Idaho man loses religious appeal on pot charges

[rug]

The Associated Press
Posted: 12/17/2011 02:28:13 AM PST

BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- A man arrested for marijuana possession during a traffic stop in 2007 has failed to convince the Idaho Court of Appeals he can't be prosecuted on drug charges because he used the pot as a religious sacrament.

Court documents show Cary William White, 53, of Boise had argued that marijuana was a natural product and gift from his creator.

”I enter into the experience of marijuana with the intent to bless it,” White said in court documents.

The appellate court, however, ruled Wednesday that his use of the plant was not substantially motivated by religious belief.

http://www.times-standard.com/lifestyle/ci_19568854

He should take this to a higher court.

[struggle4progress]

1. STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CARY WILLIAM WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 36765, 2011 Opinion No. 74.
Court of Appeals of Idaho.
Filed December 14, 2011.

In June 2007, White was stopped by a Boise City police officer because a headlight on his vehicle was out. During the stop, the officer noticed a pill bottle containing a green leafy substance in plain view between the driver's seat and the center console. When questioned, White admitted to smoking marijuana earlier in the day from a pipe, found under his seat ...

White pled not guilty and filed a motion to dismiss the charges based on the contention that Idaho Code §§ 37-2732(c) and 37-2734A violate or substantially burden his right to religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 4 of the Idaho Constitution, and the FERPA. After a hearing and consideration of White's affidavit and testimony as to his use of marijuana and religious beliefs, the magistrate denied the motion ...

White contends the district court erred in affirming the magistrate's denial of his motion to dismiss on the basis that the controlled substances statutes under which he was charged violate his right to religious freedom as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions and the FERPA ...

White must carry the burden of showing that Idaho's controlled substance statutes substantially burden his exercise of religion. Our review of the requirements, although largely factual in nature, presents mixed questions of fact and law ... Thus, while the issue of whether a belief motivating a particular practice is "religious" is a question of law, the question of what comprises the substantial motivation behind a defendant's conduct, i.e., whether the defendant is motivated by religious (as encompassed by the FERPA) or secular purposes, is a question of fact — to which we defer to the lower court unless its finding is clearly erroneous ...

The magistrate then summarized its findings regarding the nature of White's use of marijuana:

Ultimately, White's use of marijuana is more a matter of his belief in freedom, rather than a tenet of his religion. In his testimony, White stated "the reason that I am here today is because I believe my freedom and right to use those food groups as I will is a freedom that has been very important and still is very important in my religion, if you took it away would I have a religion, yes I'd still have my faith, I'd still have my practices, the fact that that is a part of it and is very important in my practice is why I'm here today." Further, although White did state that his life is not about marijuana, it certainly seems that his philosophy about marijuana is not that it produces any specific religious or spiritual revelation, but rather that he should be allowed to use it because his use doesn't hurt anybody. ...

Finally, the magistrate concluded:

White's personal belief does not elevate the use of marijuana to a religious tenet. White's description of his beliefs, ultimately, appears to be reminiscent of the 60's oft quoted motto, live and let live, combined with his own patchwork of other religions/beliefs with which he chooses to identify. The court is compelled to note that none of the statutory religions enumerated by White uses marijuana as a sacrament. ...

Ultimately, the magistrate's determinative findings are that while White has some statutorily-recognized religious beliefs, he did not show that his marijuana use in particular was "substantially motivated" by those legally-recognized religious beliefs. Thus, we examine whether the magistrate erred ...

In his affidavit in support of his motion to dismiss, White indicated that while he has lived most of his life alcohol and drug-free, he currently smokes marijuana "as an exercise of my right to religious freedom," having done so for seven years. He indicated that while he does not consider himself a "card-carrying" member of any legally-recognized religion, because he believes that religion and religious beliefs are exclusive to each person, he participates in and believes many of the tenets of several recognized organized religious groups, including the Church of Cognitive Therapy, Rastafarianism (which the Ninth Circuit has recognized as involving the use of marijuana as a sacrament), and Native American Medicine ...

