Cannabis in court: A medical marijuana patient does battle over East Wenatchee arrest

4 free views left!

Cannabis in court: A medical marijuana patient does battle over East Wenatchee arrest

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

EAST WENATCHEE — Saúl Ramos Sanchez got stopped for a traffic violation, but he wasn’t arrested for it. The cannabis in his glove box was another matter.

Saúl Ramos Sanchez was arrested and prosecuted in East Wenatchee over medical cannabis possession.

Since that misdemeanor arrest in June for possessing less than 40 grams of pot plus a doctor’s card authorizing it for medical purposes, the 19-year-old Rock Island man has become the only East Wenatchee Municipal Court defendant in at least two years to have his patient status challenged under Washington’s cannabis law.

Although Ramos had a medical card validating his possession of pot, East Wenatchee City Attorney Devin Poulson refused to dismiss the case, demanded Ramos’s medical records, asked a judge to strip him of his medical defense, and told the defendant’s lawyer he doesn’t believe clients like Ramos — who claims to suffer the effects of a back injury — have legitimate medical conditions that justify marijuana use.

“I don’t believe these young guys are suffering from a terminable (sic) or debilitating disease,” Poulson wrote to public defender Kambra Mellergaard in an August email obtained by The Wenatchee World.“The doc just signs the card.”

Devin Poulson

East Wenatchee City Attorney

It’s a new stance for Poulson, who previously dismissed many possession cases that involved a medical authorization — despite a record of bumping up East Wenatchee’s prosecution rate. Poulson would not comment for this story, saying he does not discuss city legal matters with the press. Ramos, too, declined to comment, on Mellergaard’s advice.

On Nov. 14, Municipal Court Judge Chancey Crowell turned down Poulson’s motion to deny the medical-use defense, restoring Ramos’s claim to immunity under the medical pot statute. He’ll appear in court again Wednesday, ahead of a trial date later this month.

Of 34 cases of misdemeanor pot possession brought to East Wenatchee court since January 2011, Ramos is the only one whose medical defense claim has been challenged. He’s also unusual in that there are no other criminal offenses pending from his arrest — most of the city court’s other pot cases involved related offenses such as speeding, suspended driver’s licenses, DUI or lack of vehicle insurance. All but two of the arrests resulted from traffic stops.

Out of those 34 cases, five defendants pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor possession charge. Seventeen pot charges were dismissed by the city, often in exchange for pleas to the related crimes. Seven prosecutions were deferred or vacated when the defendants agreed to probation or substance-abuse counseling. The remaining cases are still in progress.

“Typically, the cases I’ve handled, people don’t have a medicinal marijuana card — and when they do, there’s all kind of other crimes going along with it, so they don’t really meet the terms of the statute,” Mellergaard said.

The state law allows patients with “terminal or debilitating medical conditions” — with written authorization from their doctors — to possess up to 24 ounces of marijuana without fear of arrest. (It does not, however, allow possession of a marijuana pipe or other paraphernalia.) With a doctor’s authorization, they can offer an “affirmative defense” in court, proving their medical status and nullifying prosecution. Qualifying conditions include cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis and “some forms of intractable pain.”

Ramos, now an agricultural worker, claims he injured his back March 1 working in an East Wenatchee fast-food kitchen. The pain was severe enough to merit a trip to Central Washington Hospital, according to his court filings.

A letter submitted for court by East Wenatchee physician Dr. Robert Anderson, who signed Ramos’s cannabis card, says Ramos couldn’t tolerate the Motrin and Vicodin recommended for his injury and subsequent muscle spasming. Anderson wrote his authorization for medical cannabis on March 9.

Pamela Woodard: East Wenatchee medical cannabis advocate

Ramos found relief mostly from topical cannabis-based muscle ointments along with smoked marijuana, said Pamela Woodard, who provided Ramos’s cannabis through the Wenatchee Valley Holistic Health community garden she manages. With it, he was able to return to work.

