Judge Says P2P Legal According To The Law

[Dilligaf]

those are arguments, they haven't changed anything as far as the federal CSA and who states apply it has it?

"4. Defendant requests that this court find that the federal classification scheme placing

marijuana in Schedule 1 (having no medicinal value) is invalid, and that the prohibition is

unconstitutional as a denial of substantive due process." How did the court rule on it (probably not their jurisdiction to rule on a federal law..)

 

Go ahead, tell new patients and CGs your opinion and argument for p2p - when they get arrested for it - I hope you will pay their court costs. I said my piece on this.

 

DN

 

 

No, those are not arguments. The first 2 links reference a ruling by an Oakland County judge, ruling, not argument. The last link is an argument by Matt Abel as you seem to trust him so much. Please read the information before commenting. Again you refer to federal CSA, that does NOT apply to local law enforcement.

 

"This Court also finds that the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act’s explicit language finding that marijuana has accepted medical uses is explicitly inconsistent with the definition of a Schedule 1 substance found in MCL 333.7211 and the classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance. Therefore, this Court also finds that MCL 333.7212 as it relates to marijuana, is repealed by implication by the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act."

[The Digital Nomad]

No, those are not arguments. The first 2 links reference a ruling by an Oakland County judge, ruling, not argument. The last link is an argument by Matt Abel as you seem to trust him so much. Please read the information before commenting. Again you refer to federal CSA, that does NOT apply to local law enforcement.

 

How did the court rule on his argument? Did the law change? No it did not. The MMMAct gives you defenses, it did not change any other laws on controlled substances nor did it change the scheduling of marijuana.

 

Matt Abel or Kormon can explain arguments, court rulings, and what the current schedule is for marijuana. I wold hope some day we all can be in a room together with these lawyers to finally explain everything - rather than us trying to piece it all together.

 

Again, either advise new people with the safest advice, or I hope you lose sleep when they get arrested. I feel safe telling people to treat it like it is still illegal, that you have defenses, not a right or privilege.

 

EOF

DN

[Medcnman]

those are arguments, they haven't changed anything as far as the federal CSA and who states apply it has it?

"4. Defendant requests that this court find that the federal classification scheme placing

marijuana in Schedule 1 (having no medicinal value) is invalid, and that the prohibition is

unconstitutional as a denial of substantive due process." How did the court rule on it (probably not their jurisdiction to rule on a federal law..)

 

Go ahead, tell new patients and CGs your opinion and argument for p2p - when they get arrested for it - I hope you will pay their court costs. I said my piece on this.

 

DN

As a matter of fact, I am paying their court costs. Im not asking the attorney to go in and throw these references in the judges face, im merely handing them over for "reference". Nothing more, nothing less. If the attorney wants to use them for a reference, so be it. If not, then it didnt cost more than a nickle to print them off and hand them over. Dilligafs examples of interpretation in Oakland County courts may be of some help since my friends are being charged in Oakland County. Wouldnt you do everything you could to help a friend? If the examples carry no weight in the attorneys eyes, then they will be tossed aside. Their attorney isnt going the "MMMA" route at this time. He is hoping to prove illegal entry into their home without a warrant. Im just trying to gather info for a back-up plan. We will see which way this goes on Thursday. I respect your views and opinions but I am not a lawyer. And neither are you. Each case is different and so are the outcomes. We know that all too well. Medcnman.

[Dilligaf]

How did the court rule on his argument? Did the law change? No it did not. The MMMAct gives you defenses, it did not change any other laws on controlled substances nor did it change the scheduling of marijuana.

 

Matt Abel or Kormon can explain arguments, court rulings, and what the current schedule is for marijuana. I wold hope some day we all can be in a room together with these lawyers to finally explain everything - rather than us trying to piece it all together.

 

Again, either advise new people with the safest advice, or I hope you lose sleep when they get arrested. I feel safe telling people to treat it like it is still illegal, that you have defenses, not a right or privilege.

 

EOF

DN

 

 

"This Court also finds that the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act’s explicit language finding that marijuana has accepted medical uses is explicitly inconsistent with the definition of a Schedule 1 substance found in MCL 333.7211 and the classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance. Therefore, this Court also finds that MCL 333.7212 as it relates to marijuana, is repealed by implication by the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act."

