P.

P. v. Schultz CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2013A134582California2,168 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

Defendant and two others were charged in an information, filed November 9, 2011, with manufacturing “hash oil” (§ 11379.6, subd. (a)), cultivating or processing marijuana (§ 11358), possessing marijuana for sale (§ 11359), and transporting marijuana (§ 11360, subd. (a)). Prior to trial, the court dismissed all but the manufacturing charge. The case was submitted for court trial on the basis of police reports and a declaration from an expert witness retained by the defense. Defendant contested the

1 All statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code unless otherwise indicated. applicability to his conduct of section 11379.6, which prohibits the processing of controlled substances by “chemical extraction” or “chemical synthesis.” According to the police reports, defendant was seen driving away from his residence as the fire department arrived to extinguish a chemical fire. When police located defendant‟s vehicle, it was found to contain several cases of butane, lengths of PVC pipe covered with a honey-colored substance, some of which were filled with marijuana, and several pounds of marijuana. The honey-colored substance was later identified as “butane honey…

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.