Legal Opinion

People v. Beaty

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 11, 2010No. F055868, F056467PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WISEMAN, J.

—We consider whether an authorized medical marijuana user is, based on that fact alone, unamenable for drug recovery treatment and therefore not an appropriate candidate for Proposition 36 1 probation. Although the medical use of marijuana may be considered by the court in establishing the terms and conditions of probation under Prop. 36 and in crafting the treatment to be provided, we conclude the authorized use of medical marijuana does not by itself make a nonviolent drug offender unamenable to the treatment mandated by Prop. 36.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORIES

In 2007,…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. People v. CarbajalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  2. People v. MowerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  3. People v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  4. People v. EubanksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  5. People v. RodriguezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. LealCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. People v. Oseguera CA5California Court of Appeal · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API