2. Who or what group was charged with a crime (called the defendant in the original trial)? (1 mark) Smith 3. What was the crime or charge (called Cause of Action in legal terms)? (1 mark) 4. What was the plaintiff's legal argument? (1 mark) 5. What was the defendant's legal argument for producing cannabis? (1 mark) 6. If you were the judge, what would your ruling be in this case? Explain with details (2 marks) 7. If you were unsatisfied with the ruling of judge in your trial, what is the term used for taking your case to a higher court? (1 mark)

ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Smith, the accused, produced edible and topical marijuana derivatives for sale by extracting the active compounds from the cannabis plant. He operated outside the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations ("MMARs"), which limit lawful possession of medical marijuana to "dried marijuana", as he was producing non-dried (liquid) product. Smith does not himself use marijuana for medical purposes. The police charged him with possession and possession for purpose of trafficking of cannabis contrary to ss. 4(1) and 5(2) , respectively, of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, ss. 4(1) , 5(2) which limits lawful possession of medical marijuana to dried forms. Smith's defense was that he had the right to produce non-dried marijuana under the Charter of rights section of the Constitution Act. He also argued that if dried marijuana could be legally sold for medical use, why couldn't non-dried? This is a case about the legality of a law that has been enacted under the constitution. Answer the following questions about this case: 1. Who or what group was complaining or bringing a charge (called the plaintiff in the original trial)? (1 mark)