Davis v. Shewry
Filed 8/30/06 Davis v. Shewry CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| RICHARD MARVIN DAVIS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SANDRA SHEWRY, as Director, etc., et al., Defendants and Respondents. | B187999 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BS090919) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert O'Brien, Judge. Dismissed.
Richard Marvin Davis, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Bill Locker, Attorney General, Louis R. Mauro, Assistant Attorney General, Christopher E. Krueger and Jonathan K. Renner, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents.
BACKGROUND
Appellant Richard Marvin Davis appeals from a judgment entered on October 4, 2005, denying his petition for writ of mandate to declare unconstitutional and enjoin enforcement of the identification card provisions of the Medical Marijuana Program, set forth in division 10, chapter 6, article 2.5, of the Health and Safety Code section 11362.7 et seq.[1] Appellant's timely notice of appeal was filed on December 2, 2005.
DISCUSSION
1. Overview of the Compassionate Use Act and the Medical Marijuana Program
In 1996, the voters approved Proposition 215, an initiative measure which resulted in the enactment of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, codified at Health and Safety Code section 11362.5. The purpose of the act is stated in subdivision (b)(1) of the statute as follows: â€
