Multiple Billing and Cannabis Sentencing: What Advocates Are Missing

When cannabis advocates talk about prison reform, the focus is usually on people currently incarcerated for cannabis possession.

But according to attorney Victoria Cvitanovic, that’s only part of the story.

In her return to The Canna Boss Babes, Victoria — a former prosecutor turned psychedelics attorney — explains how multiple billing and cannabis sentencing enhancements are quietly increasing prison terms across the United States.

And most people don’t even realize it’s happening.

What Is Multiple Billing?

In every criminal case, there are two phases:

1. Determining guilt.

2. Determining punishment.

Multiple billing — also known as sentencing enhancement — happens during the punishment phase.

It allows prosecutors to extend a person’s sentence based on prior convictions. Not because of what they did this time, but because of what they did in the past.

“You’re not adding time to the sentence because of what they did this time. You’re adding time because of what they’ve done before.”

In many states, this operates similarly to “three strikes” laws. A third felony conviction — even if the prior offenses were nonviolent — can significantly increase sentencing exposure.

Sometimes by years.Sometimes by decades.Sometimes to life.

Where Cannabis Comes In

Here’s where multiple billing and cannabis sentencing intersect. Most states have their own version of the Controlled Substances Act. Charges are often listed by “schedule” rather than by naming the specific substance. That means cannabis convictions are frequently grouped under Schedule I violations alongside other drugs.

Years later, when someone is charged with a completely different offense, that prior cannabis conviction can still be used to enhance their sentence. Even if the current charge has nothing to do with cannabis. Even if the cannabis conviction is 10 or 20 years old. Even if cannabis laws have since changed. This creates a statistical blind spot.

Some media outlets claim that “very few people are in jail for cannabis.” But those numbers don’t account for people whose current sentences were lengthened because of prior cannabis convictions.

They are not counted as cannabis prisoners. But cannabis still added time.

The Discretion Problem

Victoria has seen this from inside the system. She worked under one district attorney who filed multiple bills in every eligible case. The logic was consistency — if everyone qualifies, everyone gets enhanced. That avoids accusations of bias. She later worked under a DA who used multiple billing only in what they considered the “most serious” cases.

Both approaches raised ethical concerns.

“Discretion is where discrimination lives.”

If you enhance everyone, sentences become uniformly harsher. If you use discretion, you open the door to inconsistency and bias. Because prosecutors are human. Judges are human. And sentencing decisions often involve interpretation. That interpretation is shaped by experience, politics, and perception.

The Racial Impact of Multiple Billing and Cannabis Sentencing

Cannabis enforcement has historically been unequal across communities. Arrest rates have disproportionately impacted communities of color, even when usage rates were similar. When prior cannabis convictions are used to enhance future sentences, those disparities don’t disappear. They compound.

A person arrested for cannabis in 2010 could still be serving a dramatically longer sentence today because that conviction was used to enhance a later charge.

And because many sentencing reforms are not retroactive, even when laws change, existing enhanced sentences often remain intact.

“Even if we stopped this tomorrow, we would still be dealing with the consequences for decades.”

Why This Is Missing from Cannabis Reform Conversations

As legalization expands, advocacy energy often shifts toward taxes, licensing, packaging rules, and hemp regulation. Meanwhile, sentencing policy receives far less attention.

But if we are serious about cannabis justice reform, we cannot ignore multiple billing and cannabis sentencing enhancements. Decriminalizing future conduct matters. So does addressing the structural sentencing policies that continue to extend incarceration today.

“If you are not aware in your state of how criminal sentencing works, you cannot be a good cannabis advocate.”

That includes understanding: How prior convictions are weighed. What triggers sentencing enhancements. Whether your state has formal multiple billing statutes. Whether reforms are retroactive.

The Complexity (And Why It’s Hard to Track)

One of the most frustrating realities Victoria highlights is that this issue is difficult to quantify.

You cannot easily pull statistics for “people whose sentences were extended due to cannabis.”

Each case would require individual review:

• What were the prior convictions?

• Were they cannabis-related?

• How much time was added?

• Was the enhancement formal or discretionary?

• That complexity makes it easy to overlook.

• But complexity does not eliminate impact.

A Broader Question of Justice

Multiple billing statutes were often written with violent repeat offenders in mind.

But broad laws apply broadly. That includes people who:

• Struggled with addiction.

• Made mistakes in early adulthood.

• Were arrested in disproportionately policed neighborhoods.

• Had minor cannabis convictions decades ago.

Sentencing enhancements do not always distinguish between context. And once imposed, they can reshape entire families.

What Advocates Should Be Asking

This conversation is not about pretending the solution is simple.

It’s about expanding awareness.

If we want meaningful cannabis justice reform, we have to ask:

• How does sentencing enhancement work in our state?

• Are cannabis convictions being used to extend prison terms?

• Are reforms retroactive?

• Who is still serving enhanced sentences today?

“We’ve solved harder problems. But we can’t solve this one if we’re not even talking about it.”

Multiple billing and cannabis sentencing are not abstract legal concepts. They are active mechanisms shaping incarceration today. If we care about justice for the cannabis community, we have to care about how sentencing actually works.

Because legalization without sentencing reform leaves people behind and that’s a conversation worth having.

Check out the full interview on YouTube: https://youtu.be/kKQ6s9netVk?si=Zxi6CyC3x_Oy3NPt