Appeals Court: Tilehkooh - Use of medical marijuana while on probation
113 Cal.App.4th 1433, 7 Cal.Rptr.3d 226, 3 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10,540, 2003 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,263
Court of Appeal, Third District, California.
The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Darius TILEHKOOH, Defendant and Appellant.
No. C040485. Dec. 8, 2003.
The trial court ruled that section 11362.5 did not apply to defendant because he could not satisfy a medical necessity defense.[SUP][4][/SUP] We disagree because that defense is not the measure of the right to obtain and use
marijuana for medical purposes granted by section 11362.5.
On appeal the People claim that section 11362.5 is not a defense to a revocation of probation and that, in any event, the possession of
marijuana violated a condition of defendant's probation that he obey the criminal laws of the United States.
We conclude that defendant may assert section 11362.5 as a defense to the criminal sanction of revocation of his probation where, as here, there is no claim that his conduct endangered others or that he diverted
marijuana for nonmedical purposes. (See § 11362.5, subd. (b)(2)). Nor does a probation condition which prohibits the lawful use of a prescription drug serve a rehabilitative purpose.