Burns v. State
2011 WY 5
| Wyo. | 2011Background
- Burns was charged with felony possession of a Schedule I drug (marijuana) in Wyoming.
- He entered a conditional guilty plea preserving the right to challenge a pretrial in limine ruling restricting his defense that the marijuana was lawfully obtained under a Colorado medical marijuana program.
- Burns claimed a Colorado medical marijuana registry card and physician certification constituted a valid prescription or order under § 35-7-1031(c).
- The district court granted the State’s motion in limine, excluding Burns’ Colorado-based evidence and defense theory, including the proposed jury instruction.
- A Wyoming Highway Patrol trooper found 666 grams of marijuana in Burns’ vehicle after stopping him for speeding; Burns acknowledged it was for medical use.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s ruling, holding that § 35-7-1031(c) does not exempt possession obtained via Colorado medical marijuana provisions from Wyoming liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Colorado medical marijuana order qualify as a defense under § 35-7-1031(c)? | Burns argues registry card and physician certification meet 'prescription or order' under the statute. | State contends the Colorado card/certification is not a Wyoming 'prescription or order' and thus not a defense. | No; the Colorado mechanism is irrelevant to Wyoming liability under § 35-7-1031(c). |
Key Cases Cited
- Neidlinger v. State, 230 P.3d 306 (Wy. 2010) (briefing deficiencies not fatal; discretionary affirmance noted)
- Gabbert v. State, 141 P.3d 690 (Wy. 2006) (limits on appellate review for weak briefs)
- Granzer v. State, 193 P.3d 266 (Wy. 2008) (abrogated on other grounds)
- Johnson v. City of Laramie, 187 P.3d 355 (Wy. 2008) (standing and final resolution concerns in plea context)
- Tucker v. State, 214 P.3d 236 (Wy. 2009) (waiver and scope of appellate issues in guilty plea)
- Kunselman v. State, 188 P.3d 567 (Wy. 2008) (waiver/appeal scope in criminal cases)
- Morgan v. State, 95 P.3d 802 (Wy. 2004) (statutory interpretation considerations in criminal context)
- Bailey v. State, 12 P.3d 173 (Wy. 2000) (role of evidentiary rulings on appeal)