CUA provides an affirmative defense in California

2016Code, § 11362.5, subd. (d).) “By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation.” (People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008, 1013 .) “Because the statute provides a limited affirmative defense, the burden is, of course, on the defendant to raise the defense and prove its elements.” (People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1551, fn. 17 .) However, the defendant need only “raise a reasonable doubt as to those facts rather than to prove them by a preponderance of the evidence.” (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th

2015(People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457 (Mower); Frazier, supra, 128 Cal.App.4th at p. 818 .) The “defendant may not merely point to the defense, but has the burden to raise a reasonable doubt about the facts underlying this defense.” ( Frazier, supra, at p. 818 , applying Mower, supra, at pp. 477, 481 .) In 2003, the Legislature enacted the MMP.

2016Code, § 11362.5, subd. (d).) “By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation.” (People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008, 1013 .) “Because the statute provides a limited affirmative defense, the burden is, of course, on the defendant to raise the defense and prove its elements.” (People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1551, fn. 17 .) However, the defendant need only “raise a reasonable doubt as to those facts rather than to prove them by a preponderance of the evidence.” (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th

2016Code, § 11362.5, subd. (d).) “By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation.” (People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008, 1013 .) “Because the statute provides a limited affirmative defense, the burden is, of course, on the defendant to raise the defense and prove its elements.” (People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1551, fn. 17 .) However, the defendant need only “raise a reasonable doubt as to those facts rather than to prove them by a preponderance of the evidence.” (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th

2016Code, § 11362.5, subd. (d).) “By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation.” (People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008, 1013 .) “Because the statute provides a limited affirmative defense, the burden is, of course, on the defendant to raise the defense and prove its elements.” (People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1551, fn. 17 .) However, the defendant need only “raise a reasonable doubt as to those facts rather than to prove them by a preponderance of the evidence.” (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th

2015“In 1996, the California electorate approved Proposition 215 and adopted the CUA, which provides: ‘Section 11357, relating to the possession of marijuana, and Section 11358, relating to the cultivation of marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient’s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician.’ (§ 11362.5, subd. (d).) By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation. [Cit

2015“In 1996, the California electorate approved Proposition 215 and adopted the CUA, which provides: ‘Section 11357, relating to the possession of marijuana, and Section 11358, relating to the cultivation of marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient’s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician.’ (§ 11362.5, subd. (d).) By this and related provisions, the CUA provides an affirmative defense to prosecution for the crimes of possession and cultivation. [Cit

2010(See generally People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 474 [ 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 326 , 49 P.3d 1067 ] (Mower); People v. Wright (2006) 40 Cal.4th 81, 98 [ 51 Cal.Rptr.3d 80 , 146 P.3d 531 ] (Wright).) The CUA does not grant immunity from arrest for those crimes, however.

2010(See generally People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 474 [ 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 326 , 49 P.3d 1067 ] (Mower); People v. Wright (2006) 40 Cal.4th 81, 98 [ 51 Cal.Rptr.3d 80 , 146 P.3d 531 ] (Wright).) The CUA does not grant immunity from arrest for those crimes, however.