The case, People v. Young (No. C036539), involved a Tehama County defendant found with several joints and baggies of marijuana weighing 4.74. ounces in his car. The defendant had a physician's note stating that he was a medical marijuana user, but no further evidence of medical need was presented at the trial.

The court ruled that the Compassionate Use Act does not provide a defense to the transportation of marijuana "in the circumstances presented here."

It noted that an earlier appellate ruling, People. v. Trippet, found that Prop. 215 does protect patients from transportation charges, depending on "whether the quantity transported and the method, timing and distance of the transportation are reasonably related to the patient's current medical needs."

The Court indicated that this might protect the movement of marijuana from a legal garden to a seriously ill cancer patient. However, it concluded: "This case...involves the transportation of marijuana in a vehicle. That kind of transportation is not made lawful by the Compassionate Use Act."

[In fact, the Trippet case also involved transportation in a vehicle, so it is unclear what distinction the court was making.]

The Young decision leaves California with two conflicting appellate rulings on the legality of transporting medical cannabis. Full text of the decision is available.