State v. Dee
2012 ME 26
| Me. | 2012Background
- Dee appeals a District Court judgment finding he violated a civil provision by possessing a usable amount of marijuana under 22 M.R.S. § 2383(1)(A).
- The Maine Supreme Judicial Court previously affirmed in a memorandum and denied Dee's request for reconsideration; the court now again affirms.
- Dee contends that Maine’s marijuana prohibition violates his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights.
- Dee admits marijuana possession is not a fundamental right but asserts it infringes liberty and property interests.
- The court applies rational-basis review because Dee does not implicate fundamental rights.
- The statute imposes a maximum civil fine of $1,000 for possession up to 2 1/2 ounces, and the court upholds this framework as not arbitrary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether marijuana prohibition violates due process under rational basis review | Dee argues prohibition violates due process as a liberty/property infringement. | State asserts rational basis; prohibition serves public welfare with no need for empirical data. | Prohibition passes rational-basis review; statute constitutional. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Haskell, 955 A.2d 737 (Me. 2008) (rational-basis scrutiny for police-power legislation; some rational basis suffices)
- Rupert v. City of Portland, 605 A.2d 63 (Me. 1992) (drug-prohibition statutes reflect legislature's health and welfare concerns)
- Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. 456 (U.S. 1981) (court may uphold statutes with a theoretical rational basis even if not empirically supported)