Editor's Note: This story resonates throughout the industry, as it exemplifies the risks involved with federal-state conflicts on marijuana laws. For some background, you might also read: "Remaining 'Kettle Falls Five' Defendants Acquitted on 4 of 5 Charges" (though many believe state law should be able to be a defense against all charges). It also flies in the face of the Rohrabacher-Farr Medical Marijuana Amendment created to prevent the Justice Department (and the DEA)—which was passed for a second year by the House on June 3—from interfering with state laws and prosecuting businesses in compliance with state laws regarding the cultivation, sale and use of marijuana.
During their trial at the federal courthouse in Spokane last March, Rhonda Firestack-Harvey and her two fellow defendants—her son, Rolland Gregg, and his wife, Michelle Gregg—were not allowed to explain why they were openly growing marijuana on a plot in rural northeastern Washington marked by a big green cross that was visible from the air.
According to a pretrial ruling, it was irrelevant that they were using marijuana for medical purposes, as permitted by state law, since federal law recognizes no legitimate use for the plant. But now that Firestack-Harvey and the Greggs have been convicted, they are free to talk about their motivation, and it might even make a difference when they are sentenced on Thursday. [Update: Sentencing of Firestack-Harvey and the Greggs has been rescheduled for October 2.]
