CannabisClergy.com
lawyer summary

summary for lawyers

Protection from federal prosecution is from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), which specifically grants religious exemptions to most federal laws. The U.S. Supreme Court decision Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, et al., v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal et al., 546 U.S. 418 (2006) specifically applied the RFRA to protect religious use of ayahuasca, a schedule I drug.

State and local protection is provided by the federal Religious Land Use and Institutalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and the California state constitution. The federal government used the RLUIPA to block the use of local zoning laws that interferred with religious beliefs. Courts have upheld the right of Native Americans to use the hallucinogenic plant peyote in religious rituals, e.g., State v. Whittington, 19 Ariz. App. 27, 504 P.2d 950 (1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 946, 94 S.Ct. 3071 (1974); People v. Woody, 61 Cal.2d 716, 394 P.2d 813, 40 Cal. Rptr. 69 (1964); Whitehorn v. State, 561 P.2d 539 (0kl. Crim. App. 1977); contra State v. Big Sheep, 75 Mont. 219, 243 P. 1067 (1926); State v. Soto, 21 Or. App. 794, 537 P.2d 142 (1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 955, 96 S.Ct. 1431 (1976).

The government tends to attack sincerity of beliefs, followed by whether or not the beliefs are truely religious. The famous case is the United States of America v David Meyers, which introduced the Meyers’ test.

The federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) specifically grants religious exemptions to most federal laws. The U.S. Supreme Court decision Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, et al., v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal et al., 546 U.S. 418 (2006) specifically applied the RFRA to protect religious use of ayahuasca, a schedule I drug.

Among other things (consult a lawyer) the RFRA requires the government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.

Courts have upheld the right of Native Americans to use the hallucinogenic plant peyote in religious rituals, e.g., State v. Whittington, 19 Ariz. App. 27, 504 P.2d 950 (1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 946, 94 S.Ct. 3071 (1974); People v. Woody, 61 Cal.2d 716, 394 P.2d 813, 40 Cal. Rptr. 69 (1964); Whitehorn v. State, 561 P.2d 539 (0kl. Crim. App. 1977); contra State v. Big Sheep, 75 Mont. 219, 243 P. 1067 (1926); State v. Soto, 21 Or. App. 794, 537 P.2d 142 (1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 955, 96 S.Ct. 1431 (1976).

If you can afford a lawyer, please consult a lawyer and prepare an adequate defense long before any arrest.

A prosecutor will test you on both sincerity and knowledge of your own religion. Be prepared.

The accompanying blog provides almost daily information on honing and improving the quality of your religious medical marijuana ministry.

next chapter

return to Cannabis Clergy

warning:

The courts have already ruled in multiple cases that a person who starts preparing a religious defense (including gathering certificates and other paperwork) after arrest loses all chance to use the late religious defense. It is essential that you prepare your defense before you are arrested. Adequate preparation may even prevent arrest.

This website is concerned with religious matters and only obliquely discusses the law. I strongly recommend that medical marijuana ministers rely on a high quality lawyer.

I (Milo) use my own religion as an example, because this is the religion I know well. I strongly urge people to get together with their lawyer and prepare a similar discussion for their own religion. Again, my religion is only an example.

Good news: Many people over the years have successfully used Pr Ntr Kmt religious cannabis certificates. The author of this website has personally several times over more than a decade shown various police Pr Ntr Kmt documentation and the police have politely returned the religious cannabis. There are at least two Pr Ntr Kmt cannabis ministers who have been released after the police discovered several pounds of religious cannabis (although the police kept the cannabis). There are numerous real world successes.

Reality: If the government decides it wants to “get you”, then your only chance is if you can afford a really, really good lawyer.

The rights you heard about in grade school only apply if you can afford a great lawyer. Public defenders are under-budgeted and only want to process paperwork for plea bargains. They simply don’t have the time or money for trials.

We don’t want to discourage anyone from worshiping with cannabis, but we do want to strongly warn everyone that you have a significant risk of long term imprisonment or worse, especially outside of major industrialized nations.

Please act responsibly. Please hire a lawyer if you can possibly afford to do so.

These web pages contain religious advice. These web pages are not professional legal or medical advice. Nothing on this website should be considered as a substitute or replacement for professional medical, health, or legal advice. All persons should seek the advice of qualified medical, health, or legal providers.

If you spot an error in fact, grammar, syntax, or spelling, or a broken link, or have additional information, commentary, or constructive criticism, please contact Milo at PO Box 1361, Tustin, Calif, 92781, USA.


previous page worker summary		next page owner summary


previous page worker summary		next page owner summary

CannabisClergy.com lawyer summary

summary for lawyers

next chapter

return to Cannabis Clergy

warning:

CannabisClergy.com
lawyer summary