Court Rejects Challenges to Classifying “khat” as a Controlled Substance

State v. Ahmed & Adam, Minn.Ct.App., 11/23/2010.  The state charged Mr. Ahmed and Mr. Adam with possession of a controlled substance, commonly known as khat.  Each moved to dismiss, claiming that khat was not a “material compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of . . . [c]athinone; [m]ethcathinone” in Minn. Stat. § 152.02, subd. 2(6) (2008).  However, way back in 2000, the court of appeals held that possession of khat is criminal.  State v. Ali, 775 N.W.2d 914, 921 (Minn. App. 2009).  Mr. Ahmed and Mr. Adam made various treaty, religious freedom, and equal protection arguments, all of which the appellate court rejects.