Shortly before sentencing, Harde himself was permitted to address the court. With a shaking voice that stifled sobs, the defendant detailed his remorse for the consequences of his actions. "I am deeply sorry that I engaged in illegal activity," the defendant proclaimed, while simultaneously regretting the unnecessary expense of his prosecution. "The awareness of my folly and its consequences never leaves me -- it tortures me by day and haunts me by night."
"I had a misconception about what I could do under the law. I was trying to help people and I was misguided in how I could help them. I was imprudent and unwise," Harde continued, before summing up his address with declarations of concession. "I realize the appropriateness of our federal drug laws. I have a deepened respect for the laws of our land. I have accepted responsibility by pleading guilty humbly."
The message of the plea was not lost on Judge Damrell, in spite of his insistence on issuing prison sentence.
"I'm going to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt that I do have -- that he thought he was doing this for the benefit of other people," the judge said regarding the cultivation charge against Harde. "That mitigates the sentence but does not mitigate the penalty. This was not a flower box -- this was a substantial garden involving substantial amounts of marijuana and substantial sales. In this case, there's no question that there's a violation of federal law and there are severe penalties."
Patients protest in front of Sacramento federal courthouse on a cold winter day.
However, the judge did stress that the 30-month sentence he imposed went below the 37-month sentence suggested by the low-end of the sentencing guidelines. "I don't think I ever recall going below the safety valve before," the judge mused in a comment that was superficially self-congratulatory but also subtly hinted of a tendency towards conservatism.
Following the declaration of the prison sentence, the judge ordered a 3-year period of formal probation and also flatly denied the defense's request to reduce the prison sentence by allowing Harde to participate in a drug treatment program.
The prosecution had objected immediately to the drug treatment request, stating that it would not be appropriate. "That's for addicts," U.S. Attorney Ellen Endrizzi said of the program, a sentiment with which the judge apparently agreed.
Also denied was the defense's request to reduce the financial penalties in the case to a single $50,000 fine. As the plea agreement states, Harde would be required to turn over to the government this fine plus his share of his family farm -- a sum equivalent to a quarter of a million dollars. In addressing the court, defense attorney Nick characterized the financial penalty as grossly excessive. "Given the circumstances of the case, it feels like they're asking for the electric chair for someone who double-parked, " Nick argued.
To counter the argument that the penalties would wipe out all of Harde's equity, the prosecution introduced claims that Harde owns various houses as well as a parcel of land. Endrizzi even went so far as to make lightly-veiled insinuations of further criminal activity on the part of the defendant, saying in passing about the properties, "One must wonder with what funds they were purchased."
It was not the only time during the hearing that the government would cast aspersion on the defense. Objecting to the idea that Harde be allowed to self-surrender, the prosecution attacked Harde's motives as well as those of his courtroom supporters. "The government would seek an immediate remand," Endrizzi told the court. "While the defendant does have community support, that community support might assist him in fleeing now that he's facing a substantial sentence."
Judge Damrell balked at the prediction. "I don't think this defendant is going to flee, and I don't think the people in this courtroom are going to assist him in doing so," the judge declared with certainty as he set Harde's self-surrender date for January 16th, 2007.
Outside the courtroom, defense counsel bemoaned the challenges of medical patients caught in the federal judicial system. "This is the best thing that could have been done for him," Nick said of Harde's plea deal. He continued by asserting that "it doesn't even make sense to try these cases" due to the likelihood of increased penalties resulting from conviction in federal jury trials. It's a risk being weighed not just by Harde, but by dozens upon dozens of other California medical marijuana patients currently facing charges in federal court.
As for the broader significance of today's events, the defense attorney offered some reflection. "What this case shows is that normal, regular people are involved in this," Nick said about medical marijuana cooperatives.
And indeed that may be the legacy left by Harde's case -- a meaningful contribution to the slow but sure erosion of the vilification of medical cannabis patients.
Comments (4)
Only registered users can write comments. Please login or register.
Court Reports 
Comments (4)
