Natural Medicine
Nutrition, Bio-Energy, Herbs, Cannabis (as per Prop 215)
Chelation and Intravenous Nutrient Therapies,  Spiritual Medicine

Landmark Appeals Court Ruling
A Big Victory For Medical Cannabis
But Too Late For Noel Spark
Another Victory Too Late For Shaun Wright

            (Los Angeles, Aug 19, 2004) Noel Spark’s conviction of illegally growing three cannabis plants was overturned by the state Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, in what appears to be a major victory for the medical cannabis movement.  The Court ruled (Aug 2, 2004) that the law does not require a patient to prove that he or she is seriously ill to benefit from the rights to use cannabis medicinally.  In another ruling the same day, the Fourth Appellate District Court overturned the conviction of Shaun Wright.

This contentious Spark case had already been through two trials in which the prosecution painted the medical approval held by Mr. Spark to be invalid, because his physician, Dr. William Eidelman, had been suspended by the Medical Board.  The jury bought the line of the prosecution, that the doctor had been suspended by the Medical Board for allegedly giving phony approvals to undercover police officers from other Southern California communities, who by coincidence came to testify from hours away. 

A member of the jury spoke to Mr. Spark’s mother after the trial, who reportedly said, “The doctor is a naughty-naughty-no-no, so even though we knew Spark was in tremendous pain all the time, we felt we had to convict.”  Mr. Spark spent five months in jail, without any pain medicine or spirit medicine.  Now the case is overruled, with important implications for patients, police, physicians, attorneys, judges, and the Medical Board.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the law did not require people to be seriously ill to enjoy the rights granted by the Compassionate Use Act, to legally use, possess, and grow cannabis for medical purposes.  This is the very same position taken by Dr. Eidelman at his disciplinary hearing before the Medical Board, the same position taken by Dr. Tod Mikuriya as Dr. Eidelman’s expert witness and in his own hearing before the Board.  The same position was rejected by the Medical Board in both cases. 

The Medical Board argued that physicians are to be gatekeepers, allowing only seriously ill patients to have approvals.  With the Appeals ruling in Spark’s case, the bar is lowered for patients, and perhaps will also be lowered for physician’s, the vast majority of whom remain afraid to help even their sickest patients.

The jury ruled against Spark, even though Dr. Dave Bearman also testified on his behalf, that he suffers a serious medical condition.  Dr. Bearman himself has just won an Appeals case, in which the Court ruled the Medical Board didn’t have enough basis to examine the records of a patient, following the complaint of a law enforcement official. The state Supreme Court just let that ruling stand.

In the Wright case, the Judge Stottler dis-allowed the Compassionate Use Defense, and did not allow Dr. Eidelman to tell the jury about Shaun's severe medical problems.  Read the ruling here.

Both Dr. Eidelman and Dr. Mikuriya are appealing their punishments by the Board.