October 2020 Court re-schedules McIntosh hearing in USA vs Lynch for April 2021. In 2020 Lynch's case was stalled by the Corona Virus Outbreak. The McIntosh hearing will determine if Lynch was following State Law 14 years ago. The McIntosh hearing is now scheduled for April 1, 2021.
April 2, 2020 Federal Prosecutors schedule McIntosh hearing in USA vs Lynch. In 2019 Lynch took his arguments to Supreme court which paused the Section 531 Arguments. Lynch lost at the Supreme Court but won a McIntosh Hearing. The McIntosh hearing will determine if Lynch was following State Law 13 years ago. The McIntosh hearing is scheduled for March 2020 through August 2020.
March 3, 2017 Free Federal Public Defenders file Notice and Request for a McIntosh Remand or Relief to end ongoing 10 year Federal Medical Marijuana Prosecution of Charles Lynch.
Appropriations Action Section 538 of 2015 was renumbered to Appropriations Act Section 542 in 2016. The Section expires in April 2017 if not renewed. The rider was renewed in 2018, 2019 and 2020. The 2020 version is numbered Section 531.
February 24, 2015 Charles Lynch filed Appropriations Act, 2015 Section 538 Motion to end his prosecution for operating a medical marijuana dispensary in 2006. The series of Government and Lynch motions follows with most recent first.
SEC. 538. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.
McIntosh Hearing Schedule CONTINUED to September 2022 in USA vs Lynch
Court CONTINUES the dates set in Scheduling Order as Follows
Evidentiary Hearing September 22, 2022 9:30 am
McIntosh Hearing Schedule CONTINUED to Februrary 2022 in USA vs Lynch
Court CONTINUES the dates set in Scheduling Order as Follows
Evidentiary Hearing February 17, 2022 9:30 am
McIntosh Hearing Schedule CONTINUED to April 2021 in USA vs Lynch
Court CONTINUES the dates set in Scheduling Order as Follows
Evidentiary Hearing April 1, 2021 9:30 am
McIntosh Hearing Schedule CONTINUED to 2021 in USA vs Lynch
Court CONTINUES the dates set in Scheduling Order as Follows
Evidentiary Hearing January 7, 2021 9:30 am
Federal Prosecutors and Federal public defenders file Expert Discovery 2020 in USA vs Lynch
Federal prosecutors file Expert Witness Disclosure. DEA Agent Dennis R. Packer will argue that Lynch's business model was not correct. Federal Public Defenders file Exper Witness Disclosure. Alex Kreit and Ofor Lion will provide expert witness that Lynch complied with State Laws. These disclosure documents are not available online at this time.
Judge Wu approves McIntosh Hearing Schedule May 2020 thru September 2020 in USA vs Lynch
Due the Corona virus pandemic Judge Wu reschedules the McInthosh hearing schedule for Lynch: Expert Discover May 4, 2020; Defendant's motion to enjoin spending June 18, 2020; Government's opposition to motion to enjoin July 16, 2020; Defendant's reply August 13, 2020; Final Discovery Cutoff August 27, 2020; Status Conference September 10, 2020; Evidentiary Hearing September 24, 2020.
Judge Wu approves McIntosh Hearing Schedule March 2020 thru August 2020 in USA vs Lynch
Judge Wu sets the McInthosh hearing schedule for Lynch: Expert Discover March 27, 2020; Defendant's motion May 14, 2020; Government's opposition June 11, 2020; Defendant's reply July 9, 2020; Final Discovery Cutoff July 23, 2020; Status Conference August 3, 2020; Evidentiary Hearing August 10, 2020.
