Days of Federal Prosecution

Civil War Against CCL Began March 31, 2007. That was
4
4
7
0
Days
1
4
Hours
0
2
Minutes
1
2
Seconds
ago and still counting

Etrade Closing Lynch IRA

ccl .420th centETrade closing Lynch's IRA because he was "arrested for selling marijuana"

Lynch Loses Appeal in 9th Circuit

9th Circuit Court BuildingLynch loses in 9th Circuit Court of Appeals but wins a McIntosh hearing September 13, 2018

Lynch Files Supreme Court Certiorari

Supreme CourtFree Federal Public Defenders file Supreme Court Certiorari

Lynch Files Section 538 Motion

rickray 001 42x42Charles Lynch files Section 538 motion to end case based on new 2015 Spending Bill

Rorahbacher-Farr Letter to Inspector General

Letter to Inspector GeneralCongressmen Sam Farr and Dana Rorabacher write letter to Inspector General

Lynch Section 538 Motions

rickray 001 200x200.fw

USA vs LYNCH

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.

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.

Final Pre McIntosh Hearing Briefs

May 30, 2019 Final Pre McIntosh Hearing Briefs

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.

Federal Prosecutor David Kowal

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

Federal Public Defenders

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.

McIntosh Hearing Preliminary Documents

May 09, 2019 Feds Prepare State Trial in Federal Court

Feds preparing to put Lynch on State Trial in Federal Court, McIntosh Hearing

Feds are planning on putting Lynch on 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. Feds are saying that Lynch needs to prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt.

FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

AS THIS COURT HAS ALREADY CONCLUDED, DEEFENDANT BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROVING HIS ACTIONS WERE IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.

Federal Public Defenders

In the appellate opinion in this matter, the court found it “contestable” whether Mr. Lynch was in “total compliance with state law,” indicating that even without further factual development, Mr. Lynch had raised doubt as to his compliance. Lynch, 903 F.3d at 1085...Thus, as dictated by law, at this stage, the burden shifts to the government to prove the CCCC was not in compliance with California medical marijuana laws beyond a reasonable doubt.

Lynch has also filed to have his case heard by the Supreme Court. Visit the Appeal and Supreme Court pages for the latest updates.

McIntosh Hearing Delay 2

April 23, 2019 Feds Ask for Extension

Feds ask for 2nd Extension preparing State Trial for Lynch in Federal Court

Feds are planning on putting Lynch on trial in Federal Court determine whether he was following state law 12 years ago when he ran his dispensary in Morro Bay California. This is the so called McIntosh hearing based on the Spending Appropriations Rider 2015-2019.

hereby stipulate to the following in support of a joint motion for a two-week continuance of the dates for preliminary briefing in this matter.

Lynch has also filed to have his case heard by the Supreme Court. Visit the Appeal and Supreme Court pages for the latest updates.

McIntosh Hearing Delay 1

April 8, 2019 Feds Ask for Extension

Feds ask for Extension preparing State Trial for Lynch in Federal Court

Feds are planning on putting Lynch on trial in Federal Court determine whether he was following state law 12 years ago when he ran his dispensary in Morro Bay California. This is the so called McIntosh hearing based on the Spending Appropriations Rider 2015-2019.

Based on the stipulation of the parties and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: The parties shall file their opening simultaneous briefs (limited to 20 pages) on April 25, 2019. Simultaneous responsive briefs (limited to 7 pages) will be filed on May 16, 2019. The hearing shall be continued from May 20, 2019 to June 3, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 15, 2019 Hon. George Wu

Lynch has also filed to have his case heard by the Supreme Court. Visit the Appeal and Supreme Court pages for the latest updates.

Lynch Wins McIntosh Hearing

September 13, 2018 9th Circuit Lynch wins McIntosh Hearing

After 10 years on appeal the 9th Circuit finally made a decision in USA vs Lynch. The Good News Lynch won a McIntosh hearing which says Federal Government cannot spend money to overthrow state medical marijuana laws. The Rider has been on the books since 2015. This year it is known as the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2019 Division C Section 537. The Bad news, even McIntosh himself has not won his arguments which are still ongoing.

The panel did not need to reach the question of whether a congressional appropriations rider (enacted following the filing of this appeal), which this court has interpreted to prohibit the federal prosecution of persons for activities compliant with state medical marijuana laws, operates to annul a properly obtained conviction. The panel explained that a genuine dispute exists as to whether Lynch’s activities were actually legal under California state law, and therefore remanded to the district court for a factual determination as to state-law compliance.

Lynch has also filed to have his case heard by the Supreme Court. Visit the Appeal and Supreme Court pages for the latest updates.

Lynch Section 542 Motion Denied

USA vs Lynch 9th Circuit Denies Section 542 Motion June 16, 2017

9th Circuit Denies Lynch Section 542 argument without prejudice. Lynch will now have to make his Section 542 arguments in his final Brief due July 17 2017, ten years to the day after Lynch was arrested on July 17, 2007.

Lynch’s Notice (Docket Entry No. [137]) is denied without prejudice to renewing the arguments in the third cross-appeal brief. No motions for reconsideration of this denial will be entertained. Lynch’s third brief on cross-appeal is due within 30 days of the date of this order.

Click the 'Motion Denied' button to read the 9th Circuit's string of decisions on previous filing and the Section 542. Thank you for your support :( Charles C. Lynch


Lynch Final Section 542 Reply

USA vs Lynch Lynch Files Final Section 542 Motion April 24, 2017

Free Federal Public Defenders file Lynch's oversized (38 pages) Section 542 motion reply and at the same time file Request to File the Oversized reply.

And the government’s proposal flips the presumption of innocence on its head. Criminal defendants, of course, are innocent until proven guilty. See In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970). Mr. Lynch is entitled to a presumption that he complied with California law unless and until the government proves otherwise.

The Reply is 38 pages and there is a 10 page max so a request to file the oversized brief is included. The 9th Circuit hasn't replied to any of the requests for extensions lately...

Click the 'Final Reply' button to read Lynch's Final Section 542 reply. Thank you for your support! Charles C. Lynch


Lynch Motion for Final Extension

USA vs Lynch Federal Public Defefenders Files Final Extension to Respond April 21, 2017

Free Federal Public Defenders file for a final one day extension to reply to Government's opposition to Lynch's Section 542 motion.


Lynch Motion for Extension

USA vs Lynch Federal Public Defefenders Files Extension to Respond April 3, 2017

Free Federal Public Defenders file for extension to reply to Government's opposition to Lynch's Section 542 motion.


Government Final 542 Opposition

USA vs Lynch Government Files Final Section 542 Opposition March 23, 2017

Federal Prosecutors file oversized (27 pages) opposition to Lynch's Section 542 motion and at the same time file request to file the oversized reply.

For the reasons set forth above, defendant’s motion should be denied, and this Court should order that defendant third brief on cross-appeal be filed without further delay.

Federal Prosecutors file oversized response opposing Lynch's Section 542 Motion. The response is 27 pages and there is a 20 page max so a request to file the oversized brief is included. The 9th Circuit hasn't replied to any of the requests for extensions...

Click the 'Government 542 Opposition' button to read the Government's Final oppositin to Lynch's Section 542 motion. Thank you for your support! Charles C. Lynch


Don't miss the latest CCL updates. Lets get Social with it!

Donate today!

News