From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: Curtis (Toon Town Hero) Sears has been fighting a   
   marijuana grow bust for many years.   
      
   He had filed a Quash motion in the days when we were arguing   
   POLCOA, struck down law stays struck down until Parliament   
   strikes it up again, not the courts and the new BENO offered   
   by the Sfetkopoulos and Beren strike-downs of the same mis-   
   supply grower caps struck down in Hitzig.   
      
   The crown folded against the simple possession charge before   
   the hearing even started but left the court room in a hurry   
   as the applicant was left standing there still asking for a   
   hearing on S.7 production charge. Can't try to Quash the   
   S.5(2) Possession for a Purpose Charge because that was   
   never struck down (R.v. Turmel) while Parker struck down   
   Possession and Krieger struck down Cultivation. But his   
   taking off avoided the krieger case getting the production   
   charges possibly dropped.   
      
   His motion was eventually dismissed by Chief Judge Popescul   
   for whatever reason.   
      
   The next motion to quash was dismissed by Judge Mills as   
   being a doomed argument, since Chief Judge Popescul had   
   already ruled that CDSA prohibitions against marijuana were   
   in full effect and always known to law. It was dismissed as   
   "stare decisis," meaning "I have to obey the higher court!"   
      
   The 3rd Quash was dismissed by Judge Elson in a similar   
   fashion to the dismissal of Mills, going along the lines of   
   not being able to appeal or rule against the Chief Judge's   
   previous ruling, and that he was not able to no matter what   
   was in the motion, and no matter how many supreme court   
   cases there were since the last ruling on the matter.   
      
   And this time too, Judge Elson ruled that the Quash motion   
   relying on Smith Mis-Use rather than Sfetkopoulos/Beren Mis-   
   Supply were in substance and the same order was requested."   
      
   So it wasn't dismissed on the merits, it was dismissed on   
   the presumed non-merits. New card seems like old card in   
   claiming the same pot. "Similar in substance and same order   
   requested," is like "Ace is similar in substance to King and   
   same pot sought." Har har har. No precedent set since it was   
   dismissed due to similarity to a previous Quash based on   
   something else. Har har har har har har har har har.   
      
   By the way, in my Casino Turmel trial, I filed 3 Quash   
   motions. Once a week after the bust, once at the beginning   
   of trial with a new card, and again during trial (not having   
   pleaded and having stood mute) with a new card. All three   
   adjudicated. Sounds like Curtis' judge didn't know his job   
   compared to my judge. Of course, my Judge Lennox went on to   
   become Chief Provincial Judge for Ontario.   
      
   But the just focused on how he didn't see anything in the   
   motion that relates to the 5(2) charges of the CDSA. That's   
   because that one was never invalidated, only S.4 Possession   
   and S.7 Production. We go for "no force and effect" against   
   S.5(2) in the later constitutional motion after the Quash   
   has gotten rid of the Parker- and Krieger-invalidated S.4   
   and  S.7 prohibitions.   
      
   So that's Manitoba. Because Curtis lost his first Quash on   
   different grounds, he can't make another on new grounds.   
   Unlike me in Ontario could was allowed to make two new   
   Quashes eash time on different grounds. I think Judge Lennox   
   knew the law better than the hicks in Saskatoon.   
      
   But no precedent set, Judge Elson didn't even look at the   
   argument. Just wrongly presumed he was bound by a Quash   
   decision on something else. Har har har.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)