuana patients can obtain marijuana.” In the report, the Grand Jury recommended that “the District Attorney’s Office should publish a position paper to outline what it considers the legal and illegal operation of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives.”

Bonnie Dumanis has not yet issued any guidelines.

As District Attorney, Dumanis could do a great deal right now to help make sure patients “are provided with legitimate access” by simply issuing guidelines that state clearly what her office believes is and isn’t lawful under state law. Prosecutorial guidelines would allow medical marijuana collectives that wish to operate legitimately to make sure that their conduct is in compliance with Dumanis’s interpretation of state law. In the absence of them, San Diego collectives have been forced to guess at what Dumanis’s office considers to be legal and face a constant threat of prosecution.

Words: In her statement, Bonnie Dumanis implies that her office has only prosecuted bad actors who are using state medical marijuana laws to shield unlawful activity. “What I do not support is drug dealers hiding behind Proposition 215 to sell marijuana for profit to people who don’t need it for medical reasons, selling to our children and even selling to people who have prescriptions in the names of their pets,” Dumanis says.

Actions: As District Attorney, Bonnie Dumanis has made all medical marijuana cooperatives in the city potential targets for prosecution, not just those that are selling to people who do not have valid medical recommendations. On September 10, 2009, for example, Dumanis said that there was “no such thing right now” as a “legitimate medical marijuana dispensar[y]” in San Diego. It’s easy enough to argue that you are only going after the bad apples if you define every single collective to be a bad apple.

Bonnie Dumanis’s argument that no collectives are operating lawfully is based on an unusually restrictive interpretation of state law that her office has adopted in court. The legal details are complex but, in essence, a 2003 state law allows medical marijuana patients to associate “in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes.” In most parts of the state, local prosecutors have interpreted this law to legalize medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives that operate more or less like a food co-op — patients with a lawful recommendation can join a collective to purchase medical marijuana. Bonnie Dumanis’s office, by contrast, has argued in court that in order to be operating lawfully, a collective needs to be run like a hippie commune, with every member of cooperative contributing labor. She has used this unusual interpretation of state law to prosecute medical marijuana providers who would be considered to be operating lawfully in almost any other part of the state.

The evidence of Dumanis’s over-reach can be seen by the fact that San Diego juries have rejected her strained view of the law in medical marijuana prosecutions.

In 2009, for example, Dumanis’s office prosecuted medical marijuana patient and provider Jovan Jackson for operating a medical marijuana collective. The prosecution was based on her office’s narrow interpretation of state law. The jury acquitted Jackson. After the trial, the foreperson explained: “the prosecution gave his narrow definition [of a collective] during the closing arguments, but there was nothing in the law that really backed that up.”

Incredibly, Dumanis’s office prosecuted Jackson a second time based on similar charges. This time, her office filed a motion to deny Jackson the ability to argue to the jury that his actions were in compliance with state law. The Judge granted this motion and, without the opportunity to mount a defense, Jackson was convicted. The case is currently on appeal.

In another example, in 2010, Dumanis prosecuted medical marijuana patient, leading advocate, and Navy veteran Eugene Davidovich for providing a fellow patient with a lawful recommendation (who turned out to be an undercover agent) with medical marijuana. Davodich admitted to the sale but argued it was lawful under state law. The undercover surveillance tape showed Davidovich checking the patient’s recommendation, but Dumanis’s office still decided to prosecute. The jury agreed with the defense and acquitted Davidovich.

Dumanis could revise her unusually narrow legal interpretation at any time. Or, as discussed above, she could articulate guidelines explaining her interpretation in detail so that medical marijuana patients and providers could abide by them. That hasn’t happened.

The bottom line: Bonnie Dumanis’s statement “clarifying [her] position on medical marijuana” is fundamentally inconsistent with the actions she has taken as District Attorney. As District Attorney, Dumanis has stood in the way of safe access to medical marijuana for patients at every turn by declining to work with the City’s task force, refusing to issue prosecutorial guidelines, and working to shut down all medical marijuana collectives in San Diego.

Dumanis has the ability to show that her statement is more than just words. If she means what she says in her new statement, she should issue the prosecutorial guidelines the County Grand Jury asked for in June 2010. In the meantime, she (or another attorney from her office) could meet with medical marijuana collectives and answer their questions about how to abide by the law. Likewise, if Dumanis is truly supportive of medical marijuana, she should have her office drop its opposition to Jovan Jackson’s appeal and allow him to present his defense in court.

If her statement turns out to represent a change of heart on this issue, I would be the first to applaud her. Without action, however, it is difficult to see Dumanis’s statement as anything other than an election-year attempt to run from her record in order to address concerns from moderate Democratic and Independent voters who support medical marijuana.

Alex Kreit is an assistant professor and Director of the Center for Law and Social Justice at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, and past chairman of the city of San Diego’s Medical Marijuana Task Force.

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

avatar doug porter November 4, 2011 at 12:16 pm

and just how were her “known” friends who were suffering from cancer getting their pot?

