Discussion arguing that excluding the medical marijuana defense would be a denial of due process Custom Essay

[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”hp1″]

You previously wrote a discussion arguing that excluding the medical marijuana defense would be a denial of due process. Doug Wilson now wants you to draft an argument with a subtle distinction:
Botwin did not violate the probation condition since pursuant to People v. Tilehkooh (2003) 113
Cal.App.4th 1433 medical marijuana falls within the prescription drug exception (Issue I from the outline
we covered during class 2).
Wilson expects the State to argue that (1) the probation condition should be read to prohibit all
drugs to reflect the court’s oral pronouncement, despite the prescription drug exception contained in the minute order, since the court’s oral pronouncement of judgment generally controls; and (2) pursuant to Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc. (2008) 42 Cal.4th 920, Tilehkooh is wrong insofar as it may be read to suggest that the prescription drug exception to a probation condition permits the use of medical marijuana.
Wilson asks you to respond to the foregoing sub-arguments utilizing Tilehkooh, supra, 113

[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”hp4″]