At 8:44 p.m. June 22, Ramos drove his green Honda Civic out of the East Wenatchee McDonald’s onto southbound Valley Mall Parkway. East Wenatchee Police Officer James Johnson stopped him for turning into the inside lane of travel, rather than the outside.

Asked for his license and registration, Ramos told the officer he had a small baggie of marijuana in his glove box, and showed his doctor’s authorization card. Johnson didn’t cite Ramos for the traffic violation, but confiscated the baggie and ticketed him for possession of less than 40 grams of marijuana.

A native of Mexico who came to the Wenatchee Valley with his family eight years ago, Ramos feared a conviction or guilty plea to the misdemeanor — punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine — could damage his visa status. He has no prior criminal record, but a conviction for possession of more than 30 grams of marijuana can be grounds for deportation.

Poulson, appointed city attorney in 2006, estimates he’s brought the number of municipal criminal cases from 400 a year to more than 700, with seven or eight jury trials annually. In the decade prior to his appointment, he said during his campaign for a Washington Appellate Court judgeship last summer, East Wenatchee Municipal Court held three jury trials total.

Asking Poulson to drop the charge, Mellergaard first turned over a Sept. 11 letter from Anderson, which said Ramos “met the criteria for a certifiable medical condition under the medical marijuana law” but did not specify his ailment. Poulson refused, writing in a court brief that “he needs to disclose which terminal or debilitating condition he has already been diagnosed with.”

“Possession of marijuana, even in small amounts, is still a crime in the state of Washington,” he wrote.

“He’s basically indicated he thinks these cards are given out willy-nilly,” Mellergaard said.

When Ramos came to court Oct. 10, Poulson moved to strike his affirmative defense, saying he hadn’t shown proof that he suffered a condition specified by the cannabis law. Crowell at first agreed, then reinstated Ramos’s affirmative defense claim after Mellergaard asked him to reconsider. She also submitted a new letter from Anderson that spells out Ramos’s injury, saying his earlier letters had been vague to protect confidentiality.

“If I don’t get to put on an affirmative defense, we don’t have a defense,” Mellergaard said. “I mean, it was in his car. There you go.”

Only a handful of medical marijuana defenses are put forward in NCW courts each year. Chelan County District Court public defenders said they handle perhaps three to four annually, in a court where 1,700 misdemeanors were filed in 2011.

Ramos’s Wednesday court date comes one day before Washington’s I-502 becomes law, permitting people over 21 up to an ounce of marijuana for personal consumption. Some NCW county prosecutors have said they will drop many of the 10 to 15 misdemeanor pot cases now pending, in light of the vote.

Those measures won’t affect Ramos’s court situation, nor other patients claiming a medical defense.

“This is somebody with no arrest record, no criminal record ... and this court intends to make a criminal out of him, and label him a drug addict at the same time,” said Woodard. “And he’s not any of those things.”

Jefferson Robbins: 664-7123

robbins@wenatcheeworld.com

» Recommend this story.

» 56 comments on this story

Want to comment on this story? All Wenatchee World members are invited to comment on stories, by using the form below. Please know that we at wenatcheeworld.com hope our site is useful, entertaining and civil. So we'll delete comments that are obscene, abusive or way off topic. We appreciate it when readers use the "suggest removal" button to flag inappropriate comments. For more about interacting with the site, see our Use Policy.

GarySchoessler 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This will be intresting to watch. At 19 even the new law won't help. No doubt the medical cards have been abused beyond belief. Not saying it does not help people but I went to see if they would issue me one for migranes and they said yes no problem without even seeing my records. I never got it I just wondered how easy it would be for a research article I was doing at the time.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Well Gary if you actually suffer from migranes the bad ones and tried Cannabis for them especially some of the topicals as well you would realize just how nice that relief can be and no woriies about nasty side effects or long term use effects like with certain Pharmacueticals. Any adult should have that choice....

