LAKE COUNTY >> The defendants” request for a 60-day delay of the hearing for a preliminary injunction against Lake County officials from making warrantless marijuana raids has been denied by San Francisco federal court. Instead, plaintiffs were allowed until Wednesday to submit a supplemental briefing, while the defendants were given until Sept. 29 to file their response.
The court will hold the preliminary injunction hearing on Oct. 6. The lawsuit, filed Aug. 30 by attorney Joe Elford, seeks future protection for Lake County residents from alleged unlawful search and seizures plaintiffs say were conducted by Lake County law enforcement since the passage of Measure N, as well as damages for residents that have already been subject to such raids and lost their marijuana plants.
According to Elford, the defence had requested the postponement of the hearing because “not all of the defendants had been served and they needed the time for everyone to be served and then appear.”
Calls to attorney John Whitefleet, who is representing the defendants of the case, were not returned by press time.
However, from the plaintiffs” perspective, the 60-day delay “would have been problematic because they wouldn”t get a hearing before the end of harvest,” Elford said.
The plaintiffs” briefing submitted Wednesday responds to the court”s decision to deny the issue of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and fills in gaps in the original case Elford filed that the court alluded to in their decision, according to Elford. The lawyer also submitted video and photographic evidence of an alleged official cutting locks to a resident”s property along with his briefing.
In issuing its denial for a TRO, the court stated the plaintiffs” request for a TRO lacked evidence that the defendants have a history of raiding marijuana cultivators, evidence that the warrantless raids were officially authorized by the county and evidence that plaintiffs who were already raided are at risk of being raided again.
For evidence of the defendants” history of raiding marijuana cultivators, the briefing cites the preliminary injunction issued by the Lake County Superior Court in 2012 after the defendants “stepped (up) their efforts to eradicate medical marijuana gardens” following the county”s adoption of the urgency medical marijuana cultivation ordinance.
Elford added in response to the court”s request for evidence that law enforcement”s actions in the raids following the passage of Measure N had been officially authorized excerpts from a county meeting. Statements by officials during the Board of Supervisors meeting on Aug. 19 and testimony during defence arguments at the TRO hearing on Sept. 2. he believes support the case. Elford cites California Department of Fish and Wildlife Lt. Loren Freeman”s comments on Aug. 19 that “attempted to excuse the warrantless raids based on the open fields doctrine.” During the TRO hearing, Elford quotes the defense in its assertion that all of its warrantless seizures were made with consent.
Additionally, Elford argues that because the BOS failed to immediately address the problem on Aug. 19 and put off the matter for future consideration, its “failure to take any action in response to known constitutional violations, constitutes ratification, or official authorization of the defendants” unconstitutional practices.”
Finally, Elford attempts to show that the victims of the raids are subject to future injuries by officials. Although the argument had been made that with growing season over, the plaintiffs could suffer no new damage to their crop, the lawyer reported a new development.
“Due to the kindness of other patients, they have been able to replant partially grown marijuana plants that will be ready for harvest soon,” Elford said.
The video submitted to the court was taken by a security camera on resident Jason Robinson”s property and shows an unidentified, armed man dressed in camouflage and bearing an unidentified insignia on his left shoulder cutting a lock to a gate on Robinson”s property. Elford alleges the man could be an officer with the Lake County Sheriff”s Office.
According to Elford, a wooden sign next to gate reads “no trespassing,” although the front of the sign cannot be seen from the perspective of the camera. The message on the sign cannot be confirmed.
Although Robinson is currently listed as a declarant on the case, Elford said he may be filing as a plaintiff.
