Search Warrants Turn Up Legal Grow, Heroin, Firearms – August 26, 2010

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Eye Staff Report

SUNNY BRAE – The Humboldt County Drug Task Force and the Arcata Police Department’s Special Services Unit (SSU), served two narcotics search warrants in the Sunny Brae Area of Arcata Wednesday morning, Aug. 25 at 7:30 a.m.

A Chester Court residence had two rooms dedicated to cannabis cultivation, said officers at the scene. It was later found to be Proposition 215 compliant, and an individual at the scene was not arrested. Due to suspected building code violations related to the grow, the City building official was called to the scene. Electrical service to the residence was ordered disconnected pending repairs and a compliance inspection.

At 1776 Beverly Drive, a number of processed suspected opium poppies, a small quantity of heroin, a small quantity of cocaine, DMT (Dimethyltryptamine, a hallucinogenic drug), less than a pound of processed marijuana, two firearms and approximately $4,000 in cash was seized. The residence was unoccupied at the time of the search warrant service and no arrests were made. Declarations in support of arrest warrants will be forwarded to the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office for two of the residents.

The Beverly Drive house, owned by Robert and Tawny Barnett of Brookings, Ore., is managed by American Property Management of McKinleyville. It has been used for drug activity on and off for years, and was last raided in February, 2009. At that time, an illegal grow was removed, the tenant arrested and power shut off due to extensive out-of-code electrical wiring.

Tags: , , , ,

3 Responses to “Search Warrants Turn Up Legal Grow, Heroin, Firearms – August 26, 2010”

  1. Mark Sailors

    The City’s land use based medical cannabis “jim crowe” law is in fact an illegal amendment to prop 215, and that is an unconstitutional according to the California Supreme Court. ( People V. Kelly 2010)
    All mention of personal medical cannabis growing needs to be removed from the City code, and they need to focus on the retail dispensing co-ops, and collectives.

  2. Pot City, USA

    Sailors is very wrong. Not surprising a stoner can’t understand the law. If he wants to be on the council he may want to get informed from some other source than High Times.

  3. Mark Sailors

    I get my information from the actual court cases not from the newspapers. The fact is the “guidelines” can only be used as a “threashold” not a “ceiling” (taken directly from the ruling), and can not be used in court. A patient may have any size garden to fullfill there own personal needs. Thats the law. State law trumps local ordinance on this issue, and before you start with Federal trumps state, you might want to read NORML V San Dieago, and Qualified Patient V Anehiem, both state clearly that Federal law does NOT trump state law. Now you may disagree with my OPINION that the city remove mention of personal gardens from city code, but that does not make me wrong on the law, as it stands now.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.