Minnesota high court moves into uncharted waters

Oct 22nd, 2009 by Mark Cohen

Today the Minnesota Supreme Court has navigated into waters it never has before — bong water. (No wonder they call it the high court!)

The defendant in the case possesed a bong with 37.17 grams of bong water in it. She was charged with having in her possession one or more “mixtures” that contains a controlled substance and weighs more than 25 grams. The defendant argued that most of the 37.17 grams was just water, and that the Legislature did not intend for bong water to be included as a “mixture” for purposes of the statute, the violation of which is a first-degree controlled substance offense.

The trial court judge and Court of Appeals agreed, deciding in Moses-like fashion to part out bong water from the mixture statute.

But a divided high court reversed, finding the defense’s argument didn’t hold water. The majority said that it was “clear” that the water containing methamphetamine was a mixture. (Crystal clear, some might say.)

But the three dissenters — Justices Paul Anderson, Helen Meyer and Alan Page — found the bong waters issue a little muddier. They concluded that it was, in fact, not clear whether the Legislature intended to include bong water in the mixture statute, which subjects a defendant to some pretty harsh penalties. Because of this ambiguity, bong water should not be included, they said.

The case includes a great discussion by Justice Anderson explaining how a bong works. Regardless of where you come out on this — and I can see both sides — it will surely give you something to put in your pipe and smoke.

Posted in Uncategorized

6 Responses to “Minnesota high court moves into uncharted waters”

Zombie Nixon says:

October 22, 2009 at 1:44 pm

We just won the war on drugs!! Break open the booze and cigars, boys.
Anonymous says:

October 23, 2009 at 7:37 am

Cypress Hill would be so mad.
Thomas Gallagher says:

October 24, 2009 at 1:52 pm

Since drugs are now in river water (search: “drugs in water supply”) and cities get their water from rivers, city water is a “mixture” of illegal drugs, according to the absurd logic of this majority of four Minnesota Supreme Court judges. So – now that all of us living in Minnesota are criminals possessing “drug mixture” water in our homes and toilets – shall we wake up, end the abuse of government power, and repeal all laws criminalizing drugs possession?

For more discussion of this Minnesota case, and it’s excellent dissent, see my law blog post:

Minnesota Court Waters Down Legal Definition of Illegal Drugs: Toilet Water Now Criminal to Possess
http://wp.me/pAFjr-2g
Newly Minted 2009 says:

October 24, 2009 at 5:30 pm

This one goes out to the Supremes …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmjXY1BDMEA
Mark Cohen says:

October 24, 2009 at 6:30 pm

Love the music salute. Nothing like leaving our blog readers with a bong, err… song in their hearts …
Andy Mergendahl says:

October 28, 2009 at 12:34 pm

Mr. Gallagher’s blog post is worth reading to understand the utter absurdity of this decision. What an embarrassment. Here’s the heart of Justice Anderson’s dissent, which any layperson can fully grasp:

“The majority’s decision to permit bong water to be used to support a first-degree felony controlled-substance charge runs counter to the legislative structure of our drug laws, does not make common sense, and borders on the absurd…the result is a decision that has the potential to undermine public confidence in our criminal justice system.”