BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 139|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 139
Author: Galgiani (D), et al.
Amended: 8/18/15
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/14/15
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Monning, Stone
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT: Controlled substances
SOURCE: California Narcotics Officers Association
DIGEST: This bill makes it an infraction to use or possess
specified synthetic cannabinoid or stimulant drugs beginning on
the effective date of this bill, not as of January 1, 2016, as
provided in existing law. This bill greatly expands the
definition of a stimulant compound synthetic cannabinoid and
greatly expands the definition of a synthetic cannabinoid to
include numerous chemical families or classes and a myriad of
individual chemicals.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Provides that any person who possesses for sale, sells or
furnishes any synthetic cannabinoid compound shall be punished
by imprisonment in the county jail for up to six months, a
fine of up to $1,000, or both. (Health & Saf. Code § 11357,
subd. (a.)
2)Provides that any person who sells, dispenses, distributes, or
SB 139
Page 2
gives the stimulant substances naphthylpyrovalerone or
cathinone, or specified variations of these drugs, or who
offers to do such acts, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable
by a jail term of up to six months, a fine of up to $1,000, or
both. (Health & Saf. Code § 11375.5.)
3)Holds that within the context of Health and Safety Code
Section 11550, "use" of a controlled substance means current
use, or use immediately prior to arrest. (Bosco v. Justice
Court (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 179, 191; People v. Velasquez
(1976) 54 Cal.App.3d 695.)
4)Provides that beginning on January 1, 2016, a person who "uses
or possesses" a specified synthetic cannabinoid or specified
synthetic stimulant is guilty of an infraction. (Health and
Saf. Code § 11357.5, subd. (b).)
This bill:
1)Provides, as an urgency measure, that the infraction for
possession of a specified synthetic cannabinoid or synthetic
stimulant shall become effective upon the date the measure is
approved by the governor.
2)Updates the list of drugs or chemicals deemed to be synthetic
cannabinoids by adding a myriad chemical groups and individual
chemicals and similarly updates the list of specified,
prohibited synthetic stimulants.
Background
Synthetic cannabinoids come in two basic forms. CB1
cannabinoids bind to CB1 cannabinoid receptors in the brain and
have psychoactive properties. CB2 cannabinoid receptors bind to
cells throughout the body that are largely involved in
regulating the immune system. (THC binds to CB1 and CB2
receptors)
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3567606/.) The
concerns
raised about synthetic cannabinoids appear to involve chemicals
that bind to CB1 receptors.
SB 139
Page 3
The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
(EMCDDA) is a European Union agency that "exists to provide the
EU ? with a factual overview of European drug problems and a
solid evidence base to support the drugs debate."
The EMCDDA website includes the following about synthetic
cannabinoids:
Synthetic cannabinoids ?. bind to the same cannabinoid
receptors in the brain [as THC] ? More correctly
designated as cannabinoid receptor agonists, they were
developed over the past 40 years as therapeutic
agents. ? However, it proved difficult to separate
the desired properties from unwanted psychoactive
effects. Although often referred to simply as
synthetic cannabinoids [or synthetic marijuana], many
of the substances are not structurally related to the
so-called "classical" cannabinoids like THC?
?[L]ittle is known about the detailed pharmacology and
toxicology of the synthetic cannabinoids and few
formal human studies have been published. It is
possible that, apart from high potency, some
cannabinoids could have? long half-lives?leading to a
prolonged psychoactive effect. ? [T]here could [also]
be considerable ? batch variability? in terms of
substances present and ?quantity.
The EMCDD reports that most synthetic cannabinoids are
manufactured in China and shipped though legitimate distribution
networks.
(http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/topics/pods/synthetic-cannabinoids.)
The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy states
that most synthetic cannabinoids originate overseas, but that
they are also being made on a small scale in the United States.
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/ondcp-fact-sheets/synthetic-dru
gs-k2-spice-bath-salts)
The EMCDD reported on adverse consequences of synthetic
cannabinoid use:
The adverse health effects associated with synthetic
SB 139
Page 4
cannabinoids are linked to both the intrinsic nature
of the substances and to the way the products are
produced. ?As noted above, some of these compounds
are very potent; therefore the potential for toxic
effects is high. Harm may result from uneven
distribution of the substances within the herbal
material, result[ing] in products containing doses
that are higher than intended.
The reported adverse effects of synthetic cannabinoid
products include agitation, seizures, hypertension,
emesis (vomiting) and hypokalemia (low potassium
levels). ?There is some evidence?that synthetic
cannabinoids can be associated with psychiatric
symptoms, including psychosis. There are also
investigations underway in the US regarding links
between the use of synthetic cannabinoids? and acute
kidney injury and recently, a case report associated
the use of the cannabinoid JWH-018 with?strokes...
There are 14 currently known "families" or classes of synthetic
cannabinoids. The bill appears to include them all. The EMCDD
noted that 105 individual chemicals in these classes were being
monitored in Europe in 2014. This bill includes hundreds of
individual chemicals in the list of prohibited synthetic
cannabinoids. Many of the chemicals are identified through a
letter and number combination, such as JWH-018, AM-087 and
HU-210. The letters are generally the initials of the researcher
who first synthesized the chemical or the institution where the
research was done.
