DEA Threatens Forfeiture of Los Angeles Compassion Clubs
Evil Men versus Innocent Nature!In an attack on access to medical marijuana in the nation's second largest city, the LA DEA office has mailed notices to landlords of Prop 215 co-ops warning them that they are liable to forfeiture and criminal penalties for allowing medical marijuana facilities on their property.
So far, some 20 letters have been reported by dispensaries in the LA area, but the DEA is said to have sent out some 100 letters. Included are numerous well regarded, established facilities with no known complaints. The action is aimed at coercing landlords to evict medical cannabis coops despite state law allowing them.
California NORML regards this as a serious attack on patients' access to medical marijuana under Prop. 215. "The DEA has no business interfering in California's medical marijuana law," says California NORML coordinator Dale Gieringer, "This action will only serve to drive patients to the illegal market and aggravate marijuana crime."
In addition to serving over 100,000 patients, medical cannabis coops currently generate thousands of legal jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenues in the LA area.
NOW is the time to tell Congress members to oppose the federal government's attack on medical marijuana.
Visit NORML's action alert HERE.
So far, all of the DEA's letters have been targeted to the LA area. No letters have been reported in surrounding counties. The operation appears timed to co-opt a pending LA dispensary ordinance that is expected to regulate and cap the number of dispensaries. At this point, California NORML sees no basis for expecting a larger state-wide sweep.
California NORML attorneys warn that there is no legal defense to federal forfeiture charges. Once landlords have received notice from the DEA, they can no longer claim to be "innocent owners." Forfeiture attorneys typically advise landlords who have received such notices to promptly insist their tenants desist from illegal activity and/or evict them. The validity of federal forfeiture has been repeatedly upheld by the federal courts, most notably in the case of the LA Cannabis Resource Center, where the government successfully forfeited $300,000 from the city of West Hollywood for leasing a building to the LACRC.
It is unclear to what extent the DEA is prepared to follow through on their threat of arresting landlords. Any forfeiture sweep would have to be conducted in cooperation with the LA US Attorney's office. It's unknown whether this has been arranged.The most likely scenario is that there will be widespread evictions and shutdowns, followed by a few selected forfeiture prosecutions to scare remaining landlords. Those landlords most vulnerable are those with the most equity in their property, since the government likes to make as much money as possible on forfeitures.
COPY OF DEA LANDLORD LETTER
(Sent by Certified Mail July 6, 2007) DEA, LA Field Division, 255 E. Temple St, 17th Fl, LA 90012 (213) 621-6700
The DEA has determined you own, or have under your management or control, a building located at [ADDRESS]. The DEA has determined there is a marijuana dispensary, [NAME], operating on the property.
This is a violation of federal law. Federal law 21 U.S.C. Sec. 56 (a)
states:
"It shall be unlawful to knowingly and intentionally rent, lease or make available for use, with or without compensation, a building, room, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance."
Federal law takes precedence over State law. It is not a defense to this crime or to the seizure of the property that the facility
operating on the property is providing "medical marijuana" under California law including the provisions of California Prop. 215. Violation of this law is a felony crime, and carries with it a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.
In addition, federal law allows for the seizure of assets, including real property, which have been used in conjunction with the distribution of controlled substances. Specifically, 21 U.S.C. 881 (a) (7) states:
"The following shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States and no property right shall exist in them: All real property, including any right, title and interest (including any leasehold interest) in the whole of any lot or tract of land which is used in any manner or part, or to facilitate the commission of, a violation of this sub-chapter."
This letter shall serve as notice that, after a thorough investigation, the DEA has determined there is a marijuana dispensary operating on the above described property. By this notice, you have been made aware of the purposes for which the property is being used.
You are further advised that violations of federal laws relating to marijuana may result in criminal prosecution, imprisonment, fines and forfeiture of assets.
For further information, please contact Acting Group Supervisor
Deanne Reuter at (213) 621-6789.
Sincerely, Timothy J. Landrum, Special Agent in Charge.