Federal Prosecutors propose Schedule for McIntosh Hearing March 2020 thru August 2020 in USA vs Lynch
Federal Prosecutors stab Lynch in the back one more time as the Government collapses and they abandon their possbily CV-19 infected offices to work from home. This is the schedule for Lynch's McIntosh hearing based on the Spending Appropriations Rider 2015-2020 frantically filed by David Kowal. It's clear he knows/knew that this schedule would not be possible due to the upcoming CV crisis yet he spent his and other's time and money working on it anyway. Today 3-19-20 the entire State of California went into lockdown (I did 9 months 10 days house arrest) I truly believe that David Kowal should be investigated by the FBI for this ongoing felonious prosecution and Section 531 is the vehicle for that investigation. This clear incompetent misconduct also shows his great disdain for Lynch at Hate Crime levels and complete disregard for the Appropriations Rider Section 531. Kowal should have been prosecuting enemies foreign or domestic, Lynch is not an enemy of the United States of America. Also more than half the entire nation operates in felonious violation of Federal marijuana laws and this continuing prosecution is an injust to the constitution and to the 'equal treatment under the law' mantra. The Government has hired many expert witnesses on both sides to try and figure out if Lynch was following state Medical Marijuana Laws 13 years ago. What a collosal waste of taxpayer money and Lynch's life. Thought Kowal was the expert but he doesn't know either, has to hire experts. Lynch ran a near perfect dispensary a 10 many thought :) The tone of Kowal's remarks are alarming ie; "because of the desire..."
By this ex parte application, the government requests that this expert deadline, and the other deadlines currently established, be extended for two weeks, for the following reasons.
The government has a potential expert (“the expert”) who has been working diligently for several months on this matter including reviewing the voluminous discovery and record in this case, for the purpose of analyzing issues concerning defendant’s compliance with California state marijuana law.
Because of the desire to file this application before the government’s office closed on March 13, 2020, I caused this application to be filed
Lynch Admonished for the smell of weed in his house January 09, 2020
Lynch was jamming some music in his trailer and finished playing Secret Agent Man when he heard pounding on the door. Lynch opened the door to two Federal Agents who are allowed by court order to search the house. The Federal Agents came into the house and smelled Cannabis. Lynch was admonished and written up by the Agents.
The Defendant was admonished for not abiding by his condition to not use or possess illegal drugs
The defendant furthered his conversation by citing criminal codes and state marijuana usage laws.
Lynch said he was not citing State Marijuana Laws but rather Federal Marijuana Laws and said more the half the entire nation is operating in violation of Federal Law.
Federal Prosecutors and Federal Public Defenders provide final briefs for McIntosh Hearing
These are the final arguments before Feds put Lynch on State trial in Federal Court to determine whether he was following state law 12 years ago when he ran his Medical Marijuana dispensary in Morro Bay California. This is the so called McIntosh hearing based on the Spending Appropriations Rider 2015-2019. Government is saying that Lynch needs to prove he followed State Law beyond a reasonable doubt. Lynch says has already shown he was following state law and it is the burden of the Government to prove he was not following State Law.
Defendant further shows the weakness of his arguments by relying heavily on the unpublished Ninth Circuit opinion in United States v. Gloor
Unsurprisingly, district courts have had no problems acknowledging these opinions while still firmly holding that defendant bears the burden by a preponderance of the evidence in a McIntosh hearing.
As the government has set forth, the Ninth Circuit in Kleinman properly used the Cal. AG Guidelines to measure a defendant’s state law compliance for conduct that preceded the promulgation of the guidelines
Misquoting and altering the transcript, the government suggests that at the hearing on the indicative motion, the defense “conceded” that if the burden is on the defendant, then Mr. Lynch has not shown compliance. (Gov’t Opn’g Br., Dkt. No. 490 at 7.) In fact, the defense stated the opposite: “Even if the burden is on us, I think we have met it.” (Dkt. No. 467 at 41:15-18.)
All this court must determine is whether, as a factual matter, California law authorized Mr. Lynch’s conduct. If so, the rider applies. See Lynch, 903 F.3d at 1087.
Finally, the government relies on the unpublished district court decision in United States v. Daleman...Daleman relies on the general rule that the proponent of a motion bears the burden of proof...Importantly, Daleman predates Gloor, where the Ninth Circuit looked to state procedural mechanisms to determine whether the defendant demonstrated state-law compliance under McIntosh.
In straining to find noncompliance, the government argues that laws and guidelines that postdate Mr. Lynch’s conduct—by as much as a decade—are relevant to the court’s decision.
Lynch has also filed to have his case heard by the Supreme Court. Visit the Appeal and Supreme Court pages for the latest updates.
