No Mandatory Presumption in H&S 11383(f) (People v. McCall)

On Thursday (1/15), in People v. McCall, no. S113433, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Moreno, holding that Health and Safety Code section 11383(f), did not create a mandatory presumption: "We hold that the language in question creates no presumption at all, but is simply a valid exercise of the Legislature’s power to create substantive law and define crimes." Former, section 11383(f) stated that “possession of immediate precursors sufficient for the manufacture of . . . hydriodic acid . . . shall be deemed to be possession of the derivative substance. Additionally, possession of essential chemicals sufficient to manufacture hydriodic acid, with intent to manufacture methamphetamine, shall be deemed to be possession of hydriodic acid.” As noted in footnote 17 of the opinion, section 11383 was amended on Sept. 30, 2003, to eliminate the presumption and to create new crimes which penalize the possession of precursors with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine. So this opinion may not have much relevance to future 11383(f) prosecutions.