JimboBear 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Interesting article Jefferson. I also agree with Mr. Schoessler above that it will be interesting to see the outcome of this case. I wholeheartedly agree that far too many people possess these cards whose ailments do not fit the criteria, and I'm also amazed that there appears to be no expiration date on these "prescriptions".

As I understand it, if I hurt my back today and claim to be intolerant of the pain killers I am prescribed, I can go back to the medical provider or even yet another "doctor" who can recommend the cannabis and give me a card that is permanent and allows me to use pot in any form for the rest of my life. Anyone out there who can confirm or deny that for me?

Need I say that I find the above concept preposterous? I certainly cannot obtain a permanent, lifelong prescription for the pain killers that I have been prescribed for my injuries from time to time. Is it time to look a bit more thoroughly into the practice of those who write these "prescriptions"?

H 5 months, 2 weeks ago

I believe its at the discretion of the doctor on how long the card is good for. At least that's the way it is for a friends granddaughter. The doctor gave her a card good for 3 years in the hopes that her condition will improve.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

you are right it is at the doctors judgment and most authorizations are not lifetime very very few are most are 1 year.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Most authorizationa as they are called not prescriptions almost never are written for a lifetime. And how is it unfair that the good lobbying done by big pharmacuetical concerning our states law makes sure that all patients have to try their pharcueticals first before they can even try cannabis thats the law. Guaranteeing big pharma a continued cut of the billion dollar pharma pie before and adult can even make an all natural choice for an alternative medicine... Are we that loyal to the industry that kills thousands yearly with their lethal drugs while profitting billions at the same time... Yet an educated free thinking adult is compelled to use their product first isen't that enough do they deserve more... what ever happened to the sense of freedom in this country freedom over our oun bodies hearts and minds to make our own choices for our self on what is right for us. Cannabis is a safe and effective medicine a proven fact that our government still deny's even when the governments stance on cannabis has been disproven...

Stever 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This is, unfortunately, yet another of Mr. Poulson’s continued displays of incompetence and his megalomaniac search for power. As I stated in a post when he was running for appellate judge, he is not qualified to be a prosecutor, let alone a Judge. His constant, extreme waste of East Wenatchee taxpayer dollars should be examined closely and immediately by the esteemed East Wenatchee City Council, and, of course, the WW. I would, however, recommend Mr. Poulson as a cleaner of horse stalls; I believe he could adequately perform that task given enough time.

rebaann1939 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

JimboBear 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

lonedog3 5 months, 2 weeks ago

he should prosecute all of the drunks in the courts with this same zeal!! fight to put the drunk drivers in jail! this case and probably many more like it in east Wenatchee is most likely the REAL REASON king lacey has stripped the citizens of more income through his increased licensee fees! And you thought those increases were for the streets!!

trunner 5 months, 2 weeks ago

The real crime here is why the boy was pulled over to begin with...

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Interestingly enough I can comment to that it makes you wonder if you are young and drive a honda and make a minor and we are talking minor infraction like pulling into the inside lane you get pulled over based on the whim of the officer for sure. Not long after this happened to him I personally followed two vehicles making the same exact turn out onto valley mall parkway here is the kicker the first of the two was a white escalade suv with an older white driver and the second was an East Wenatchee police officer, he did not pull over the Escalade for the exact same turn what he did was make the same turn himself. Because I am familiar with this case I just thought wow bad luck chuck I guess if you do this its anyones guess who gets stopped for it and who does not right. Unfortunately for this defendent his minor turn resulted in a possible criminal conviction because he was honest volunteered his medical cannabis to the officer had his legal paperwork and by the way he had 1 gram of medical cannabis yes 1 GRAM...

trebor462 5 months, 2 weeks ago

IS Mr Poulson running for office again?

