Safe Life Caregivers v. City of Los Angeles
California Court of Appeal
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RUBIN, J.
— In this appeal we reiterate what other appellate courts, including our Supreme Court, have already held — there is no constitutional or statutory right to possess, cultivate, distribute, or transport marijuana for medical purposes. (City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center, Inc. (2013) 56 Cal.4th 729, 739 [156 Cal.Rptr.3d 409, 300 P.3d 494] (Riverside).) We apply that rule of law to appellants’ challenge to Proposition D (Prop. D), the current medical marijuana ordinance of the City of Los Angeles (the City), enacted by voters in 2013. We…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Associated Home Builders of Greater Eastbay, Inc. v. City of LivermoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Committee of Seven Thousand v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Hurst v. City of BurlingameCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Even Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Feuer v. FXS Management, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. Onesra Enterprises, Inc.Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 2016
- Benno v. BosenkoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Benno v. BosenkoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- HNHPC v. Dept. of Cannabis ControlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.