White testified that he has no specific time of day or place as to when and where he engages in marijuana use, but that he participates in various gatherings of people on approximately a weekly basis where music is played and everyone is encouraged to participate through playing, singing, and/or dancing and where marijuana may or may not be used depending on who is there and what the group decides to do. He testified that the frequency of his use varies—he may partake in the "sacrament" daily for several weeks, but there have been times when he has gone several months without partaking ...

Considering this evidence as a whole, it becomes apparent that White's motivation (or motivations) for smoking marijuana are not easily, and unequivocally, discernible. On one hand, as he points out, he did testify that he considers his use of marijuana an exercise of his religion, that he takes it as a sacrament akin to Christian communion and in spiritual rituals honoring "the savior," that he believes there is a spiritual end to his marijuana use, and that the Holy Bible provides for such usage. However, just because White has claimed that his impetus for smoking marijuana is religious, does not make it so for the purposes of the FERPA ...

As the magistrate found, there was also evidence that White's marijuana use is based on more secular precepts. He testified that he is not a member of any legally-recognized religious groups for which marijuana has been recognized to be a sacrament and that he began smoking marijuana again (after having done so in his youth) with his cousin, who had long smoked marijuana. White testified that he did not begin smoking marijuana as a religious exercise but after he fell off a ladder and was experiencing significant pain and was looking for a more "natural way" to calm down than to take prescription pain medication. He indicated that he needed to "slow down and to find balance" and that marijuana helped him to do so. While describing it as a "spiritual experience," he also indicated that a significant reason he still smokes marijuana is to calm the overactive part of his mind and to get back more into the feeling part of his mind. He indicated that other practices he engages in—such as breathing exercises and "energy movements" such as tai chi and yoga—allow him to arrive at this same state of mind. He also averred the use of marijuana is a "powerful tree of life" and "healthful," and he believes that mankind has forgotten its harmonious position with nature and that marijuana helps facilitate awareness of life, the significance of living beings, and the harmony of living things around us. He averred that his use of marijuana is not hurting either him or his neighbor and testified that he believes everything in life is sacred, including plants, and that if used correctly and with "honor" they have a beneficial effect upon whoever is ingesting those ...

Reviewing the record, we cannot say the magistrate's finding — that the substantial motivation behind White's marijuana was more a matter of his belief in "freedom" and a "live and let live" motto and that his philosophy regarding his usage of the drug is not so much that it produces any specific religious or spiritual revelation, but rather that he should be allowed to use it because his use doesn't hurt anybody — is erroneous ...

Taken together, we conclude there was substantial evidence for the magistrate to determine that, while White may have testified in a manner to link his marijuana use to legitimate religious beliefs and practices, this was more of an instance where he has utilized parts of various recognized religions "to meld into a justification for his use of marijuana" and did not, as in Pedersen, establish a link between any recognized religious beliefs he may have and his marijuana use ...

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20IDCO%2020111214245.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR

[rug]

2. It's a bear for any court to define religion.

"In the three epigraphs at the beginning of this Article, neither the fictional Mr. Thwackum, the real English Charity Commission, nor the equally real U.S. Supreme Court was attempting to define 'religion' for purposes of international human rights law. The definitions nevertheless exemplify a variety of mistakes that have been made by adjudicators in refugee law as well as others attempting to interpret the meaning of 'religion' in human rights law."

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss16/gunn.shtml

[EvolveOrConvolve]

3. I've met this man IRL

He's a bit, erm, nutty.

My guess is that he's partaken of the "green sacrament" too many times.

[rug]

4. No kidding?

I can't say his arguments are the most coherent. But neither are the marijuana laws.

I wish him well.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

5. Yea, I completely disagree with the marijuana laws (and other prohibition type regulations)

But I'm not sure getting the courts to grant a religious exemption is the best way to go about legalization.

He's definitely "off", but seems like a harmless gentleman. And even if his arguments aren't great, at least he tried.

[cleanhippie]

6. Agreed. One mans pot is another mans peyote.

To be honest, all natural substances should not be illegal. But that's just me.

[tama]

7. +1

[rug]

8. I just want to express my disappointment at the failure to appreciate my pun.

[tama]

9. AH

thanks for pointing that out. Been a while since I've courted the higher court. Let's extend your pun and wish that also the legal professionals take their case to the higher court, share the sacrament and stop bothering people with their silly rules and judgements.

[rug]

10. Done.