GarySchoessler 5 months, 2 weeks ago

The new pot law seems so odd. You can't grow it, sell it, have a pipe to smoke it in, or buy it. But if you find some on the ground you can legally pick it up and eat it if your over 21. Seems like the cart before the horse.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

If people would just read the law they could then make informed comments... as of December 6th all adults 21 and older can the limits prescribed in the new law. January 2013 a one year rule making and regulatory process starts in which all those in the industry can participate via open meetings and hearings in Olympia, by January 2014 the licensing process begins for producers, processors, and retailers to obtain a license and do commerce. The industry will be regulated by the Washington State Liquor Control Board thats the short version I 502 is a very complicated 72 page initiative and to comment people really should educate themself and make relevant and important discussion on issues that are really very imprtant to communities that are under educated about cannabis in general. Until the regulatory structure is in place and running adults can posses and do not face any criminal penalty for doing so, no questions are asked on where adults get that cannabis in the interim

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Additionally yes you can posses a pipe to smoke it now if want. With the medical cannabis law ammended in July 2011 it is legal for patients to aquire all things necessary to produce, process, and grow cannabis including items needed to use their cannabis regardless of state statute on paraphanalia as well as local ordinances that reiterate state statute. I hope this info is helpful. I do have a crazy one for you though Gary even after all this is done it will still be ilegal to share a joint with a friend go figure : )

GarySchoessler 5 months, 1 week ago

I tend to agree with your statments about the law, I belive the confusion is trying to mix the two laws. Having a card vs dec 6th law. From what you decribe as my under education of the law I would have to say yes Im not an expert by any stretch but from what I do understand I (not having a card) cant even use a pipe if I were to smoke it.

GarySchoessler 5 months, 2 weeks ago

On another note. the young man in question at the least tried to work around the illegal part and tried to do it within the rules that we put in place. It would be bad to ruin his clean record over the fact that he tried to work within the confine if the laws we approved and put on the books.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

That is the most valid point here Gary thanks for mentioning it. Additionally it is never good to assume that he is not a qualified patient because guess what he is... There are many many patients with medical cannabis cards who do not outwardly or at visual observation appear to have medical conditions. But that is not how we take care of our medical issues is it, by other people who are not doctors visually assesing us and making non professional judgements as to whether we are ill or not do we. We have mediacl professionals who are licensed to make those decisions and those decisions are supposed to be between a patient and their doctor. additionally we have very strict medical privacy laws both federal HIPAA laws and state laws protecting a patients right to privacy of their medical records we also have state laws for other parties being able to access those records even law enforcement and judicial participants there is a state statute for a process that needs to be followed to access a patients records even for court. Unfortunately none of that has been followed in this case apparently if your a cannabis patient it is being assumed that you don't deserve those protections. That is why in the medical cannabis law for Washington State 69.51A.005 that section is the legislatures purpose and intent and the legislature says persons with documentation from their doctor who have not committed any other crime either related or unrelated to thier cannabis should not be prosecuted or arrested or subject to this type of prosecution. Our legislature says this why because they did not intend for legally authorized patients in compliance with the statute to be drug through court on taxpayers dollar and did not want medical professionals judgement being second guessed by the court without compeling facts of law or very good reason for doing it. This case is an example of someone who had all the proper documentation had committed no crime and is being prosecuted based on an opinion of one person who is not a doctor or medical professional. And on top of that it is a direct slam against a very good doctor who is a member of our own community and has practiced medicine for decades and is also an expert in holistic medicine as well as U.W. educated MD now that is an insult to that medical professional.

Lovethiscity 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Wow. Sometimes the police don't agree with the law and feel that they need to set aside the will of the voters to enforce what they believe to be right. The officer was in the wrong by citing this young man. 48 hours has already done two stories about the police in our area as they enforce what they see fit without gathering all the facts. The police need to do their job- find all pertinent facts both for and against the defendant, then let the prosecutors office decide on charges. Also, come on mr. Poulson, Your going to prosecute someone for possession of drug paraphanelia even though you must know that the voters assume that someone will need a pipe to smoke their legal marijuana? Dot forget who you all work for- the people! Enforce our will not your own!

