There is no issue in AZ more urgent than the appeal of the State v Jones Case (AKA AZ’s concentrates crisis). Rather than retread the background, here’s the link to our reporting on Leafly about the case. The appeals court ruled against Jones, concentrates and the AZ MMJ patient community at the end of June. An appeal was filed by Robert Mandel on Sept 10. Click on this link to see that PDF.

Mandel JONES appeal PFR w Appx

The appeal is a request for the state Supreme Court to hear the case. Mandel’s appeal asserts that the AMMA does protect the use of cannabis products made for the resins of the cannabis flower (concentrates or extracts) and, by extension that A) AMMA-abiding patients who have been charged w class 4 felonies for concentrates should have those charges dropped and that B) the medical cannabis industry should be allowed to continue to market and produce edibles.

Today it was announced that the state has now responded. They are calling for the Supreme Court to NOT consider the case and let the current ruling stand. They assert that the original appeal did not include sufficient facts about concentrated cannabis and the language of the AMMA, and since the original appeal was too weak, a stronger one should not be heard now. Seriously.

As ludicrous as that might seem if the Supreme Court sides w the state then the Jones’ conviction would be upheld, concentrates would become illegal and all the patients w pending concentrates charges could be prosecuted for class four felonies that they had purchased legally. The AZ cannabis industry would be imperiled and so on. The state explains their position at length and with multiple footnotes, but here is their own summary of the justification from not rehearing the Jones case:


The court of appeals correctly concluded that the AMMA did not immunize Jones from prosecution for possessing hashish.  To the extent Jones urges the Court to review whether the AMMA immunized the possession and use of all marijuana extracts, his failure to develop the relevant facts below makes this case inappropriate for deciding that question.  The Court should deny review of Jones’s due-process claim because he did not purchase the hashish from a licensed dispensary.  And the Court should deny review of Jones’s grand-jury claim because he may not raise it for the first time on appeal.

Read the complete document PDF here: state response on jones appeal

Gary Smith, the head of the Arizona Cannabis Bar Association, contacted our office and wants to assure that the Amicus Briefs in the case will all be filed within 21 days. We will provide you an update asap.

THX to all involved. #CannabisWillPrevail.