Reply

avatar Syd Finch November 4, 2011 at 3:05 pm

Illegally.

Reply

avatar Kenloc November 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm

That’s what I’m sayin. Did she try and close the dispensaries that supplied her ill friends? Are they still her friends after that?

Reply

avatar Gordon Wagner November 4, 2011 at 1:16 pm

Does Ms. Dumanis strike anyone else as being straight out of 1970? The whole throwback cop attitude. It’s almost nostalgic to find someone in the public eye who’s so hardline.

Reply

avatar bud101 November 4, 2011 at 1:26 pm

Don’t trust her! She is trying to skirt the middle in hopes to draw votes.

STAY AWAY FROM BONNIE DUMANIS!

She’ll flip flop once in office.

Reply

avatar Syd Finch November 4, 2011 at 3:04 pm

Dumanis is a Liar. A self serving parasite who cares little for LAW unless it suits her or her cronies.
She has to be delusional if she thinks she has a shot a Mayor of anything! She is easily one of the worst DA’s in the USA.

She is, in fact, a FOOL and a LIAR!

Reply

avatar Duncan20903 November 4, 2011 at 4:49 pm

Didn’t Ms Dumanis have something to do with taking County of San Diego v San Diego NORML to the SCOTUS, despite the fact that the respondent wasn’t able to be correctly identified by the County? Just in case you didn’t recall the only thing that San Diego NORML had to do with the case was being named respondent. Do I even have to go into the fact that the case was subsequently laughed out of every Court which heard the lame arguments? Then both the California Supreme Court and the SCOTUS concurred and issued the identical rulings “b-o-r-i-n-g, get lost!”

Reply

avatar Donna Lambert November 4, 2011 at 10:16 pm

I hope that is not you taking a stab at NORML Don Duncan. Don’t even go there. You guys attempt to control and hijack everything. If you can’t control it or hijack it you throw a “friends of the court brief” in their and then try to claim credit.
All you guys want is money and power and to create a restrictive permitting pot monopoly.
Part of the problem is that this entire movement has been hijacked by greed and self serving angles.
Eugene Davidovich had a case thrown out which was rerouted to Judge So 3 days after the cop got his card for Operation GreenRx. Later Judge Kenneth So (presiding judge of San Diego) took his trial for a whopping 1 ounce of pot, and let him sit on the stand and lie all he wanted, as well as put on any defense he wanted, unlike any of the other many cases I have sat in.
Funny thing is there is a Kenneth So Junior ~ hmm ~ over there at the city attorneys office heading, what? Oh, yes, “medical marijuana”
There is more hijinks and corruption in this town than 1950’s Louisiana.
Someone who wants a real story might start investigating the ties of the golden ring group out there at Mother Earth Cooperative which was arranged by who?
Oh yes, Davidovch and Duncan.
With who for a front man? Oh yes, Former ASA leader high school buddy Bob Rydell.
The plot thickens.
Does anybody care?
When the 300 stores shut down because of the city attorneys office this Duncan-ote store stands to make an easy $50 million per year.

None of this is about the sick and dying. None of the talks I heard at city council were about setting up collective cultivation sites that didnt involve investors and payouts.

If you want to start getting “real” ~ let’s talk.
Otherwise you need to explain why you would have a known narc represent you down here?

That is because as soon as Davidovich had his first case dropped he promptly rented an office next to a target store and less than 8 weeks later that and several others were raided. Yes, Dvch had presented himself as a poor broke individual needing to make deliveries.

Rumor has it he briefly surfaced in 2006 about a month before another collective was raided and the guy sent to prison.

But, Duncan, like you said. You don’t care if he is a cop. You like what he is doing for you.

Follow the money. I will expose you. Maybe then this movement can get back on track. It was supposed to be about patients being able to work together, to share and grow and live free from fear. Not about your offshore account in the Cayman islands. $$$$$$$$$$

Reply

avatar OB Mercy November 4, 2011 at 5:54 pm

Another politician talking out of both sides of their mouth? Oooh, nothing new there. She is a sham and a liar. DO NOT VOTE FOR HER! Bonnie, if you are reading this….read my lips….YOUR POLITICAL CAREER IS OVER!!!!

Reply

avatar Shelly Schwartlander November 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm

She refused to prosecute a woman who left a death threat message on my phone, who I had a restraining order against, who hasn’t worked for years but lives well off cons and scams, ripping off landlords for rent while subletting for lots of $, pot and was known to the cops in OB as bad especially running her house a block from Corriea. I felt pretty stupid as a 20 year homeowner, always employed, after a detective recorded the calls and the City Attorney gave me silly reasons to ignore this untouchable who ultimately wasn’t prosecuted for anything, certainly not for terroristic threats. One of her fleet of cars was not impounded when the driver was busted in it and it was full of dope. Heavy NY accent and part of the “tribe” go a long way I believe with our DA, makes me sad to think she could become our mayor.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Before clicking Submit, please complete this simple statement to help us weed out the bots... Thank you! *

Older Article:

Newer Article: