Georgia Jury Finds Marijuana User Not Guilty In Dispute With State Laws

 Laurens County, Georgia – Javonnie Mondrea McCoy is a medical  marijuana patient in a state where the plant is still illegal and was  recently in court facing charges of possession and manufacturing. McCoy  grew cannabis for his own personal consumption to treat severe headaches  and other pain that he has suffered since he spent two weeks in a coma  in 2003.

Instead of attempting to fight the case on the grounds that the  evidence against him was wrong, McCoy instead argued that the laws were  wrong. He was honest about his experience and his medical use of  cannabis during the trial, and the jury acquitted his case, despite the  evidence against him. McCoy’s lawyer, Catherine Bernard, said that McCoy is not the type of person who belongs behind bars. 

“The jury appreciated his honesty throughout the  case—including testimony at trial and statements to police—and  recognized that a good, hardworking man living a quiet life and not  bothering anyone didn’t deserve a felony conviction for his actions,” Bernard said. 

This is just the most recent case of a jury nullification victory for  cannabis users, but this strategy is becoming increasingly popular. For those who do not know, jury nullification is basically the right  for any juror to not only judge the facts of the case but to also  actually judge the validity of the law itself. 

This means that if a jury  feels that a defendant is facing an unjust charge, they actually have  the right to rule in the defendant’s favor, even if they are technically  guilty under the court’s standards. Considering the fact that most of the nonviolent offenses on the  books today are extremely unpopular for a variety of reasons, you would  think that jury nullification would be household knowledge, or taught in  schools even. 

However, this is a very well guarded secret, with many  judges actually preventing the defense from informing juries of their  right to nullify laws that they feel are unjust.

 In fact, in 2016, New Hampshire House because the first state  in the nation to consider a bill that would require courts to inform  juries of their right to vote not guilty when the verdict would produce  an unjust result. 

Attorney Catherine Bernard could not be immediately reached for  comment, but posts on her Facebook page suggest that the judge attempted  to block her from discussing jury nullification in court. 

“Today, I quoted Article 1, Section 1, Paragraph XI of the Georgia Constitution  to the jury. The judge interrupted and told them it was ‘not a correct  statement of the law.’ The judge took an oath to uphold that  Constitution. What’s going on here?” Bernard wrote.  

It is sadly common for judges to prevent talk of jury nullification  in their courtrooms, as cannabis activist Ed Forchion, aka “NJ Weedman,”  learned during one of his jury nullification victories. 

Forchion was passionate in the closing arguments of his 2012 trial, wearing a shirt that said “Marijuana … It’s OK. It’s Just Illegal,”  and telling the jury that he had been munching on edibles throughout  the whole trial. Then at one point, he was nearly held in contempt of  court for trying to advance his jury nullification argument. 

In the years since Forcion has faced constant harassment from the  authorities and has been arrested on numerous occasions. Luckily, he was  still able to win over the jury earlier this year when he was found not  guilty after spending over 400 days in jail on trumped-up witness tampering charges, which were related to a prior marijuana case.