How Many Cg's Can Be In One Building

[d.roninson]

I know a CG can only be in possesion of 12 plants per pt up 5 pt my question is can 2 cg work in the same building as long as they are in seperate rooms that are locked

[420 grower]

Yes

[Mememe]

over 99 plants is not good at all with the feds.

[knottwhole]

Yes

Would you be willing to put your money on that? As they are a new member to this site, you put them in possible great legal jeopardy if they take your answer for fact.

Many localities are prohibiting cooperating grow areas.

This is at best, a gray area.

Why are you saying yes without knowing it to be fact beyond controversy?

[420 grower]

Right. Risk goes up. Stealth is key...

[wingnut]

But who wants to be the test case ? Look what fed has done in ingham sp? county .

[drtarzanmd]

Federal Trafficking Penalties

 

Marijuana (Schedule I)

 

FIRST OFFENSE

 

1 to 49 plants; less than 50 kg

 

Not more than 5 years

 

=====================================

 

more than 10 kgs hashish; 50 to 99 plants

 

Not more than 20 years

 

=====================================

 

100 kg to 999 kg mixture; or 100 to 999 plants

 

Not less than 5 years, not more than 40 years

 

=====================================

 

1,000 kg or more mixture; or 1,000 or more plants

 

Not less than 10 years, not more than life

 

 

Copy & Paste from :

 

 

http://www.justice.gov/dea/agency/penalties.htm

[wingnut]

so don't do it over what would bring in the Feds . And the separate locked enclosure .

[grewett]

Wingnut's response 'don't go over the number that would bring in the feds,' begs the question, "What is that number?"

Based upon cases they bring and personal experience knowing one DEA Agent (CA),under 99 is not worth their while. To me the ? is not how mny caregivers can bed in a building but comgined, how many plants can be in a building? So as a practical matter in the buildings I rent out to growers, if only one operator rents the building he can have any number; I say nothing about anything so long as the check hits the mailbox prior to the 1st. I come around if it don't, not to audit plant numbers but to fix their "oversight." When I rent a building to more than one grower, the contract says each is renting for x # plants and won't exceed that # ever! And, all cloning is done on the plant (air layering). I audit randomly grower plant numbers and cloning method. DEA usually does not pursue building owner with charges, just goes for forfeiture, but I am unwilling to take the chance of being charged while having a building where my rental contract makes it plain landlord was monitoring plant numbers. Also, stupid is as stupid does, as everyone does it it has to be right, right? Stupid is cloning by cutting off a stem. Root it on plant, when needed for next round of veg, chop off plant and only at that moment! raise your plant number. I won't have a building I am monitoring go over 99 plants. Summary: DEA agents don't get promoted or cited for little drug busts--they get ribbed "you think you're a dick?" (local cop).

[Dr. Bob]

This is a personal opinion, not legal advice, but I would say it would be a good guideline.

 

As Tarzan points out, 50 and 100 plants seem to be a magic number as far as penalties go. Most advice seems to be to keep the plant count at 99 or below. This is a God's plenty of plants, and when you are getting up that high you would have a hard time explaining how it isn't a commercial grow anyhow.

 

My thoughts-

 

All caregivers in a multiple caregiver residence should be members of a family unit, specifically they are not just a bunch of folks getting together for the express purpose of growing cannabis.

 

While each caregiver can grow 72 plants total (based on max patient load), I think if you push that to the extreme, if you have 25 close friends gathered up to grow collectively, you have a max total of 1800 plants in one location. Clearly this is absurd to have a farm like this, you are just asking for major trouble... So where do we cut it off? 20, 10, 5 caregivers? 5 can grow 360 max, clearly this is still more than most folks would be comfortable with, and surely would attract both federal and state attention to say the least.

 

Plants are grown to supply medicine for a patient, and no more, under the act. The 12 plants is considered a max per patient (I am hearing rumblings about oil production etc that could possibly be argued that more are needed- but am not aware of a grow of more than 12/pt being approved by the courts). If, for example, your patient needs 1 oz a week, which I understand is considered a lot, if you plant cycle is 16 weeks and your yield is 1.5 oz per plant you produce 18 oz per 16 weeks. Given you will lose some, that is clearly reasonable. 2 oz per plant or 24 is reasonable as well. But is you yield is higher, say 4 oz per plant or 48 oz, and you need 16, you are going to have to justify the extra. Expand that to 5 patients and yourself, and you see the poundage goes up rapidly. Folks outside the community don't understand these things well, all the jury sees is 4 pounds of cannabis from your basement sitting on the prosecution table.

