In Iowa’s quest to create “traps for the unawary,” as Justice Thomas calls them, consumable hemp is the next frontier. See Standing Akimbo v. United States, 141 S.Ct. 2236, 594 U.S. ___, 210 L.Ed.2d 974 (2021) (Statement of Justice Thomas). And see, Welcome to Iowa, Land of Entrapment, Bleeding Heartland, May 31, 2022.
He contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove that the substance at issue was marijuana. In particular, he contends the State failed to prove the substance was not hemp.
State v. Meyers, No. 24-1384, Court of Appeals of Iowa, October 1, 2025.
In State v. Mumford, our supreme court rejected a similar argument. 14 N.W.3d 346, 356 (Iowa 2024).
She argues that there is insufficient evidence to support her conviction because the State failed to disprove the green, leafy substance found in her purse was legal hemp. We disagree. Mumford at 355.
Id. The instructions given to Meyers’ jury stated:
Marijuana, with the exception of hemp and hemp products, is a controlled substance.
It is not necessary for the State to prove that the exception for hemp and hemp products does not apply, unless the defendant has first offered proof that the exception does apply.
So, beware, you must prove your hemp has a THC content of less than three tenths of one percent by dry weight or go to jail and do not pass go.
You must be logged in to post a comment.