The background provided by the author and sponsor includes model
statutes for prohibiting synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic
stimulants. The model statute was drafted by the National
Alliance for Model State Drug Laws.
(http://www.namsdl.org/about.cfm.) The list of chemicals in the
bill reflects the model statute. The purpose of describing
synthetic cannabinoids by class or family is to include any new
chemical in each class as a prohibited substance. That is, if a
new drug is developed in any of the 14 classes, the chemical is
prohibited, regardless of whether the individual chemical is
included in the statute. It is not known whether many new
SB 139
Page 5
synthetic cannabinoid classes can or will be developed.
Synthesis of a new class or family of cannabinoids would not be
included in the list of prohibited chemicals.
From 2010 through 2011, reported emergency room (ER) visits
linked to synthetic cannabinoids increased from 11,406 to
28,531. The vast majority of patients were young males, ages 12
through 20.
(http://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/SR-1378/SR-1378.p
df) This is a relatively small number of ER visits, as total
drug-related ER visits numbered 2,460,000 in 2011. Of the
2,300,000 ER visits in 2010, approximately 460,000 concerned
marijuana and approximately 11,000 concerned synthetic
cannabinoids. However, the reported number of synthetic
cannabinoid ER visits likely understates actual visits, as
testing availability is limited and some medical personnel might
not be familiar with the drugs. The ER studies reported that
very few patients engaged in follow-up treatment. It is not
clear whether ER doctors did not make referrals for additional
care, or if patients chose not to seek it.
Very recently, ER visits for synthetic cannabinoids have spiked.
As use of these drugs appears to be dropping, the surge in ER
visits is likely the result of a dangerous change in chemical
composition of the drugs. One who obtains a synthetic
cannabinoid can only guess as to its composition and effects.
The New York Times explained in an April 24, 2015 article:
"[Synthetic cannabinoids ?typically imported from China by
American distributors, come in hundreds of varieties; new
formulations appear monthly, with molecules subtly tweaked to
try to skirt the DEA's list of illegal drugs as well as
drug-detecting urine tests. ? [E]each new variety can present
distinct health risks caused by its underlying chemistry or
contaminants in renegade manufacturing facilities."
A United Nations report in 2011 considered the addictive
potential of synthetic cannabinoids. The report found a number
of synthetic cannabinoids could produce dependence because uses
may quickly develop tolerance to the drug. However, the
chemical composition of synthetic cannabinoids changes rapidly,
often with a different affinity for cannabinoid receptors and a
different effect on the user. It is not clear if there is a
SB 139
Page 6
general dependence or addictive quality among synthetic
cannabinoids, such that use of one chemical or substance would
contribute to dependence on another, or other, synthetic
cannabinoids.
The University of Michigan Monitoring the Future survey first
asked 8th and 10th graders about their use of synthetic
[cannabinoids] in 2011. The survey found that in 2012 annual
prevalence rates were 4.4% and 8.8%, respectively. Use in all
grades fell in 2013, and the decline was sharp among 12th
graders The declines continued into 2014 and were significant
for both 10th and 12th graders; use for all grades declined 40%
in 2014 from peak use in 2011 Awareness of the dangers of
synthetic cannabinoid was up sharply among 12 graders.
(http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-overview2014.
pdf.) The use of synthetic stimulants among 8, 10th and 12
graders was first reported in the survey in 2012, with
approximately 1% of students having tried the drug. Use of
synthetic stimulants has also declined significantly - down
approximately 20% from 2012 to 2014.
The decline in the use of synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic
stimulants was preceded by a precipitous drop in the use of the
psychedelic salvia divinorum - another drug that gained
popularity and some infamy around 2008. Since peak use (of
3.6%) by students in 2011 and 2012, use of salvia declined 61%.
Sale or distribution of salvia was made a misdemeanor in 2008,
but no penalties exist for possession or use. The decline in
use appears to result from negative experiences by users, such
as a frightening sensation of falling through space, not
criminal penalties.
It appears that the synthetic stimulant chemicals included in
this bill are closely related to cathinone, the psychoactive
chemical in the khat plant, which is commonly used in the Middle
East. Khat and Cathinone are Schedule II stimulants. (Health
and Saf. Code § 11055, subd. (d)(7)-(8).) Without this bill, it
appears that possession of one of the specified synthetic
chemicals would be a crime through the analog statute. The
analog statute provides that any drug that has a chemical
structure or properties that are similar to a scheduled drug can
be the subject of prosecution as though the drug were included
SB 139
Page 7
in the schedules.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/25/15)
California Narcotics Officers Association (source)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California Association of Code Enforcement Officers
California College and University Police Chiefs Association
California District Attorneys Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
Los Angeles Police Protective League
Riverside Sheriffs Association
OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/25/15)
American Civil Liberties Union
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
Prepared by:Jerome McGuire / PUB. S. /
8/26/15 16:42:55
**** END ****