Cops Can Destroy Seized Weed, Colorado Supreme Court Rules

Going, going, gone.EXPAND
Going, going, gone.
Scott Lentz
Keep Westword Free
I Support
  • Local
  • Community
  • Journalism
  • logo

Support the independent voice of Denver and help keep the future of Westword free.

For the past four years, any time local police seized cannabis in a criminal investigation, they've been required to care for it, either by keeping the plants alive or by returning the marijuana in a usable form to the owner. That's no longer the case.

On January 23, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that requiring police to store marijuana in evidence is in violation of federal law. The court issued its opinion in the case of the People v. Robert Crouse.

Crouse, a medical marijuana patient, was arrested on May 5, 2011, on charges of cultivation and possession of marijuana after police seized 55 marijuana plants and about 2.9 kilograms of marijuana product from his home. He was charged with a felony count of cultivating more than thirty marijuana plants. Crouse asserted that he was in lawful possession of the cannabis for medical purposes, and a jury acquitted him of marijuana-related drug crimes.

After his trial, Crouse asked the court to order police to return the seized marijuana plants and, in December 2013, a district judge ruled in his favor because Colorado state law says that upon acquittal, marijuana "shall be returned immediately."

The Colorado Supreme Court.EXPAND
The Colorado Supreme Court.
Colorado Judicial Branch

On Monday, however, Colorado Supreme Court Judge Allison Eid wrote that whenever officers return marijuana, it's forcing them to be "distributors," which is a federal crime.

Last September, Eid was one of 21 candidates named by President Donald Trump as a potential U.S. Supreme Court nominee.

"The return provision requires law enforcement officers to return, or distribute, marijuana," she wrote in the decision. "Thus compliance with the return provision necessarily requires law enforcement officers to violate federal law."

Three justices dissented, saying the Controlled Substances Act "immunizes federal and state officers from civil and criminal liability in the circumstances at issue here." Colorado Supreme Court Judge Richard Gabriel, who wrote a dissenting opinion, said he believes it's possible to comply with both the Controlled Substances Act and Colorado state law. Justice Gabriel was joined by Chief Justice Nancy Rice and Justice William Hood in the dissent.

Under article XVIII, section 14(2)(e) of the Colorado Constitution, law enforcement officers are required to return medical marijuana once the individual is acquitted of a state drug charge. But for now, at least, it looks like federal law will trump state law.

Keep Westword Free... Since we started Westword, it has been defined as the free, independent voice of Denver, and we would like to keep it that way. Offering our readers free access to incisive coverage of local news, food and culture. Producing stories on everything from political scandals to the hottest new bands, with gutsy reporting, stylish writing, and staffers who've won everything from the Society of Professional Journalists' Sigma Delta Chi feature-writing award to the Casey Medal for Meritorious Journalism. But with local journalism's existence under siege and advertising revenue setbacks having a larger impact, it is important now more than ever for us to rally support behind funding our local journalism. You can help by participating in our "I Support" membership program, allowing us to keep covering Denver with no paywalls.

We use cookies to collect and analyze information on site performance and usage, and to enhance and customize content and advertisements. By clicking 'X' or continuing to use the site, you agree to allow cookies to be placed. To find out more, visit our cookies policy and our privacy policy.


Join the Westword community and help support independent local journalism in Denver.


Join the Westword community and help support independent local journalism in Denver.