濮阳东方男科医院评价很高(濮阳东方妇科技术值得信赖) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A California appeals court says it's legal to have small amounts of marijuana in prison — so long as inmates don't inhale.The 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled that California voters legalized recreational possession of less than an ounce (28 grams) of cannabis in 2016, with no exception even for those behind bars.But the court says state law does prohibit smoking weed in prison. Prison officials can also still punish pot possession as a rules violation."According to the plain language of ... Proposition 64, possession of less than an ounce of cannabis in prison is no longer a felony," the court ruled Tuesday. "Smoking or ingesting cannabis in prison remains a felony."RELATED: City votes in favor of marijuana production site in Kearny MesaThe court overturned the Sacramento County convictions of five inmates who had been found with marijuana in their prison cells."The voters made quite clear their intention to avoid spending state and county funds prosecuting possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, and quite clear that they did not want to see adults suffer criminal convictions for possessing less than an ounce of marijuana," Sacramento County Assistant Public Defender Leonard Tauman said in an email. The appeals court "quite properly honored what the electorate passed."Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office said it is reviewing the ruling and did not say if he will appeal.RELATED: Nevada becomes first state to ban pre-employment marijuana tests"We want to be clear that drug use and sales within state prisons remains prohibited," said corrections department spokeswoman Vicky Waters. She said the department "is committed to providing a safe, accountable environment for prisoners and staff alike and we plan to evaluate this decision with an eye toward maintaining health and security within our institutions."The three-judge panel rejected the state's argument that guards will lose control over prisons if inmates are free to possess small quantities of marijuana, noting that possession can still be punished as a rules violation with longer prison terms or a reduction in privileges.While prison officials can still punish inmates for violating the rules, "this ruling will prevent inmates from having years added to their sentences for simple possession, reducing overcrowding and saving ,000-75,000 a year in unnecessary costs," said Assistant Public Defender David Lynch.RELATED: More than 100 illegal pot farms busted in Anza, tons of weed seizedThe judges scolded the attorney general's office for a counter-argument it said "uses arcane rules" and "twists the meaning of the words of the statute."Becerra's office argued that the court's reading of the law was absurd because it in effect allows controlled substances into prisons. But the court noted that it previously ruled that it's not illegal for inmates to have properly prescribed medications or medical marijuana behind bars — though it may be against the rules."The Attorney General raises the same hackneyed and losing arguments in each case involving contraband in jails or prisons," the judges wrote.Lawmakers held "an over abiding consensus" in the 1940s that drug use by inmates was "the ultimate evil," they wrote. But those old laws belie "a gradual change in attitude" first toward medical and eventually toward recreational marijuana."As a matter of public policy, his position may be sound," the judges wrote. "The fact that the Attorney General may not agree with the voters does not empower us to rewrite the initiative."They ultimately concluded that "a result is not absurd because the outcome may be unwise." 3667

Russ Johnson is used to being around all sorts of snakes. From harmless to deadly snakes with enough venom able to kill 10 men with one strike. Johnson headed up to the Phoenix Herpetological Society in north Scottsdale, a rescue for about every type of reptile. One day Johnson was transporting a cobra, pulling its container. He said he didn't know the vibrations rattled the top lose."He was right by my arm and then struck me right here," Johnson said, pointing to his back.Johnson said he knew it was the cobra. "I felt like I had a bad burn in my back."The venom is so toxic that Russ knew it would eventually shut down his respiratory system.  "I could just start to feel the burning spreading and so that mean venom is spreading," Johnson said.  He was rushed to Banner University Medical Center in Phoenix. They're used to treating rattlesnake bites but a cobra? They didn't even have the antivenom to treat him. The closest vial of medicine was more than 800 miles away, in Denver. "It was difficult," said Dr. Michelle Ruha, a toxicologist at Banner. She's also one of Johnson's doctors. She tried giving him antivenom the hospital did have, hoping it would save his life. Nothing was working."He was no longer able to open his eyes," Ruha said. "He was becoming weak. He was having trouble speaking."The only option was to fly the 10 vials of antivenom from Denver to Phoenix. Finally, eight hours after the bite, Johnson was starting to come back. "There was an angel on my shoulder," Johnson said. "Beyond Dr. Ruha, who is my personal angel, and I guarantee you that."Today, Banner University Medical Center has the cobra antivenom on-hand. It's also expanding what types it does carry. It's even getting shipments of the medicine to treat bites from the taipan, the deadliest snake in the world. No. they're not native to the Phoenix but neither is a cobra. Doctors at Banner said they don't want to be caught off guard when a life is at stake. 2052

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that inmates convicted of nonviolent sex crimes cannot be denied a chance at early parole consideration under a ballot measure approved by nearly two-thirds of voters four years ago. Former Gov. Jerry Brown, who championed the 2016 initiative as a way to reduce prison populations and costs by speeding chances for parole, has repeatedly said he and other proponents never intended for it to cover sex offenders. But lower appeals courts ruled that the plain language of the initiative means they cannot be excluded from consideration as nonviolent offenders, and the high court agreed. 674

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Law enforcement agencies in California must release police misconduct records even if the behavior occurred before a new transparency law took effect, a state court of appeals has ruled.The 1st District Court of Appeal's decision released Friday settles for now a debate over whether records created before Jan. 1, when the law took effect, were subject to disclosure. Many police unions have sued to block the records release, while public information advocates argued the records should be disclosed.The ruling applies to police agencies statewide, including the attorney general's office, unless another appellate court steps in and rules differently, said David Snyder of the First Amendment Coalition."These records are absolutely essential for the public to be able to see what the police departments are doing with respect to police misdoubt," said Snyder, whose group intervened in the case. "These agencies have enormous power over Californians and so transparency of those agencies is absolutely essential in order to be able to hold them accountable."At least one agency reversed its prior decision to deny access to old records after the ruling came in. Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones said he would release records dating back five years after reading the court of appeal's decision, the Sacramento Bee reported.Mike Rains, an attorney for the Walnut Creek Police Officers Association and other police agencies seeking to block the disclosure, said he doesn't see the decision as setting precedent on the merits of the case but that agencies are likely to take guidance from it unless another court rules differently.His clients do not have an issue with releasing records of misconduct produced after Jan. 1, Rains said, but see the release of old records as a privacy violation."Police officers used to have a privacy right," he said. "We don't believe it changes the rights of privacy to those records that were created prior to Jan. 1."California lawmakers voted last year to require police agencies to release records on police shootings and officer misconduct to the public. Police unions had sought to block old records, with some law enforcement agencies even destroying them. Attorney General Xavier Becerra also declined to release records from his office, saying the intent of the law need to be clarified by the courts.The appeals court ruled on March 12 but only made the opinion public Friday.The rulings by a panel of three justices said the old records can be released because the action triggering their release — a request for public information by reporters or others — occurs after Jan. 1. The justices also noted the release of the records does not change the legal consequences for officers already found to have engaged in misconduct."The new law changes only the public's right to access peace officer records," the justices wrote. 2908

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers want the state Attorney General to investigate all police shootings that kill an unarmed civilian. The bill is one of the highest-profile reforms filed this year in response to the killing of George Floyd while in police custody. The Senate OK'd the bill Sunday despite opposition from Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who has called it “untenable and unreasonable.” He says it would cost his office up to million a year. But the bill easily passed the Senate with bipartisan support and is now headed toward a final vote in the state Assembly. 603

来源：资阳报