Patient To Patient Transfer-Legality

[onion]

hi

I was just wondering if in fact patient to patient transfers are legal? or if a patient can sell their overages to a registered caregiver? or if a patient can sell their overages to a dispensary?

does anybody actually know the answer to this? I see a lot of opinions, but has this question been answered by the courts in any way?

there is a dude I know who is a caregiver for a few patients, he can't keep up with demand, and he wants to purchase my leftovers. would this be a legal transfer?

[The Digital Nomad]

section 4

(i) A person shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, solely for being in the presence or vicinity of the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, or for assisting a registered qualifying patient with using or administering marihuana.

 

Don't forget:

 

(e) "Medical use" means the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, internal possession, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the administration of marihuana to treat or alleviate a registered qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition.

 

 

You can assist HIS patients, not the CG.

 

-DN

[Guest Happy Guy]

Patient to patient... yes. Patient to dispensary? NO

Where the rubber hits the road is the 'distribution chain'.

Here's a rule of thumb; If you don't know the end user patient it is probably an illegal transfer. It is also not very smart to buy any medicine from anyone who didn't grow it. You are buying 'flinger meds', something someone is trying to get rid of. You will find all the 'junk meds' in this category.

[Budz-4-U]

Two Carded Patients can help each other. In regards to Dispensaries, that word is not in the MMJ law.

Some are staying open under the theory that if the owners and employees are Patients, then it is still Patient to Patient transfers.

Some Dispensaries are also real careful on the amount they keep in stock, at any given moment.

If only three owners/employees are Patients themselves, and each are Caregivers for their max of five Patients, lets do the math.

Each would be allowed their 2.5 ounces, plus 2.5 ounces for each of their Patients = 15 ounces X 3 owners/employees = 45 ounces. Known as 2.8 pounds, or 1,260 grams.

Just three Caregiver/Patients are allowed that. Some Dispensaries watch their allowed stock, using that method of math. Only buying more as they sell to Patients.

My opinion is that, if they follow that concept, and never have more in stock, and only sell to Patients, and keep very accurate records, and pay taxes, then I don't see much of a problem with what they are doing. My opinion is that if this is not legal, then it should be. In this example, they are only doing what we can already do, except they choose to do it in the open, instead of in the privacy of our homes, cars, and Compassion Clubs.

That is just my opinion. We can argue about their level of Compassion @ $20 a gram, but that wasn't your question. They provide a service, you can choose to do business with them, or not.

[Budz-4-U]

Patient to patient... yes. Patient to dispensary? NO

Where the rubber hits the road is the 'distribution chain'.

Here's a rule of thumb; If you don't know the end user patient it is probably an illegal transfer. It is also not very smart to buy any medicine from anyone who didn't grow it. You are buying 'flinger meds', something someone is trying to get rid of. You will find all the 'junk meds' in this category.

What if the person at the Dispensary, buying the Meds, is a Patient ? Patient to Patient transfer ??? (Just asking.)

[Guest Happy Guy]

IMO, I don't think any dispensaries are staying open because of their 'legality theory' about their transfers. The only dispensaries that are open are the ones that haven't had a case built against them..... yet. They will all go down eventually.

[Guest Happy Guy]

What if the person at the Dispensary, buying the Meds, is a Patient ? Patient to Patient transfer ??? (Just asking.)

It might be legal if the patient at the dispensary that bought it took it right home for themselves. Passing it all around is going to be found illegal in any conservative court. The buyer would have to prove they bought it for themselves, not just a middleman for profit. The middleman for profit is illegal. That is the dispensary business model to a T.

[peanutbutter]

There's been a slight shift in this thread from "is p2p legal" to "are dispensaries legal when you consider p2p?"

 

Two slightly different questions.

 

With the question about p2p. That is a part of "medical use." Patients and caregivers are able to do p2p with meds. It's just part of "medical use."

 

There has been a legal theory around here for a while that says "in a p2p, the receiver is protected because of the ability to "acquire" as part of "medical use." However the other side of the transfer is not protected. That would be the giver or seller who is not protected."

 

That is based on "acquire" being part of "medical use." It is generally believed that it is lawful for patients and caregivers to acquire cannabis as long as it is for the medical benefit of the patient.

 

Nothing in the law requires that a specific location be used to conduct p2p activities. There IS a location in the law that forbids "medical use" from certain locations. Schools, jails .. what is NOT on the list of forbidden sites is dispensaries. No place in the law forbids p2p if the receiving party works in a dispensary. Please note .. when our law was written and voted on, dispensaries existed already. If they wanted to exclude dispensaries, they could have added them to the forbidden list. They did not.

 

There are other things that are part of this "medical use."

