Case: United States v. Firestack-Harvey

2:13-cr-00024 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington

Filed Date: Feb. 6, 2013

Closed Date: 2015

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On February 6, 2013, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Washington indicted five defendants on six counts: conspiracy to manufacture 100 or more marijuana plants, manufacture of 100 or more marijuana plants, possession with the intent to distribute more than 50 marijuana plants, distribution of marijuana, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug crime, and maintaining a place for the manufacture and distribution of marijuana. The Federal Public Defender was appointed to rep…

On February 6, 2013, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Washington indicted five defendants on six counts: conspiracy to manufacture 100 or more marijuana plants, manufacture of 100 or more marijuana plants, possession with the intent to distribute more than 50 marijuana plants, distribution of marijuana, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug crime, and maintaining a place for the manufacture and distribution of marijuana. The Federal Public Defender was appointed to represent the five defendants. Defendants were released on bond on February 20, 2013.

Discovery and motions continued for most of the year. On November 14, 2013, defendants filed a number of motions to dismiss for Tenth Amendment violations, specifically that the United States was forcing the state of Washington to enforce federal law, and violation of Due Process and Equal Protection under the Fifth Amendment. One of the defendants also filed motions to suppress evidence. On April 30, 2014, Judge Sickle issued a series of opinions responding to motions. He denied the claim, that because Congress allowed DC to have medical marijuana, prosecution for marijuana use in Washington was unconstitutional under the Due Process clause or the Equal Protection clause.

On the motion to suppress claims, Ms. Firestack-Harvey's statements made under interrogation after she asked to speak to an attorney but statements she made prior to that point were held to be admissible. Judge Sickle also rejected defendants' motion to dismiss on the ground that local marijuana use was permitted by the Controlled Substances Act and rejected the their Tenth Amendment challenge, holding that the Court did not have the authority to dismiss under the Tenth Amendment. Finally, Judge Sickle rejected motions to dismiss based on the government's failure to preserve evidence, holding that the fifth defendant, Jason Zucker, did not show bad faith on the government's part.

On May 6, 2014, the government issued a superseding indictment dropping one of the marijuana charges. Defendants subsequently plead not guilty. Pretrial conferences and preparation continued through 2014. On November 12, 2014, Judge Sickle issued an order granting the government's motion to exclude certain defense witnesses who were going to testify to the medical benefits of marijuana. On November 14, 2014, the case was reassigned to Judge Thomas O. Rice.

On February 2, 2015, the defendants jointly submitted a motion to dismiss, arguing that Congress had prohibited the use of federal resources to prosecute users of medical marijuana in California, among other states. On February 12, Judge Rice denied the motion, holding that the recent passage of an appropriations bill did not repeal by implication the Controlled Substances Act. On February 18, Judge Rice granted the government's motion to dismiss charges against Larry Harvey, one of the five defendants, due to his serious health issues. The trial began on February 23. On February 24, one of the five defendants, Jason Zucker, changed his plea and pleaded guilty to Count 1. The Court accepted his plea on March 4.

On March 2, 2015, the jury convicted all three remaining defendants on Count 2 of the indictment, intentionally and knowingly manufacturing 100 or more marijuana plants, but acquitted on all other charges. On April 17, Judge Rice denied defendants' motion for a new trial and acquittal, holding that the evidence at trial was sufficient to prove Count 2 beyond a reasonable doubt and that there was no serious risk of a miscarriage of justice. On June 4, 2015, Judge Rice ruled on defendants' motion to enjoin further prosecution based on the appropriations rider from Congress and acquittal. He rejected that claim again but stayed sentencing to allow the parties to prepare. On June 19, Judge Rice denied Jason Zucker's motion to join the other defendants' motion to dismiss and stay his sentencing.

