Are They Legally Able To Charge Me?

[coold44]

To make a long story short, I was searched by a police officer after an altercation my friend was in at a bar, I had less then a gram of medication on me, and my paper work was in my truck, and I wasnt aloud to prove it due to the police officers disgretion, I have been to court and filled a motion due to the fact that they are trying to charge me with posetion, I cannot aford a lawyer and am most likely going to get a court appointed attorney, are they legally aloud to charge me with a crime??

[Marijuana Ranch]

420Peace coold44,

 

Sounds like you are a victim of Natzi type leo.

With your paper work and proof of delivery 20 days old you were cool.

The cop is a fool for waysting valuable law enforcment dollars because of his disregard of the law...

You will come out O.K except for the tyranny...

[DLD420]

The law says no they can't, at the very least you have the AD working for you. good luck

[Nemosity]

So much for the 'not getting arrested' part of the law.... As long as your paperwork was submitted atleast 20 days prior to the incident, you should have never been arrested. I would be contacting some lawyers to sue this department, and that will be on THEIR dime so don't worry about money to pay the attorneys. However, even if you didn't have paperwork on you, had never filed for the permit, but you were using it to treat yourself medically for anything, you should still not have been arrested. The MOST, the VERY MOST that should have come out of this was a warning about keeping your paperwork on your person while in possession of your medication. Since you can't type a script and stick it to your bud's, your paperwork/card is your proof of script. Maybe they could give you a ticket on the "Jaywalker" level for not having your paperwork on you, but to drag you through the court system over medicine, that's just jackwholish.

[JohnB RPh]

So much for the 'not getting arrested' part of the law.... As long as your paperwork was submitted atleast 20 days prior to the incident, you should have never been arrested. I would be contacting some lawyers to sue this department, and that will be on THEIR dime so don't worry about money to pay the attorneys. However, even if you didn't have paperwork on you, had never filed for the permit, but you were using it to treat yourself medically for anything, you should still not have been arrested. The MOST, the VERY MOST that should have come out of this was a warning about keeping your paperwork on your person while in possession of your medication. Since you can't type a script and stick it to your bud's, your paperwork/card is your proof of script. Maybe they could give you a ticket on the "Jaywalker" level for not having your paperwork on you, but to drag you through the court system over medicine, that's just jackwholish.

 

I want to make sure I don't repeat the same mistakes as this poster and irritate people, so please help me out. What was in this post that deserved two negative reps?

[JohnB RPh]

I want to make sure I don't repeat the same mistakes as this poster and irritate people, so please help me out. What was in this post that deserved two negative reps?

 

Well, just one now.

[Highlander]

Well, just one now.

 

I didn't give any neg reps on this, but maybe the source if the demerits was:

 

"However, even if you didn't have paperwork on you, had never filed for the permit, but you were using it to treat yourself medically for anything, you should still not have been arrested. "

 

People need to understand that having a card (paperwork = card after 20 days) IN YOUR POSSESSION is the only way to protect yourself from arrest. If LEO caught you with a handgun and you said "Oh I have a permit for this at home....."???? and probably 99% of the time any LEO in this state who encounteres someone with MJ who isn't registered, he will arrest that person and will be 100% within the law in doing so. Statements like the one quoted above encourage people to do stupid things.

[JohnB RPh]

I noticed the statement about "needing it for medical purposes" as well and agree with you 100% about the fallacy of it, but I could swear I've read that same argument stated on here about fifty times.

[Ionic7]

Deleted for my own arrogance.

 

My sincere apologies i misread and over reacted.

[semicaregiver]

I posted this in a few other threads, but I think it is worth repeating here.

 

The idea of telling people that they are ok if their paperwork is 20+days old and they have a cancelled check is leading a lot of people astray.

 

There are several issues here that work against you.

 

1. LEO has no way of verifying that your paperwork is not bogus. There was a meeting just last month that was posted on here and michigancannabispatients.com relating to a meeting that CPU had with the MSP. From the way I read the minutes, the MSP attorney basically told the CPU folks that they would not accept the paperwork as proof of being registered. Ever heard of photoshop?

 

2. Even is LEO were to accept your paperwork as legit, the way the law is structured, MDCH can not verify to LEO that you paperwork is valid. Due to confidentiality all they are allowed to do is confirm to LEO that your "CARD" is legit by verifying your "Registry #" on the card. They are prohibited from searching their records for LEO by "NAME"

 

The end result is you will be "ok" after they sort out all the paperwork, but in the meantime you might end up in jail or as a minimum be charged with a crime that will eventually be dismissed after a lot of drama and grief.

