Court Opinion

ID: 9766196
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:36:52.073735+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:20.311777
License: Public Domain

MORRISON, Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
As to the bomb, I would affirm. As to the possession of marihuana, I would reduce the bond to $5,000.00. Recent trends in the national congress and in the public thinking1 would denounce as unreasonable a prohibitive bond for possession of marihuana. This court and all courts should keep abreast with the times. I respectfujly dissent to the affirmance of the order as to the possession of marihuana.

. Cal. Health and Safety Code, Sec. 11530 (1964), as amended, (1968) ; Alas.Stat., Sec. 17.12.110(a) (Supp.1969); Dominion of Canada, 17 and 18 Eliz. 2, c. 41, Sec. 12 (1969), amending 9 and 10 Eliz. 2, c. 35, Sec. 3(2) (1961) ; Conn.Pub.Act, No. 753, Sees. 1 and 19 (1969); Ill.Pub.Act 76-464, Sec. 38(5) ; Iowa Laws 1969, House Pile 516; Mont.Rev.Codes Ann., Sec. 54-133 (Supp.1969); N.D.Cent.Code 19-03-28.1 (Supp.1969), Utah Laws 1969, Ch. 170, at p. 671; Wash.Laws 1969, Ch. 256; Wyo.Stat.Ann., Sec. 35-369 (Supp.1969) ; S. 2657, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., Sec. 8 (1969); S. 2637, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969) ; S. 2608, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969); A.L.I. Model Penal Code, Sec. 1.04(5) (Proposed Official Draft, 1962) ; Rosenthal, A Plea for Amelioration of the Marihuana Laws, 47 Texas L.Rev. 1359 (1969).