Legal Question

[DenverChief]

So I just read that the Boulder City Council is considering new ordinances regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries. As some of you may or may not know Colorado has a state constitutional amendment that provides for medical marijuana to be available to the sick through licensed dispensaries.

Colorado Constitutional Amendment:


The Boulder City Council is proposing that among other things that "Law enforcement would also be allowed to conduct unannounced searches of dispensaries."
[url]http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=133769&catid=339 (]http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hs/Medicalmarijuana/mjamendment.html[/URL)

Wouldn't this City ordinance be in direct violation of the State Constitution

"Section 7. The people shall be secure in their persons, papers, homes and effects, from unreasonable searches and seizures; and no warrant to search any place or seize any person or things shall issue without describing the place to be searched, or the person or thing to be seized, as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation reduced to writing."

And the Federal Constitution
4th Amendment

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Now I'm not an expert in licensing requirements but something tells me that by applying for a license you are agreeing to the terms of the license set forth by the governmental agency...but if those terms violate your constitutional rights?

Discuss

[Abba-Dabba]

"Law Enforcement" is a fairly broad term. What kind of LE? Are they expecting a beat cop to make these searches? Or are these just complaince checks like with the DoRevenue Enforcement with alcohol and tobacco? Will there be some new Govt. Agency made further expanding the size of Government?

Who gives pharmacies their licenses? Will this "enforcement" be handled by that same govt. entity? Are pharmacies subject to these same unnanounced searches by law enforcement? And if they are, going on previous history how are these searches deemed warranted and how many searches are averaged relative the the number of pharmacies in the state throughout the entire year. I don't know, just seems like leaving a gaping wound open for a lawsuit.

[Kyle DeLexus]

The Supreme Court has explained that what "a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection ... " But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected (see Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 [1967]).

And also.

A business owner's expectation of privacy in commercial property is less than the privacy interest afforded to a private homeowner and is particularly attenuated in commercial property used in "closely regulated" industries (i.e., airports, railroads, restaurants, and liquor establishments), where business premises may be subject to regular administrative searches by state or federal agencies for the purpose of determining compliance with health, safety, or security regulations.

[FAX]

It seems to me that law enforcement has been executing marijuana-related, unannounced searches for a long time. Legion are the poor bastards rotting away in prison who were victims of a marijuana-related, unannounced search. I don't see how this is any different ... except for the fact that they're actually announcing the upcoming unannounced searches.

I'm a huge supporter of medical marijuana, though. My mother began smoking pot at the age of 72. Turned on by a friend of mine during a road trip to Wyoming. She said it helped her glaucoma immensely. Everything was going fine until she discovered the concept of marijuana brownies, made a big batch, and ate too many. I thought the old girl had had a stroke. I'd never seen such an elegant, elderly woman that loaded before and I don't ever want to see it again.

FAX

[Katipan]

Guy we used to shoot automatic weapons with had a... umm.... certain tax stamp? license? to have them. But he always told us that having it meant trading in his rights, as THE MAN could at any time come to his home and demand to see his guns.

Wouldn't it be the same thing?

[DenverChief]

The Supreme Court has explained that what "a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection ... " But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected (see Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 [1967]).

And also.

A business owner's expectation of privacy in commercial property is less than the privacy interest afforded to a private homeowner and is particularly attenuated in commercial property used in "closely regulated" industries (i.e., airports, railroads, restaurants, and liquor establishments), where business premises may be subject to regular administrative searches by state or federal agencies for the purpose of determining compliance with health, safety, or security regulations.

Agreed but those are regulatory agencies such as Dept of Health, Dept of Regulatory Agencies, Excise and License....not law enforcement...

[DenverChief]

Guy we used to shoot automatic weapons with had a... umm.... certain tax stamp? license? to have them. But he always told us that having it meant trading in his rights, as THE MAN could at any time come to his home and demand to see his guns.

Wouldn't it be the same thing?

Excellent point but only the ATF could do this...no other agency has the authority

[DenverChief]

Nothing?