NurseMichelle 5 months, 2 weeks ago

As a nurse, it is very frustrating that Poulson is accusing these patients and doctors of fraud. Only a patient knows his true pain. It is crazy that Poulson would make such outlandish accusations. What will be even more crazy, is if judges buy into this! I'm sorry, if you don't like a doctor prescribing cannabis, or their reason behind the prescription, take up the law with legislature. As someone said above, go after the drunks!

kyook 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"As a nurse, it is very frustrating that Poulson is accusing these patients and doctors of fraud."

Unthinkable! Tell us, in states where medical marijuana has been legal for a little longer, have there been any documented cases of fraud? I'm wondering if Washington doctors & patients are somehow above it?

Norm 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"As a nurse, it is very frustrating that Poulson is accusing these patients and doctors of fraud."

What's both frustrating and unthinkable is that he is tacitly alleging fraud but not prosecuting it; he has targeted the wrong suspect (the patient, not the doctor) for the wrong alleged crime (cannabis possession, not production of fraudulent documents).

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Oh and by the way Norm medical cannabis has been legal in this state more then a decade since 1998... I think thats plenty of time for the board of health to have uncovered those doctors who might not be above it. Additionally Doctors vary in their own judgement on when alternatives should be used or may help and guess what their are actually doctors who embrace the safety and efficacy of cannabis over other hrmful drugs and those who believe because they are educated and know the truths and science of cannabis that it should be used by anyone who gets benefit from it. and now that its legal all adults can use it as they see fit and appropriately so.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Well the court records are public you should read them if you want that info. The nurse is right please read the section of the medical cannbis law 69.51A.005 legislature purpose and intent the legislature says it right there they do not intend doctors to be second guessed and courts to be clogged up with prosecutions of patients in compliance with proper documentation and that is exactly what is happening here... Additionally if they believe a doctor is wrongly authorizing guess what there is even a process for that and it does not include going after the patient period. And there has only been one doctor sanctioned in this state and it took several years to do it and it was less about cannabis and more about the other narcotics yes thats right Pharmacueticals he was prescribing cannabis was the secondary issue. The board of health takes doctors education and licenses very seriously they do not go off willy nilly second guessing and investigating doctors on the whims of prosecutors who are prosecuting legal patients for 1 gram of medicne period. So even if this prosecutor filed a complaint on the doctor who is a very good doctor and a member of our community the board of health would most likely not even take up the complaint when they read his bio and his service as medical professional as well as being an expert in holisitic medicine.

imjustsayn 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Really!! No one has the right to question someone's health or medical treatment. If the concern is the prescribed medication, then Mr. Poulson should be questioning the doctor not the patient.

Norm 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"With a doctor’s authorization, they can offer an “affirmative defense” in court, proving their medical status and nullifying prosecution."

Actually, that's not what the law says. The law states quite clearly that "qualifying patients...may not be prosecuted...for possession..." (full text below). If the suspect has valid documentation provided by a licensed health care professional as defined in the statute, the suspect may not be prosecuted.

The law puts the burden of proof on the prosecutor to show that the documentation is somehow fraudulent.

RCW69.51A.040 "The medical use of cannabis in accordance with the terms and conditions of this chapter does not constitute a crime and a qualifying patient or designated provider in compliance with the terms and conditions of this chapter may not be arrested, prosecuted, or subject to other criminal sanctions or civil consequences, for possession, manufacture, or delivery of, or for possession with intent to manufacture or deliver, cannabis under state law, or have real or personal property seized or forfeited for possession, manufacture, or delivery of, or for possession with intent to manufacture or deliver, cannabis under state law, and investigating peace officers and law enforcement agencies may not be held civilly liable for failure to seize cannabis in this circumstance, if:..." http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=69.51A.040

robbins 5 months, 2 weeks ago

The affirmative defense portion of the law is here. It's confusing, because portions of that section were vetoed and never revised, but the law makes clear that if a prosecution does come to court, an authorized patient does have an affirmative defense to offer.

