Denial of mistake-of-law defense was not error in marijuana case; Defendant had more plants than allowed by Colorado law

United States v. (Stormy Bob) Griffith, 2019 WL 2571747 (10th Cir. June 24, 2019) (CO, published): A jury convicted Griffith of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana and being a felon in possession of a firearm. His appellate counsel filed an Anders brief. Still, counsel suggested numerous grounds which might be "potential appealable issues based on the record." After reviewing those issues, the panel agreed that there were no grounds for appeal that were "not wholly frivolous."

For our purposes, the most important issue reviewed was whether the district court erred in not instructing the jury on Griffith’s mistake of law defense. Griffith’s proposed instruction said (1) his conduct was legally authorized if he had acted under a mistaken belief that his conduct was not illegal, and (2) his conduct was permitted by an official written interpretation of the law issued by a public entity empowered to interpret the applicable law. The panel said the court’s decision was correct because Griffith did not demonstrate he was in compliance with Colorado’s marijuana laws. Colorado allows cultivation of up to 99 plants per ‘patient,’ but Griffith and his wife had 478 plants.