Juries are not willing to convict people with small amounts of marijuana.

As marijuana use wins growing legal and public tolerance, some jurors may be reluctant to convict for an offense many people no longer regard as serious. “We’ll hear, ‘I think marijuana should be legal, I’m not going to follow the law,’ ” said prosecutor Mark Lindquist in Pierce County, Wa. “We tell them, ‘We’re not here to debate the laws. We’re here to decide whether or not somebody broke the law. ”

Drug-law reform advocates say juries should follow their consciences and refuse to convict a concept known as jury nullification, widely used during Prohibition and in the Jim Crow-era South. “This is one of the first times in a number of years there’s a general discussion around this powerful but rarely used jury tool,” said Allen St. Pierre of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. “But going back 20 years plus, there’s been some tumult in the courts where the issue is cannabis and the person being prosecuted wants to turn to the jury and say, Yes, I am guilty, and here’s why."

Some jurors may be reluctant to convict for an offense many people no longer regard as serious.

Twelve states plus the District of Columbia have decriminalized possession of small quantities of marijuana. Led by California in 1996, 17 states have laws that allow medical use of marijuana.

But federal authorities have continued to pursue prosecutions in those states, prompting increasing calls among drug-law reform advocates for juries to follow their consciences and refuse to convict — a legal concept known as jury nullification, widely used during Prohibition and in the Jim Crow-era South.


Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-marijuana-juries-20101225,0,2484761.story