Get Emergency-Response Text Messages |
| Sign up here to get text messages sent to your cell phone when important events happen! |

Keyes Pleads Guilty in Washington Case
April 10th, 2006
by Vanessa Nelson
Sacramento activist and medical marijuana patient Peter G Keyes pled guilty to a charge of "attempted possession" at today's hearing in Burien, Washington. In exchange for the plea, Keyes will get the charge wiped off his record following payment of court fees and completion of a six-month period without criminal activity.
Today's hearing marked Keyes's first appearance in court following an incident in August 2005 in which the Port of Seattle Police seized 10.3 grams of medical marijuana from the activist. Returning from Seattle's world-renowned "Hempfest," Keyes was stopped and searched by Transportation Security Administration agents at Washington's Sea-Tac Airport. When two water pipes and a small jar of medicinal cannabis were found in Keyes's bag, the security officers called in the Port of Seattle Police as well as a representative of Southwest Airlines. Agitated that the police officers refused to acknowledge his status as a medical marijuana patient and denied him a receipt for the confiscated property, Keyes was quickly banned from flying by the airline representative.
It is precisely such assertive behavior that has made this case a highly-debated one in Keyes's hometown. Sacramento medical marijuana activists are deeply divided over the issue of support for Keyes. His critics have said that his judgment and public relations skills are questionable, generating so much controversy that Keyes recently resigned from his position as National Vice President of the Compassionate Coalition. For every critic of Keyes, however, there appears to be a supporter who is just as vocal about defending him. Many activists in Sacramento feel that Keyes is a strong and effective advocate whose case represents the need to establish reciprocity agreements between states that permit the medicinal use of cannabis. "Those of us who are aware of the larger implications of Peter's case will continue to support him in his struggle for justice and freedom from oppression," says Compassionate Coalition Chairman Nathan Sands. "This case affects all medical marijuana patients, and we will support Peter so that we don't have to go through the same harassment in the future."
Keyes's status as a legitimate medical marijuana patient did indeed have sway with the prosecutor in his case. Not a Washington resident, Keyes was unable to mount a medical defense under state law. Sharon Blackford, Keyes's attorney, was nonetheless able to use her client's valid California doctor's recommendation as a negotiation tool when making a deal with the prosecuting attorney.
As for the final word on the ordeal, Keyes feels that he was unfairly targeted and speaks out against those he holds responsible. "My persecutors were wrong from the beginning," says Keyes, "and I got a lot of flak from my contemporaries for standing up and saying so, but the outcome proves that they were wrong and they knew they would never win."
Now relieved of the burden of fighting an out-of-state court battle, Keyes can move on to more important matters. He is free once again to focus his energy on his activist efforts, especially his upcoming rally at the California capitol building on April 23rd, which features high-profile speakers, live music, and educational booths. For more information, visit www.CompassionateCoalition.org
WA INSULTS OUT-OF-STATE DOCS
Court limits medical marijuana law
Doctor approval - Washington's top court rules on who can give recommendations for use
by Rachel La Corte, Associated Press
November 23rd, 2006
OLYMPIA -- A voter-approved initiative allowing doctors to recommend medicinal marijuana does not apply to cases where the doctor is licensed outside the state of Washington, the Washington Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
"The initiative could have, but did not, define a qualifying doctor as one with a valid license from any state," Justice Tom Chambers wrote in the 6-3 majority decision.
Initiative 692 passed in 1998 with 59 percent of the vote. It gives doctors the right to recommend -- but not prescribe -- marijuana for people suffering from cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma and other conditions that cause "intractable pain."
Marijuana is still illegal to buy and sell. It's listed in the same class of drugs as heroin and LSD. Possession of marijuana is allowed under I-692, but state law does not say how people can obtain it.
In its decision, the high court affirmed a Court of Appeals ruling that upheld the conviction of Sharon Tracy, who had been charged with possession and manufacture of marijuana.
Tracy suffers from a hip deformity and migraine headaches and has had a series of corrective surgeries following a ruptured colon and bowel conditions, according to court records.
She was arrested in May 2003 after police arrived at her home to investigate a domestic violence complaint. While there, police smelled marijuana. After returning with a search warrant, they found slightly more than an ounce of marijuana, four marijuana plants and a California medical marijuana card.
A few months after the arrest, she obtained another medical card from a doctor in Portland, the closest large city across the border from her home in Stevenson, Wash.
The judge at her trial in Skamania County would not let her use the compassionate use defense allowed under I-692, because she was not found to be a "qualified" candidate because the card in her possession at the time of her arrest was not issued by a doctor who was formally licensed to practice medicine in Washington state.
The trial court entered a finding that the authorization received by the Oregon doctor met Washington's requirements but it was not able to be used in court because the card was received after her arrest, Tracy's attorney said.
Tracy, 53, has been living in Hayward, Calif., since 2004 to care for her elderly mother.
Her attorney, David Schultz, said that at the time of her arrest, she was traveling back and forth between the two states because of her family situation, which is why she got the card from California in the first place.
Schultz said his client, who had not served any jail time pending the appeal, now faces as long as 90 days in jail. He said he hasn't yet decided whether to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court but said Tracy should not be in jail.