Comment
medical marijuana and forfeiture
Feds may lift forfeiture threat from medical marijuana clinics
by Mary Spicuzza
May 24, 2009
The letters sent to landlords renting to medical marijuana facilities in recent years were quite specific.
They warned that federal law prohibited renting to or housing dispensaries involved in manufacturing, storing, distributing or using a controlled substance — and added that violating those laws could result in criminal prosecution, imprisonment and fines as well as seizure and forfeiture of real estate and other assets. "Federal law takes precedence over State law," reads one letter sent by a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration official to a dispensary's landlord.
But those letters all seem to have been mailed before President Barack Obama took office — and well before he issued a memorandum last week for the heads of executive departments and agencies addressing preemption. The May 20 memorandum notes longstanding practices reflect that executive departments have shown respect for state prerogatives, but adds that in recent years federal authorities "sometimes announced that their regulations preempt State law, including State common law" without sufficient basis.
"The purpose of this memorandum is to state the general policy of my Administration that preemption of State law by executive departments and agencies should be undertaken only with full consideration of the legitimate prerogatives of the States and with a sufficient legal basis for preemption," it reads. "Executive departments and agencies should be mindful that in our Federal system, the citizens of the several States have distinctive circumstances and values, and that in many instances it is appropriate for them to apply to themselves rules and principles that reflect these circumstances and values."
His memorandum was released just two days after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear appeals from two California counties that argued they were being forced to allow violations of federal law. The counties basically were challenging Proposition 215, a 1996 state voter initiative that says patients can use medical marijuana after getting a recommendation from a licensed physician. The law has since become a model for medical marijuana laws in a dozen other states, although the subsequent laws vary from state to state.
While attitudes toward medical marijuana seem to be shifting under the Obama Administration, it's still unknown how exactly federal law enforcement policies dealing with medical marijuana will change. For example, the DEA website still has a page titled, "California Medical Marijuana Information," aimed at presenting its views on cannabis use. "Local and state law enforcement counterparts cannot distinguish between illegal marijuana grows and grows that qualify as medical exemptions," it reads. "Many self-designated medical marijuana growers are, in fact, growing marijuana for illegal 'recreational' use.
All of this brings to question whether those DEA letters sent to landlords warning of potential forfeiture actions and other penalties are still valid. Asked about the issue several weeks ago, a spokesperson for Attorney General Eric H. Holder did not give a clear answer about the Justice Department's intentions.
When asked whether landlords who rent to medical marijuana cooperatives are still at risk of asset forfeiture, a U.S. Department of Justice official said it's not a priority to target those who follow state laws. Department spokeswoman Laura Sweeney said in an email that "as part of the federal government's efforts to best employ its resources, the Department focuses its investigative and enforcement activities involving marijuana on large-scale drug traffickers whose conduct is often inconsistent with both federal and state law."
All of this, of course, comes as welcome news to medical marijuana advocates, who say that more than 300 letters were sent by the DEA to landlords in 2007 and 2008. "Since Obama has taken office, we have not seen any letters disseminated," Americans for Safe Access spokesperson Kris Hermes said.
But Hermes added there was recent "activity" in Santa Barbara, which involved warning letters mailed to landlords renting to dispensary operators telling them that had 45 days to evict their tenants or face the consequences. Two clinics shut down after their landlords received the letters, he added, but both have since reopened. "There have been no landlords that have lost their property or have been civilly/criminally prosecuted under Bush or Obama stemming from those letters, underscoring the main reason for their dissemination: to instill fear and intimidation among property owners such that evictions would take place without further action by the federal government," Hermes said in an email.
Thom Mrozek, public affairs officer of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of California, said he had no comment beyond the information provided by Justice Department headquarters.
Letters warning landlords of possible forfeiture may have already led to closures of as many as seven San Francisco medical marijuana facilities last year, according to a 2008 article in San Francisco Chronicle. Statewide it's unclear exactly how many facilities were shuttered as a result of landlords frightened off by the possibility forfeiture.
DEA spokespeople said they had no comments to add to the Justice Department's statement about forfeiture issues.