[kruztydj]

The case Neil did was a ruling which stated cannabis is no longer sch 1 in Mich. This state ruling has no bearing on the feds sch of cannabis which still is sch 1. Well unless we get our state to also demand the feds re-sch cannabis off sch 1. Then it may help on the fed level.

[thanks2]

"This Court also finds that the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act’s explicit language finding that marijuana has accepted medical uses is explicitly inconsistent with the definition of a Schedule 1 substance found in MCL 333.7211 and the classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance. Therefore, this Court also finds that MCL 333.7212 as it relates to marijuana, is repealed by implication by the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act."

The section of PHC:

 

MCL 333.7211 Schedule 1; placement of substance.

 

Sec. 7211.

 

The administrator shall place a substance in schedule 1 if it finds that the substance has high potential for abuse and has no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or lacks accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision.

 

 

 

You have to love intelligent judges who do their job as they are suppose to, without bias.

[cristinew]

and has no accepted medical use WE THE PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN Have found that marijuana has accepted medical uses. it is the law now,

[The Digital Nomad]

despite the works of a few judges and attorneys - it has not changed anything yet

 

"The United States Supreme Court has ruled in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop and Gonzales v. Raich that it is the federal government that has the right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for medical purposes. "

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Oakland_Cannabis_Buyers%27_Coop

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich

 

Gonzales v. Raich (previously Ashcroft v. Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court ruling that under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, the United States Congress may criminalize the production and use of home-grown cannabis even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes.

 

Again, no changes in scheduling of the drug, but the MMMAct gave you defenses.

 

DN

[peanutbutter]

How did the court rule on his argument? Did the law change? No it did not. The MMMAct gives you defenses, it did not change any other laws on controlled substances nor did it change the scheduling of marijuana.

 

Matt Abel or Kormon can explain arguments, court rulings, and what the current schedule is for marijuana. I wold hope some day we all can be in a room together with these lawyers to finally explain everything - rather than us trying to piece it all together.

 

Again, either advise new people with the safest advice, or I hope you lose sleep when they get arrested. I feel safe telling people to treat it like it is still illegal, that you have defenses, not a right or privilege.

 

EOF

DN

 

1. The law DID change. And this judge ruled about that change in the law.

 

2. The attorney general is using that line about the MMMA not being a real law. That it doesn't really provide rights and protections. You know .. that perception war stuff.

 

We know there are things in the law they want to ignore. I, for one, don't wish to help them to convince the public that we are criminals.

[peanutbutter]

despite the works of a few judges and attorneys - it has not changed anything yet

 

"The United States Supreme Court has ruled in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop and Gonzales v. Raich that it is the federal government that has the right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for medical purposes. "

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Oakland_Cannabis_Buyers%27_Coop

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich

 

Gonzales v. Raich (previously Ashcroft v. Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court ruling that under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, the United States Congress may criminalize the production and use of home-grown cannabis even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes.

 

Again, no changes in scheduling of the drug, but the MMMAct gave you defenses.

 

DN

 

Ahhh .. Now I understand. There is federal scheduling and state scheduling.

 

We're talking about state scheduling and you are talking about federal scheduling.

 

BTW Gonzalis v Oregon in 2006 had very interesting discussion about the role of the state in the context of federal CSA. The two cases you cited were before the one I cite.

[peanutbutter]

In a 6-3 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy,[3] the Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's judgment, but employed different reasoning. The majority opinion did not dispute the power of the federal government to regulate drugs, but disagreed that the statute in place empowered the U.S. Attorney General to overrule state laws determining what constituted the appropriate use of medications that were not themselves prohibited. The court found that it was inappropriate to apply Chevron deference toward the Attorney General's "interpretive rule" that controlled substances could not medically be used for the purpose of physician-assisted suicide.

 

The Raich case in 2005 was the result of a civil action. Not criminal. That might have produced a different result.

