Bergen

People v. Bergen

Bad Law
166 Cal. App. 4th 161·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 1345·82 Cal. Rptr. 3d 577
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2008B203793California4,279 words

Opinion

Opinion

Neidorf, J.

Niall Patrick Bergen appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no contest to manufacturing concentrated cannabis, known as “hash oil” or “honey oil,” by using butane to extract the resin containing the psychoactive ingredient tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from marijuana plant material. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379.6, subd. (a) (section 11379.6(a)).) Bergen contends he should have been charged under section 11358, which addresses processing resin from marijuana, instead of section 11379.6(a). We conclude that when, as here, the method used to extract the marijuana resin was by means of a chemical such as butane, section 11379.6(a) applies over the more general statute punishing marijuana cultivation, harvesting or processing. (§ 11358.) Accordingly, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

The following evidence was presented at Bergen’s preliminary hearing. Sheriff’s deputies conducted surveillance of a house on Carolyn Drive in a residential area of Palmdale. Deputies reported they smelled marijuana emanating from the residence as they drove by.

Deputy Sheriff Rich Simmons had been observing the house for several hours on February 15, 2007, when he saw a car pull into the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.