Open Accessibility Menu
Committed To Developing The Best Solution For Your Family

Colorado Family Law: Medical Marijuana Use is Not Necessarily Endangerment

In re Marriage of Parr & Lyman, 240 P.3d 509, 512 (Colo. App. 2010)

Rule: Medical marijuana use is not necessarily endangerment

Facts: Father agreed to a parenting plan with a UA requirement to ensure he didn’t use marijuana. A week after he signed the parenting plan, and the same day the judge entered the decree, the State approved his medical marijuana application. He filed a pro se motion to remove the UA provision from the parenting plan, but the magistrate denied his motion. He filed a timely motion for magistrate review. Five months later, Mother filed a motion to restrict parenting time. Nine months later, the trial court ruled. He had unsupervised overnights while the case worked through the courts. The trial court affirmed the Magistrate’s ruling and added that he could only have supervised parenting time until he could prove that his marijuana use was not detrimental to the child, and he had to submit to hair follicle testing. Father appealed the trial court ruling, and he argued that the parenting time restriction and the hair follicle testing modified the parenting plan and modifications were improper absent a finding that his medical marijuana use would endanger the child or lead to significant emotional impairment. The appellate court agreed with him, and stated that medical marijuana use alone does not represented a threat to the physical and emotional health and safety of the child, or otherwise suggested any risk of harm.

More on this issue:

See In re the Marriage of Parr, 240 P.3d 509 (Colo. App. 2010).

The COA upheld the original stipulation between the parties that required Father to drop UA’s to demonstrate that he was not using marijuana (Father did not have a medical marijuana card at this time). At the time the stipulation was approved, Father had limited parenting time, therefore, the trial court did not view the imposition of UA drug testing as a restriction on his parenting time. Id. at 511-512. This is important for our cases where the party does not have a medical marijuana card. I would argue, no card, no reliance onPar/Lyman. This case cannot be read to suggest that any illegal drug use without more is not endangerment - that is far too broad a reading.

Shortly after signing the stipulation, Father obtained his medical marijuana card and petitioned the magistrate asking that the UA testing be waived. The magistrate concluded that Father had agreed to the stipulation knowing he had applied for a medical marijuana card so he was “stuck” with the stipulation. Father appealed, but no immediate action was taken. In the interim Father’s parenting time increased to unsupervised and overnight visitation. Subsequently, Mother filed a motion to restrict parenting time because the Father had not provided clean UA’s and had asked the child to keep Father’s drug use a secret. No hearing was held on this motion. (This is critical to the outcome). More than a year after Father filed his petition for review, and 9 months after Mother’s motion to restrict, the trial court issued an order returning Father’s visitation to supervised and instructing that he may petition for unsupervised visitation only upon the submission of a clean hair follicle test and weekly clean UA’s. No evidentiary hearing was held, the Court simply went off Father’s admission to medical marijuana use.

The narrowly tailored issue on appeal analyzed whether the trial court erred by: 1) adding the additional requirement for hair follicle testing to the motion to restrict; and 2) basing the restriction off the sole evidentiary fact that Father had admitted to medical marijuana use. The COA was clear to distinguish this case from a Washington case where an evidentiary hearing was held and the restriction of parenting time was based on medical marijuana use AND the danger of second hand smoke and the parent’s negative demeanor towards the children and others when the medical marijuana was used. Id. at 512; In re Marriage of Wieldraayer, 147 Wash. App. 1048 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). By doing so, the COA left the evidentiary door WIDE OPEN with regards to showing medical marijuana use plus (insert your facts here) at an evidentiary hearing constitutes endangerment.

The crux of the COA’s narrowly tailored opinion hinges on the fact that there was no evidentiary hearing regarding endangerment. The COA specifically stated “In reaching this conclusion, we do not express an opinion as to whether medical marijuana use may constitute endangerment; rather, we conclude only that endangerment was not shown here.” Id. at 513.

In summary, if medical marijuana use is an issue in your case, you MUST seek an evidentiary haring regarding endangerment (make sure you offer evidence at the hearing on the motion, even if by offer of proof). The COA left the bar pretty low in terms of showing endangerment with medical marijuana use plus ______. I think any credible argument would survive on appeal, as the standard for review would be “an abuse of discretion,” and the appellate courts are loathe to overturn endangerment findings for fear of ending up in the papers. (I.e. – I think having a parent using medical marijuana and transporting the child in the car would constitute endangerment. Courts don’t allow people to drive children around intoxicated even though drinking is legal).

See What Our Clients Have To Say

  • I've been very impressed with Harris Family Law through this whole process. - Pat
  • Your kids will thank you. - Michael
  • My lawyer saved me from myself. - Jeff
  • I’m starting my new life now. - Scott
  • With help from some great support resources, we are stable, happy, and moving forward to a great new life. - Amy
  • Once my legal team stepped in, things rapidly began to change. - Anonymous
  • After hiring my lawyer, I am certain that I made the right choice. - Joel
  • Your fast responses to all of our questions and your concern for our situation really made us feel at ease. - Chris
  • I've been very impressed with Harris Family Law through this whole process. - Pat
  • You have been nothing less than fantastic thank you so much and look forward to never having to work with you in the future - Nate

We Care about our Clients, our Team and our Community

  • Our Clients You come to us for guidance, support and assistance at a trying time. We take this responsibility very seriously. You deserve a high level of service and excellent legal representation. WE CARE about your challenges, solutions and process for resolution.
  • Our Team We celebrate the many individual strengths that make up The Harris Law Firm team. We encourage growth while also promoting a collaborative working environment. WE CARE about our team and strive to ensure an environment of collegiality, appreciation and consistent professional development.
  • Our Community The Harris Law Firm supports the legal, local and international community. Through deliberate strategic giving efforts, we work together to bring strength, happiness and empowerment to Colorado and beyond. WE CARE about our role in the world around us.

Contact Our Colorado
Family Law Firm

If you are in need of a compassionate, skilled, and experienced Colorado family law attorney, The Harris Law Firm can help. If you have a legal question about a domestic relations issue, including divorce and the allocation of parental rights, please complete our contact form below. A member of our legal team will be in touch with you soon to arrange a private consultation with one of our experienced attorneys. Together we can find a resolution.
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • This isn't a valid email address.
    Please enter your email address.
  • This isn't a valid phone number.
    Please enter your phone number.
    You entered an invalid number.
  • Please enter a message.
  • Please make a selection.