norml22 - Page 8

Page 8 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 which provided: _'No person shall operate a motor vehicle on any
 highway while knowingly having in his possession or in the motor
 vehicle any narcotic drug within the meaning of section 24:18-2
 of the Revised Statutes .... t, Section 24_18-2 defined narcotic
 drugs as including _coco leaves, opium, marijuana and every
 substance not chemically distinguishable from theme" Citing
 empirical studies on the effects of marijuana and recent changes
 in the state drug statute, the court held that marijuana could
 not be classified as a narcotic drug within the meaning of the
 motor vehicle statute°
 in S_tat_, 500 P.2d 291 (Okla. Ct. Crim. App. 1972) ,
 the defendant had been charged with possession of marijuana. At
 the close of the evidences the trial judge instructed the jury as
 You are instructed that if you believe from the
 evidence in this case beyond a reasonable doubt
 that the defendant did. possessed (sic) a
 ruarcQ_/___l__to wit: _rihuaD__ you shall find
 the defendant guilty as charged in the
 information. If you fail to so find, your verdict
 shall be not guilty.
 500 P°2d at 296.
 Sam argued on appeal that the trial court erred in
 instructing the jury that marijuana was a narcotic, and the Court
 of Criminal Appeals agreed, citing State ___Ca2D_se _/ipra, and
 _eople V, McCab_, _l!D2__, the court concluded that 'emarihuana is
 not a narcotic drug° o and the trial court's instructions to
 that effect are error. '_ _d., at 297°
 The California Court of Appeals, in _eoD/__v_RIL_21, 49

Previous , Next , Return to Index