Norm 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Actually, the link you were looking for is here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=69.51A.043

That language doesn't apply because the state registry that it refers to was vetoed by the governor. The language in section .040 was Not vetoed and it is quite unequivocal - "qualifying patients...may not be prosecuted...for possession".

Mr Paulson may only prosecute on the theory that the suspect is NOT a qualifying patient, which means he must allege and prove that the patient's qualifying documents are somehow fraudulent.

If Mr Paulson is not alleging fraud, then the case must be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

robbins 5 months, 2 weeks ago

The language regarding a registry was vetoed, but the language regarding the affirmative defense was not.

Ms. Mellergaard's motion to reinstate Mr. Ramos' defense claim cites 69.51A.043, the section I mentioned above. She wrote: "The statute at the very least indicates an intent that a person who has met the requirements of RCW 69.51A.040 [the section you linked to] should not be prosecuted and any doubt as to whether the affirmative defense applies should be resolved in the patient's favor."

Judge Crowell agreed. I don't think either of us is wrong about this, but the case to this point has turned on the affirmative defense claim outlined in .043.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

69.51A.040 is the compliance part of the chapter indeed so why is this prosection still ongoing when the doctor stands behind his patient and continues to do so and has written letters to the court to that. Is it because we need to spend more East Wenatchee tax dollars on public defenders and court costs to continue to scrutinize this case to make sure a young person is made into a criminal over 1 gram of medical cannabis that he possesed lawfully REALLY is that how our East Wenatchee court shows fiscal responsibility as well as ignoring the liberal authority given to them in this law to not waste time and money prosecuting this way. For those of us who know this law inside and out all parts of the chapter this is not how it should be used. For those of us who know the case precident set in prior uses of this law the outcomes of those cases the appeals of those cases etc. This one really just goes against all that.

Norm 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"“I don’t believe these young guys are suffering from a terminable (sic) or debilitating disease,” Poulson wrote to public defender Kambra Mellergaard in an August email obtained by The Wenatchee World.“The doc just signs the card.”"

If Poulson is not lying, then he is committing prosecutorial misconduct. He should be prosecuting "the doc" that he believes provided fraudulent documents, not the person who relied on documents provided by a licensed professional.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This is correct although it is not a question of Mr. Poulson lying or telling a truth he is stating an opinion he has, a hunch if you will that young people who do not look to him to have an obvious condition should be prosecuted. That is wrong on so many levels as many conditions that qualify do not have a visual confirmation. That is why this is for the Doctors not prosecutors. Think of it like this the law is very detailed for a reason, if the intent was for prosecutors to visually assess patients for a medical condition then the law would just say all patients must be arrested go to court under prosecution and prove their medical status period. it does not say that for a reason the point of the law is not to clog up the courts with medical patients who don't please prosecutors personal non medical judgements against them. The law actually discourages this hence the whole entire section of the law that also protects medical professionals from this very thing having their medical opinions second guessed. Just as the law provides protections of non liability for law enforcement who use good judgement and common sense and do not arrest or do not confiscate medical cannabis they are protected and have no liability for accepting a patients documentation and leaving them be. This is true for doctors and medical professionals they also have protections in the law for using their judgement and authorizing based on their medical opinion and are protected from being targeted for doing so. Again this prosection is way out of the normal application of the law.

novarama 5 months, 2 weeks ago

The great irony here is that Ramos Sanchez willfully disclosed the possession. He obviously felt he was within his legal rights or he wouldn't have chosen to incriminate himself. As someone who is here provisionally, he has a lot more at risk than just the charge he is facing. I find myself wondering why this case is being prosecuted when other similar cases were dismissed. Will Douglas County be selectively determining who they believe to be a "valid green card holder"? Does anyone else find this disturbing? If I was pulled over with a prescription drug in my purse and a valid prescription, but the officer felt for whatever reason that I did not have sound medical reason for having said prescription, could (s)he then pursue illegal possession of a legend drug? Preposterous, right?

