## Facts

- Police obtained a warrant after a bank reported large cash deposits in small bills over two months and currency that smelled strongly of marijuana.
- During a June 2003 search of Roger William Mentch’s residence, officers found an indoor marijuana cultivation operation, plants at multiple growth stages, equipment, and harvested marijuana.
- Mentch told officers he used medical marijuana and supplied marijuana to several persons with physician recommendations, describing his activity as a collective or cooperative.
- At trial, Mentch claimed protection under California’s Compassionate Use Act (CUA) as a “primary caregiver” for several qualified patients.
- Evidence showed Mentch supplied marijuana to about five patients for two to three years, claimed to be their exclusive supplier, and sometimes transported patients to medical appointments or provided advice about marijuana use.
- The trial court refused to instruct the jury on the CUA “primary caregiver” affirmative defense, and the jury convicted Mentch of cultivation and possession of marijuana for sale (and related offenses).
- The Court of Appeal held the instruction should have been given; the California Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant whose activities mainly consist of supplying marijuana and advising on its use, with only limited additional help, qualifies as a “primary caregiver” under the CUA.
2. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the “primary caregiver” affirmative defense based on the evidence presented.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal.
- The court held Mentch did not qualify as a CUA “primary caregiver” where his “caregiving” primarily consisted of supplying marijuana and only sporadically assisting patients in other ways.
- The court held the trial court properly refused the requested jury instruction and reinstated the convictions at issue.

## Legal Principles

- Under the CUA, a “primary caregiver” is an individual designated by the patient who has consistently assumed responsibility for the patient’s housing, health, or safety.
- The qualifying caregiving responsibility must be independent of, and not defined by, furnishing marijuana; it must exist at or before the time the person begins assisting with medical marijuana.
- Providing marijuana (even exclusively and over an extended period) and offering advice about its use does not, by itself, satisfy the statutory requirement of consistent responsibility for housing, health, or safety.
- Sporadic, incidental assistance (such as occasional transportation to medical appointments) is insufficient absent broader, consistent caregiving responsibility.
- The Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) did not alter the CUA definition of “primary caregiver” or expand that affirmative defense on these facts.

## Conclusion

The court limited the CUA “primary caregiver” defense to persons who provide consistent, independent caregiving for a patient’s housing, health, or safety; a marijuana supplier who offers only occasional ancillary help is not entitled to a primary-caregiver jury instruction.


People v. Mentch, 45 Cal. 4th 274, 195 P.3d 1061 (Cal. 2008)