 

So my suggestions are as follows:

 

All caregivers growing at one location are related somehow to show they are not together just to grow cannabis.

The max plant count at multiple caregiver grows be limited to 99 at any one address.

All plants are clearly separated and marked by caregiver and patient, hopefully in separate marked rooms.

 

A couple of words of wisdom:

 

1. It is better to try to prove to the court how you complied with a silly ruling by an appeals court justice than to try and show the higher court was 'wrong' and you are there to 'educate' them in the true meaning of the law. That is a test case, and you don't want to be one.

 

2. Don't push things- it is better to error on the side of safety than to try and push it to the limit- again that is a test case.

 

3. Before you do ANYTHING, put yourself in the shoes of a prosecutor and figure out how you would send YOU to jail. Then figure out how to cut the legs out of the argument. The above discussion of plants in one location and yield calculations/use calculations is an example of this logic. It isn't the only answer, but tell me it doesn't make sense.

 

4. Keep in mind a little reality check. What we think the law means doesn't matter, what the courts think it means does because they are the ones that send you to jail. If the COA rules I have to sign certs standing on my left foot, I'll call it silly, but I'll produce a photo of me doing just that- standing on my left foot and signing. Not because it is right, but because that is what they want and my goal is to take out their argument and protect my patient.

 

Keep the righteous outrage and arguments (or flaming) to a minimum. I don't have all the answers, or even most of them. This is just designed to provoke some thoughts. Y'all do what you want.

 

Dr. Bob

[MORE COWBELL]

TARZAN THANKS FOR POSTING

 

THE FEDERAL MINIMUM GUIDELINES

 

ESTABLISHED BY REAGAN/BUSH REGIME

 

yes people look .........................

1-49 plants up to five years

100+plants=MANDATORY 5 YEARS MINIMUM!

 

YES WE ARE STILL TARGETS FEDERALLY !

 

Dont be fooled-the drug war is still in overdrive and is hungry for your assets!

[petoskeystoned]

So literally the best "max" situation would be someone with 60 plants for 5 patients, 12 for yourself, and a spouse with 3 patients or 2 and is a patient for a total of 96 at an address. Pushing it any further I think is pretty nuts with the recent cases being heard..

[Dr. Bob]

sounds reasonable Petoskey.

[pic book]

Recent MI Appeals Court decision (last week I think) said (paraphrasing): there is no plant maximum in the law but rather there is a requirement that the number of plants be shown to be reasonably necessary given the medical necessity and necessity to assure continuous and unnterrupted supply.

 

What does this mean? 12 or 60 is not magic, nor is 72, but in prosecution the offense must show you were above and beyond the reasonable number of plants to keep on hand, given the diagnosis (diagnoses) of your patients, your production history, etc, your patient's patterns of use.

 

What does this really mean? The Appeals Court decision of last week HUGELY increased the legal bill you will face to fight charges. Fees for your doctor to testify, your patient's doctors to tesify, expert witnesses and of course your attorney's prep and court time. The legal bill just went ballisic. An argument over a specific number of plants is simple. Over necessity is expensive, expansive, time-consuming. There will be many more plea deals taken in the future! This decision is the full employment measure for mmj defense attorneys.

[drtarzanmd]

TARZAN THANKS FOR POSTING

 

THE FEDERAL MINIMUM GUIDELINES

 

ESTABLISHED BY REAGAN/BUSH REGIME

 

 

Your Welcome 'Angry LIBERAL'

 

Whatz even more scarier is it would not be my first offense !

 

I made up my mind long ago that i would NEVER go past 48 plants ....

 

Their NOT trickin' Me .... Between Jane and I we're allowed to

have 60 plants and 12 1/2 Total Ozs ...

 

We 've Never had a reason to grow that much ...

 

My Bloom Room can Only handle 6 - 8 plants Max.

 

Yes i would Love to Grow More , But I don't dare to ...

 

I don't trust our Laws ( Police ) .

[The Digital Nomad]

I caution about air layering to clone. Michigan only determines if you are 'manufacturing or cultivating', they do not sipulate between cuttings stuck in a cube, rooted clones, or an attempt to circumvent plant count by air layering - you are still 'manufacturing' marijuana.

Each air layered 'clone' could be one count of manufacturing a plant - as that is what you are doing right?

 

Ask Kormon or Abel about air layering and plant count.

 

-DN

[knottwhole]

I made up my mind long ago that i would NEVER go past 48 plants ....

 

I'm with you on that. I'm allowed 48 but never have more than 20 counting my mom's, clones and plants. It's amazing what you can do once the perpetual grow is tuned in.