[peanutbutter]

Here is the Oregon ruling:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-623.ZS.html

 

Edit .. from the first line in the ruling:

 

The CSA explicitly contemplates a role for the States in regulating controlled substances.

[GanjaWarrior]

Feel free to post the direct link to a document that says marijuana is not schedule 1 anymore

 

Thanks!

 

DN

http://neilrockindpcblog.com/2011/12/09/read-the-brief-district-court-judge-rules-marijuana-is-no-longer-a-schedule-1-controlled-substance/

[Timmahh]

You are all fools. Nobody knows anything. I cant believe the arguing about this. Im more legal than you.

 

This board is a ongoing argument/discussion and it stinks. Here let me define delivery or transfer. How about I define the word assume. hehehe please post info and not assumtions

 

 

So Mr Smartzilla. Enlighten us with your grey matter.

[The Digital Nomad]

Look - what is the problem is not our loyalty to the MMMP movement but just human nature.

 

Some people look at a forest, and they see a tree. Some people look at the forest, and they can see animals that live there. Some people will look at the forest and see dollar signs, others will see something that needs to be torn down to make way for sidewalks.

 

What was the purpose of this discourse? To help people stay safe.

 

DN

[peanutbutter]

What was the purpose of this discourse? To help people stay safe.

 

That is simple .. never use or grow marijuana.

[flyinstringbean]

Sooooo...Just Play it VERY SAFE until they change it,AND,Don't Drive Right after ya Medicate cause the rest of us don't wanna pass ya doin 30mph in a 55 Zone,OK??

[bobandtorey]

That is simple .. never use or grow marijuana.

 

thats what i would do

 

OPINION FILED /ORD DENY MTN TO DISMISS/GRANT MTN TO PR

[nexplosion]

How long will the nonsense let this commonsense last?

[bobandtorey]

Did everyone get that above? Bob Redden has been denied the medical marijuana defense by the Oakland County courts. What should we do about it?

 

i think the right Question should have been

what should have been done

long ago it's to late for us now and for the people that are still growing Stop doing it or you will end up like us

[cristinew]

Ouch

[Timmahh]

If Michigan as a State has had a court or legislation remove cannabis from the Michigan PHC Drug schedule list. then it should be dismissed on the ground he was NOT using a Schedule 1 drug. If Marihuana is no longer a schedule 1 drug in the state, then the STATE courts need to forget about what the Federal Judges say, because they are dealing on State concerns, not Federal ones. We are the STATE of Michigan, not the Michigan/US Federal Authorized State of the Union.

 

We are our own state, we do not NEED the Federal Government, they NEED US... if States opt in their 13th amendment, and withdraw from the US, the US is left with no States in its Union.

 

the FEDERAL government is only allowed to exist by the UNION of the STATES with in. not the other way around..

 

if the Federal government was gone. Michigan would Still Be a State. But if all the states were gone, the US government would only be fantasy.

 

i say the motion to dismiss should include the fact Marihuana is NOT a shcedule 1 drug any longer.... thus he is not breaking any laws concerning cannabis, as no one else is.

[asignman]

IMHO most of the people on this site have had it wrong since August. That COA ruling DID NOT speak to P2P transfers at all. That ruling, like EVERY court ruling is about 1 thing. In this particular instance the court was ruling on whether the place was a nuisance or not. In ruling against the dispensary it found that BECAUSE the store front was grossing a 20% margin, and was a third party, that act was considered a sale. Sales of Marijuana is illegal and the store was found to be a nuisance because of that. Nothing more.

 

This judge has just confirmed my position that P2P is legal in this state per the MMMA act of 2008.

[Timmahh]

exactly Asingman. Though the CoA ideal of Sale is farely far fetched imo. this is a first that offering Transfer or Delivery Services constituted sales.

[The Digital Nomad]

I hate this argument.

 

"Foster said he did not go into detail about allowing activities allowed under the MMA in his original ruling because, “I can only rule on the evidence presented to me.”

 

He reiterated that “patient to patient sales” are illegal, as determined by the state Court of Appeals decision in People v. McQueen, which is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court."

 

Why not advocate for new patients and CGs to be very careful about this. LEO can and has arrested people for P2P.

 

DN