On July 24, 2015, judgment was entered for Zucker. He was sentenced to 16 months in prison and a $5000 fine with four years of supervised release. On October 2, Firestack-Harvey and Michelle Gregg were sentenced to one year and one day in prison. Ms. Firestack-Harvey had her fine waived while Ms. Gregg was assessed a $2000 fine. Rolland Gregg was sentenced to 33 months in prison and assessed a $7500 fine. All three were given three years of supervised release post-sentence.

The case appears to be closed.

Summary Authors

Craig Streit (11/17/2016)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8097567/parties/united-states-v-firestack-harvey/


Judge(s)

Peterson, Rosanna Malouf (Washington)

Rice, Thomas Owen (Washington)

Van Sickle, Frederick L. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Hicks, Earl (Washington)

Ormsby, Michael C. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Baunsgard, Caitlin A (Washington)

Campbell, Matthew A (Washington)

Edari, Syovata (Washington)

Fischer, Robert R (Washington)

Flennaugh, Robert II (Washington)

Judge(s)

Peterson, Rosanna Malouf (Washington)

Rice, Thomas Owen (Washington)

Van Sickle, Frederick L. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Hicks, Earl (Washington)

Ormsby, Michael C. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Baunsgard, Caitlin A (Washington)

Campbell, Matthew A (Washington)

Edari, Syovata (Washington)

Fischer, Robert R (Washington)

Flennaugh, Robert II (Washington)

Flevaris, Taki V (Washington)

Irwin, James F (Washington)

Maxey, Bevan J. (Washington)

Niesen, Jeffrey S. (Washington)

Phelps, Douglas D. (Washington)

Serra, J. Tony (California)

Telfeyan, Phil (District of Columbia)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Cikutovich, Frank L (Washington)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:13-cr-00024

Docket

June 29, 2016

June 29, 2016

Docket
279

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying the Defendants' Motion to Suppress Firearms

April 28, 2014

April 28, 2014

Order/Opinion
286

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Jason Zucker's Motion to Dismiss Based Upon the United States' Failure to Preserve Evidence

April 29, 2014

April 29, 2014

Order/Opinion
285

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Jason Zucker's Motion to Compel the United States to Provide a Bill of Particulars

April 29, 2014

April 29, 2014

Order/Opinion
283

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Motions to Dismiss on Equal Protection or Due Process Grounds

2014 WL 1682863, 2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 60963

April 29, 2014

April 29, 2014

Order/Opinion
284

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Motion to Compel Discovery

April 29, 2014

April 29, 2014

Order/Opinion
290

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Indictment Under the Tenth Amendment

2014 WL 1744255

April 30, 2014

April 30, 2014

Order/Opinion
297

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Jason Zucker's Request for an Order Precluding the United States from Filing an Information Under 21 U.S.C. 851 (a)

April 30, 2014

April 30, 2014

Order/Opinion
290

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Motion to Dismiss the Indictment on the Grounds That Possession of Marijuana is Legal Under Federal Law

2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 60959

April 30, 2014

April 30, 2014

Order/Opinion
292

2:13-cr-00024

Order Denying Michelle Gregg's Motion to Suppress Evidence Seized Pursuant to the Search Warrant That Was Issued By A State Superior Court Judge

April 30, 2014

April 30, 2014

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8097567/united-states-v-firestack-harvey/

Last updated Aug. 7, 2022, 3:13 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
844

Attorney Withdrawal & Substitution - USA

Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

PACER
844

Attorney Withdrawal & Substitution - USA

Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

PACER
844

Attorney Withdrawal & Substitution - USA

Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

PACER
844

Attorney Withdrawal & Substitution - USA

Oct. 29, 2018

Oct. 29, 2018

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

Criminal Justice (Other)

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 6, 2013

Closing Date: 2015

Case Ongoing: No reason to think so

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

This is a criminal case in which the United States prosecuted five individuals for manufacturing and distributing marijuana in violation of the Controlled Substances Act as well as possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug crime.

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

The United States of America , Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Criminal Conviction

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Amount Defendant Pays: Varies