JCT: You'll remember the two co-appellants in my
consolidated medpot appeals, Pierre Drouin and Real Martin.
Both did their offensive motions to the top but only Real
Martin now needs to go back down to start at the bottom
again.
Pierre Drouin did receive his exemption from Health Canada,
and being proven sick, the Crown offered him 3 months house
arrest if he pleaded guilty and he took it.

Real Martin's application for prohibition of his charges due
to Krieger was also dismissed by the Supreme Court.

SCC: 32010
Real Martin v. Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave)
//cases-dossiers.scc-csc.gc.ca/information/cms/case-summary_e.asp?
32010
Coram : McLachlin C.J. and Charron and Rothstein JJ.

The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the
Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C44684, dated February
23, 2007, is dismissed.

CASE SUMMARY
Criminal law - Narcotic control - Whether section 7(1) of
the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19,
is still an offence known to law?

The Applicant was charged with production of marihuana
contrary to section 7(1) of the Controlled Drugs and
Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19 ("CDSA"), possession for
the purpose of trafficking marihuana contrary to section
5(2) of the CDSA and five counts of possessing a prohibited
weapon contrary to the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46.

After being committed to stand trial, but before his trial
in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the Applicant
brought an application for an order prohibiting prosecution
of the count under section 7(1) as it was his position that
it was no longer an offence known to law because Parliament
had not re-enacted the offence since a judge of the Alberta
Queen's Bench struck it down in R. v. Krieger (2000), 225
D.L.R. (4th) 164.

Justice Nadeau dismissed his application, concluding that
there was a suspension of the order of the declaration of
invalidity and that declaration was since remedied by the
enactment of the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations
("MMARs"). The Court of Appeal agreed.

December 5, 2005
Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Nadeau J.)
Neutral citation: None
Application for order prohibiting prosecution dismissed

February 23, 2007
Court of Appeal for Ontario (Labrosse, Sharpe and Blair JJ.)
Neutral citation: 2007 ONCA 132
Appeal dismissed

April 24, 2007
Supreme Court of Canada
Application for leave to appeal filed

Anyway, Justices McLachlin, Charron and Rothstein have
condemned Real Martin to face prosecution in Ontario
Superior Court in Cochran tomorrow Aug 15 2001.

At this stage, not that the challenge to the existence of
the law is gone, we have to challenge the constitutional
validity of the law with as constitutional challenge based
on the fact it's hard to find doctors to participate in the
Health Canada program making the exemption process
unworkable.

Court File No.
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
(Criminal Division - North-East Region)
Between:
Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent/Plaintiff
and
Real Martin

Applicant/Accused

NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
Pursuant to S.8(2)(a) or of the
Constitutional Question Act

TAKE NOTICE THAT on Aug 15 2008 at 10am or so soon
thereafter as can be heard the application to the judge for
any Order abridging the time for service, filing, or hearing
of the application, or amending any defect as to form or
content of the application, or for any Order deemed just;
AND FOR
1) a declaration that the provisions of the CDSA prohibiting
marihuana are inconsistent with the Charter and of no force
and effect by virtue of the fundamental freedoms section of
the Constitution Act, 1982 pursuant to S.24(1) of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I, Schedule A
on the grounds that
a) the prohibition of cannabis hemp marijuana threatens my
right to life under s.7 by denying me the right to use
marijuana by the non-participation of Ontario physicians
making the exemption process with 1 in 62 doctors
participating illusory;
b) the Applicant's rights under Section 7 of the Charter are
subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as
can he demonstrably justified in a free and democratic
society and the Applicant says that prohibitions in s.4(1),
s.7(1) and s.5(2) of the CDSA is not a reasonable limit and
is not demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic
society.

AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of the application,
the Applicant will refer any materials this Honourable Court
may allow.
Dated at _____________ on ______________ 2005
Applicant Real Martin
Address: ___________________________
Tel/fax: _____________________

To: Registrar of this Court
Attorney General for Canada

JCT: So Real Martin now has to explain what he has done to
find a doctor. He also has a lady friend who used to have an
exemption but when she lost her doctor and could find no
other doctor to sign, her exemption lapsed and she's no
longer legal.
I hear Robert Neron, one of my first exemptees, also has
lost his doctor and can't find another to sign and has since
had his exemption expire.
So the exemption system that allows 98% of doctors to refuse
to participate can be shown to be pretty illusory.

If his constitutional challenge is dismissed, then it's the
Crown's turn to present its prosecution and this is where
Real asks for legal aid to get a lawyer to do an orthodox
trial defence against an orthodox prosecution, (in case
there are any technicalities that can be used).

But there's always the chance he'll be railroaded into jail
tomorrow. So let's say a small prayer that he'll do a
convincing enough job on his medical need and the failure of
the medical community to cope with prescribing this new
herbal medicine.

Anyway, he's already left for Cochran from Hearst. Stay
tuned. He'll call tomorrow no matter the outcome, whether on
his dime or collect from jail. I forget if he's facing 5
years or life.