 

Within the definition of "medical use" there are a couple of other words that imply more than one party involved. Those are "transfer" and "delivery." Both of those involve two or more persons and are just as much a part of "medical use" as is "acquire."

 

Some claim that "acquire" is only allowed within the context of a patient caregiver relationship. While some believe it, that specific limitation is not listed in the law itself.

 

There are three examples within the law that touch on that topic within the law.

 

The first is the visiting out of state patient. That patient is allowed the same abilities as a resident patient. So if the visiting out of state patient is allowed to consume, where does the medicine come from for them to do the consuming with? The law does not require them to bring their caregiver to Michigan with them. They can't bring any medicine with them. So how does such a patient get the medicine to consume? They acquire it here.

 

The second is the patient that doesn't have a caregiver. There are many of those out there. IF it were illegal for a patient to acquire meds from their caregiver only, then the law would REQUIRED a patient to have a caregiver.

 

The third example is for a minor child. The parents are the persons that MUST be the minor patients caregiver. And here the law says something a little different. It says that the parents MUST control the acquisition of the medicine. THE LAW EXPECTS THE PATIENT AND CAREGIVER TO ACQUIRE THE MEDICINE FOR THE MINOR PATIENT.

 

Those are three examples within the law where acquisition is not expected to take place via the caregiver only.

 

Three examples, within the law, where the acquisition DOES NOT TAKE PLACE FROM THE CAREGIVER TO THE PATIENT.

 

To recap .. "acquire" is specifically listed within the law as expected action that is necessary for the patient to be able to have a source for their medicine.

 

Clearly the action of "acquire" is lawful according to the MMMA.

 

The very same locations, within the law, that allow for acquisition, mention a couple of other actions right next to "acquire." Those other words protect the seller or giver in the transaction. Namely "transfer" and "delivery."

 

While we have become familiar with the phrase "p2p" (that word transfer) we have not really begun to examine the word "delivery."

 

If "acquire" is clear in the law, then so also are the words "transfer" and "delivery."

 

Some have tried to establish the idea that "transfer" does not involve money. Therefore dispensaries are illegal. Very thin logic. Very thin. For a moment lets agree with THAT logic. So what about "delivery?" Delivery of a controlled substance (cannabis) to a licensed person in Michigan is part of "medical use." Sales of a cannabis is not to be considered "sales of a controlled substance."

 

Bottom line: "Medical use" is allowed by our law. "Medical use" includes the actions of "acquire", "transfer" and "delivery."

 

There are locations where "medical use" is not allowed. "Dispensaries" is not one of the forbidden locations.

[Highlander]

It is always funny to me when someone posts a legal question in the "legal professionals" forum, and there is a mad rush of laypeople giving their opinions. We need a "legal professionals" forum and a "legal hobbiests" forum so people can judge the credability of the advice given.

[onion]

"You can assist HIS patients, not the CG"

 

but a caregiver can legally obtain marijuana from any source, so logically I would assume that I as a patient that can legally posses the stuff and he can legally obtain it from any source, then there shouldn't be a problem right?

[Guest Happy Guy]

It is always funny to me when someone posts a legal question in the "legal professionals" forum, and there is a mad rush of laypeople giving their opinions. We need a "legal professionals" forum and a "legal hobbiests" forum so people can judge the credability of the advice given.

ahhh, but this IS the internet...... you aren't going to get any real attorneys on here. LOL At least none that have clients.

[Guest Happy Guy]

"You can assist HIS patients, not the CG"

 

but a caregiver can legally obtain marijuana from any source, so logically I would assume that I as a patient that can legally posses the stuff and he can legally obtain it from any source, then there shouldn't be a problem right?

Some would say that a patient can't legally transfer to a caregiver. See the problem? The transfering patient can only transfer to another patient.

[Highlander]

ahhh, but this IS the internet...... you aren't going to get any real attorneys on here. LOL At least none that have clients.

 

I thought everything posted on the internet was true, complete, and accurate?

[sexyheather2213]

Hey guys, kinda new here.

 

I was just wondering, what court cases have resolved the P2P transfer issues? I know there were a couple cases in court months ago. Any news on what happened?

 

Basically, yes, Michigan law clarifies you can do P2P transfers but, why are people being arrested and charged?

 

I would hate to think I am doing something legal when doing a P2P transfer and then get arrested.....

 

 

So, whats with the law saying it is legal and people getting arrested?

[Guest Happy Guy]

Hey guys, kinda new here.

 

I was just wondering, what court cases have resolved the P2P transfer issues? I know there were a couple cases in court months ago. Any news on what happened?

 

Basically, yes, Michigan law clarifies you can do P2P transfers but, why are people being arrested and charged?

