Ninth Circuit: Religious Freedom Not A Defense For Marijuana Charges
On June 14th, in US v. Christie, No. 14-10233 the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction of two ministers of the “Hawaii Cannabis Ministry” for violations of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
Reverend Roger Cusick Christie founded the “Hawaii Cannabis Ministry,” envisioning the congregation as “a community wherein cannabis could be celebrated as a sacrament.” See US. v. Christie. True to his word Christie passed out the ‘holy sacrament’ during bi-weekly ceremonies where members of the congregation would pay a suggested ‘donation’ in exchange for cannabis in various forms. Additionally, Christie distributed marijuana to members who came in-person to the Sanctuary, again in exchange for a suggested ‘donation.’
A grand jury indicted Rev. Christie, and several of his associates, inter alia numerous Controlled Substances Act violations. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B), 846, and 856(a)(1). Christie was convicted and sentenced to sixty months in prison. On appeal, Christie alleged violations to his right to freely exercise his religion, as guaranteed by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 107 Stat. 1488, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb.
The 9th Circuit disagreed:
We have little trouble concluding that the government has a compelling interest in preventing drugs set aside for sacramental use from being diverted to non-religious, recreational users. A risk of “diversion,” after all, simply means the threat that cannabis—an illegal, Schedule I controlled substance—will wind up in the hands of people whose use is disconnected from any sincere religious practice. Such illegal, non-religious use, by definition, finds no protection under RFRA.
Moreover, the panel reasoned:
The Ministry’s distribution protocol required those who wished to obtain cannabis during the week to appear in person and to present a membership card or a state-issued medical marijuana card. Prior to the Spring of 2009, recipients were also required to meet privately with Rev. Christie. By April 2009, the Ministry was distributing more than half a pound of cannabis among approximately sixty to seventy people daily via their express service. Id.
Many times when a person is pulled over by the police in his or her automobile, the police will search the vehicle the person was driving without a warrant, and without permission. Today we will talk about warrantless vehicle searches.
Arizona’s new sealing statute is a powerful way for people who have been charged or convicted of many common offenses, to be able to say “no” in many instances.
Diversion is a recognized court procedure, common in Arizona, but that is discretionary, and controlled entirely by the prosecutor, but that when offered and completed allows you to have all criminal charges entirely dismissed
In Arizona, “Aggravated Assault” charged under ARS § 13-1204 is a Class Four Felony, and in some cases with mandatory prison.
DUI or domestic violence police misconduct even if not resulting in grievous misfortune can sometimes provide a helpful remedy for the criminally accused.
About Michael Harwin
Michael’s skill and experience have been recognized repeatedly. He holds an A-V 5/5 preeminent rating by Martindale Hubbell. He has been named one of the top lawyers in Arizona by Southwest Superlawyers, and one of the best lawyers in Tucson by Tucson Lifestyle Magazine. He also has been named one of the best lawyers in the United States by BestofUS.com , and given the highest rating possible by AVVO, 10/10 Superb. Amazon Books