 

My only conclusion is that "OK" means different things to different people. To the state employee pushing paper it means that it will all work out in the end and maybe they will need to provide someone with an extra form. To the person sitting in the back of LEO's scout car, OK means something entirely different.

[Ms Chocolate]

To answer your question - Yes!

 

The protection afforded under the Registry Program is not the same as with AD. Protection from arrest goes with the card, and registration is not a requirement.

 

Under the AD you can be arrested. You then go to court to assert your defense. Because of the States failure to product the registration cards in a timely manner, anyone without a card will have to rely on AD.

 

Coold44 may have had the proper paperwork, but he did not have on him. Granted, things may have still gone as they did. He stated that he filled a motion, hopefully it was a Motion to Dismiss.

[ChefBoyLp]

That really sucks...I was also arrested for possession...I got certified a couple days after...still waiting for the card...went to court a couple weeks ago after being certified for about 3 months and still got one year probation community service random drug test and drug counciling...I hate this so much been on probation for 2 weeks now it sucks

[phaquetoo]

To make a long story short, I was searched by a police officer after an altercation my friend was in at a bar, I had less then a gram of medication on me, and my paper work was in my truck, and I wasnt aloud to prove it due to the police officers disgretion, I have been to court and filled a motion due to the fact that they are trying to charge me with posetion, I cannot aford a lawyer and am most likely going to get a court appointed attorney, are they legally aloud to charge me with a crime??

 

 

NO

[peanutbutter]

People need to understand that having a card (paperwork = card after 20 days) IN YOUR POSSESSION is the only way to protect yourself from arrest.

 

Ummm .. how about education?

 

Such as educating leo not to waste the PA's time with a case that can't be won.

 

As long as people are out there educating leo that "bust them and let the judge sort it out" is a good thing, we'll keep hearing these stories.

 

See .. in this case leo is going to waste the time of a judge, court and PA. All because the leo didn't want to take the time to look at the paperwork in the car.

 

Obviously the officer thinks he/she is more important than all of those people.

[Ionic7]

Deleted for my own arrogance.

 

My sincere apologies i misread and over reacted.

[peanutbutter]

You just got certified after you got arrested, of course you got one year probation, when the crime happened you were illegal. I'm sure the judge saw it as you just got your card to try and wiggle out of it. As far as it matters you knew the risks of carrying pot illegally and you choose to do it gonna have to live with it, its not the systems fault.

 

You got it wrong wrong wrong.

 

The judge broke the law by giving this person a conviction on their record and the probation. The spirit if not the letter.

 

Once the judge knows the defendant has a letter from the doctor, it should be all over. As long as it was a reasonable amount.

 

And the date on the letter doesn't matter!! Several cases have been dismissed that way in MI.

[+420Atheist]

Peanutbutter has it right from what I can tell. It does not matter if you got the Dr's recommendation the day you go to court. It should have been accepted as an AD because there was a medical need. The card from the state is only needed to make it easier for LEO to know if you can claim a medical need. It is not necessary for the AD in court.

[peanutbutter]

Peanutbutter has it right from what I can tell. It does not matter if you got the Dr's recommendation the day you go to court. It should have been accepted as an AD because there was a medical need. The card from the state is only needed to make it easier for LEO to know if you can claim a medical need. It is not necessary for the AD in court.

It is a travesty of justice that a lawful patient is violated by the system this way.

The patient doesn't even need the ID card to get the case dismissed.

[Ionic7]

Deleted for my own arrogance.

 

My sincere apologies i misread and over reacted.

[bobandtorey]

the AD is solid just ask us But we are still in court also

[lkline300]

He was not a lawful patient he only got his cert once he got popped, that is abusing the system.

 

If he has a medical need he is a lawful patient.............................

 

 

Oh wait he has to get his name on the list first............lol........................

[Ionic7]

Deleted for my own arrogance.

 

My sincere apologies i misread and over reacted.

[lkline300]

Show me a law that says if someone has need for it they are a patient. Last I checked you needed a card and approval via the state so unless you have something useful why bother?

 

If you can prove medical need IE medical records, doc rec... the LAW says you are legal..........

 

WE bother because people need to stand up for their rights The card or paperwork is only suppose to spare you the hassle of having to go to court to prove it.

 

I'm not making any judgment about his condition, but if he has one he deserves to be left alone & that IS the intent of the law.

[Ionic7]

Deleted for my own arrogance.

 

My sincere apologies i misread and over reacted.

[JohnB RPh]

Peanutbutter has it right from what I can tell. It does not matter if you got the Dr's recommendation the day you go to court. It should have been accepted as an AD because there was a medical need. The card from the state is only needed to make it easier for LEO to know if you can claim a medical need. It is not necessary for the AD in court.

 

Isn't this essentially the same statement Nemosity got negative rep for?