 

I would hate to think I am doing something legal when doing a P2P transfer and then get arrested.....

 

 

So, whats with the law saying it is legal and people getting arrested?

Who got arrested for doing a de minimis patient to patient transfer? Who got charged? I haven't heard of a single patient getting arrested for this. Could you site the cases you are referencing? I believe the Isabella dispensary case came down in favor of these transfers. It is going to the court of appeals. There are no simple p to p cases that I have heard of.

[Highlander]

Who got arrested for doing a de minimis patient to patient transfer? Who got charged? I haven't heard of a single patient getting arrested for this. Could you site the cases you are referencing? I believe the Isabella dispensary case came down in favor of these transfers. It is going to the court of appeals. There are no simple p to p cases that I have heard of.

 

"ThatOneArtist" posted a while back that he had listened to p2p=legal advice on this forum and ended up getting busted for p2p. But then he got quiet and we didn't hear more about it. Could have been a ruse.

[garyfisher]

"ThatOneArtist" posted a while back that he had listened to p2p=legal advice on this forum and ended up getting busted for p2p. But then he got quiet and we didn't hear more about it. Could have been a ruse.

 

It was a ruse.

[Guest Happy Guy]

"ThatOneArtist" posted a while back that he had listened to p2p=legal advice on this forum and ended up getting busted for p2p. But then he got quiet and we didn't hear more about it. Could have been a ruse.

Maybe one didn't have a card or something else the affirmative defense might cover? Lawyer told him to be quiet. I listen very close and haven't heard about a clear cut case of two patients with cards being hassled for transfering under 2.5. I heard the state police recommended it more than once that we transfer our overages to other patients. With all those cops with cards, patients transfering should be like sitting ducks. They do not seem to be the target.

[Estimated Prophet]

So, the message I'm getting from this thread is that nobody really knows for certain.

[sexyheather2213]

Maybe one didn't have a card or something else the affirmative defense might cover? Lawyer told him to be quiet. I listen very close and haven't heard about a clear cut case of two patients with cards being hassled for transfering under 2.5. I heard the state police recommended it more than once that we transfer our overages to other patients. With all those cops with cards, patients transfering should be like sitting ducks. They do not seem to be the target.

 

 

Well, I guess I was wrong. Then why are some many on here and everywhere else so scared of doing a P2P transfer? Has anyone here done a P2P transfer?

[Highlander]

Maybe one didn't have a card or something else the affirmative defense might cover? Lawyer told him to be quiet. I listen very close and haven't heard about a clear cut case of two patients with cards being hassled for transfering under 2.5. I heard the state police recommended it more than once that we transfer our overages to other patients. With all those cops with cards, patients transfering should be like sitting ducks. They do not seem to be the target.

 

I agree. I have been watchful of cases of this sort since day 1 and have found none that have worked their way through the system. I, too, recall the MSP stating that meds for patients who pass away or extra meds should be given to other patients, rather than taken to the MSP as the MDCH first suggested. There was also a memo from MSP that indicated that p2p sales were legal. With all of the craigslist p2p sales and no known busts, I agree that LEO isn't wasting our tax dollars on p2p transfers.

[barkascruff]

Happy Guy you stated that

 

Patient to patient... yes. Patient to dispensary? NO

 

then said

 

Where the rubber hits the road is the 'distribution chain'.

Here's a rule of thumb; If you don't know the end user patient it is probably an illegal transfer.

 

Curious as to how you came up with this judgment, or thumb rules I guess, was this a particular court case? I am unfamiliar with the "rubber hits the road" analogy with distribution chain, if you would please elaborate on that too, I didn't make the connection.

 

Now if this was all just your opinion on the the OP's original question on whether "in fact patient to patient transfers are legal? or if a patient can sell their overages to a registered caregiver? or if a patient can sell their overages to a dispensary?" then please disregard everything I asked above, no response would obviously be necessary.

[peanutbutter]

Some would say that a patient can't legally transfer to a caregiver. See the problem? The transfering patient can only transfer to another patient.

 

LOL .. where did you get that from? It's OK for a patient to transfer to a patient but not a caregiver????

[kirsten]

I thought I saw an interview with the lady who wrote the law and she said she intended it to be legal for patients to go to eachother for meds. What if your cargiver gets arrested and has all his/her plants stolen? If you are seriously ill you need to be able to get your meds from someone else.

I think people pretend that the law is unclear so they can rob caregivers and patients.

[Guest Happy Guy]

LOL .. where did you get that from? It's OK for a patient to transfer to a patient but not a caregiver????

I got that from an attorney. I'm sure you can find someone to argue it in a different way. It's a conservative viewpoint. But not even the most conservative I have heard.