11Bravo 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Read the story one more time. It is NOT Douglas County, it is the City of East Wenatchee! Devin Poulson is a city employee appointed by the Mayor of East Wenatchee.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

novarama your right that never happens ever once it has been established that your RX is valid and your doctor is confirming that end of story. This is because it is cannabis pure and simple and yes Mr. sanchez has much more at stake then most would in this circumstance making it very disturbing since he has no criminal record and has never been arrested for breaking any law ever. Just so Douglas county does not get a bad rap here this is a city of East Wenatchee prosecution by the City Attorney, not a county prosecution by the Douglas County prosecutor. In fact I believe the Douglas County Prosecutor has taken a very common sense approach to the medical cannabis law and has no intention of prosecuting this way kudos to him.

stevensgs 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Does Poulson have any medical training that qualifies him to have any opinion on Sanchez's medical condition? I don't see a Dr. before or an M.D. after his name.

stevensgs 5 months, 2 weeks ago

I also question his motivation for trying to make this a test case. Why did he choose this case to make a point? The young man had no previous criminal offenses against him so why choose this case? I don't want to insinuate that race was a factor. I'd like to think that if it was a white, naturally born American, he would have made the same decision to prosecute.

bushman66 5 months, 2 weeks ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

bushman66 5 months, 2 weeks ago

&, btw, what kind of word is "terminable"? Jeez, we have some fabulously educated "terminable" lawyers representing "we the people" in East Wenatchee.

JimboBear 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Oh, it's a good word Bushman, and you at least used it in the proper context. It seems to me that Mr. Poulson may have been a bit confused.

kyook 5 months, 2 weeks ago

“I don’t believe these young guys are suffering from a terminable (sic)(capable of being terminated) or debilitating disease,” Poulson wrote..."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terminable?show=0&t=1354720445

Seems like a perfectly appropriate word used in context to me.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

No not used in context kyook he is quoting the state statute which the word is terminal yes meaning your going to die... Not be be terminated like form a job or the like I'm sure those who use cannabis and have a terminal illness wish their illness could be terminated so they could live...

Norm 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"Seems like a perfectly appropriate word used in context to me."

Its not. The appropriate words for law enforcement officers to use are the words in the statute: "terminal or debilitating medical condition". Mr Paulson's job is to enforce the law, not to enforce his opinions; his use of his own words rather than statutory language further emphasizes the fact that he is attempting to enforce his opinion rather than the law.

JimboBear 5 months, 2 weeks ago

"The appropriate words for law enforcement officers to use are the words in the statute: "terminal or debilitating medical condition".

Another day to mark on our calendars Norm. I couldn't agree more. Not only with this statement but with your entire post. Good Job!

H 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Seems to me that Poulson used another word that he shouldn't have. . “I don’t believe these young guys are suffering from a terminable (sic) or debilitating disease” . The law clearly states that a qualifying patient means a person who: Has been diagnosed by that health care professional as having a terminal or debilitating medical condition . . There's a big difference between a medical condition as stated in the law and a disease. . Anyone else notice that Poulson is talking in the plural in that sentence? I think he's trying to scare other young people from trying to get a medical card.

1independent 5 months, 2 weeks ago

His statement is very concerning because it singles out in a prejudicial way, males, young people, and visual appearance if he is prosecuting based on those factors without compelling facts of law then that is prejudice, unfair treatment under the law against a specific group and demographic based on a personal opinion only...

RetiredLawyer 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Marijuana enabled Mr. Ramos to return to work. Isn't that what we want treatment (conventional or alternative) to do? Would Prosecutor Poulson prefer that Mr. Ramos apply for permanent total disability and draw a pension at taxpayer expense? This is a good case for exercise of prosecutorial discretion, and one in which the prosecutor says "I decline to prosecute."

TerryFinn 5 months, 2 weeks ago

Next step will be to get health plans to cover the costs.

bushman66 5 months, 2 weeks ago

I think Mr Poulson's fervor to prosecute Mr. Ramos is a little over the top. We need more tea partiers to come down on him (Mr. Poulson) for frivolous gov't spending.