Wilde

United States v. Wilde

Good Law
74 F. Supp. 3d 1092·2014 WL 6469024·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161601
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 18, 2014No. CR-12-0144 EMCCalifornia3,811 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT

(Docket No. 87)

On September 9, 2014, Defendant Mikal Xylon Wilde filed a motion to dismiss the Government’s indictment. Docket No. 87. In his motion, Wilde argues that the indictment must be dismissed because the classification of marijuana as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) 1 violates his Fifth *1094 Amendment rights. In his reply brief, Wilde also argues (for the first time) that the indictment must be dismissed because the “Government’s current enforcement policy” with respect to the marijuana laws “violates the doctrine of Equal Sovereignty of the States.” See Docket No. 97 at 4. As explained in more detail below, because Congress’s classification of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance satisfies traditional rational basis review, and because Wilde waived his equal sovereignty argument, the Court DENIES Wilde’s motion to dismiss the indictment.

I. BACKGROUND

On August 25, 2010, Mario Roberto Juarez-Madrid was shot and killed near a marijuana grow in Kneeland, California. See Docket No. 20. Fernando Lopez-Paz was also shot during this incident, but survived. Id. Messrs.…

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.