Judge Dismisses Felony Delivery Charges P2p Transfer Legal?

[cristinew]

2,5 oz

[cristinew]

accordance with the act

 

(b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest,

for assisting a qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act

 

2) for each registered qualifying patient who has specified that the primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient,

[JohnnyC]

Yes so deliver or transfer no more then 2.5ozs

[cristinew]

accordance with the act for assisting a qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act

 

you must read the law

[cristinew]

medical use does not mean 100 plants 1000 oz sales to anyone ,,

 

if you ignore 4 b you could be in trouble,

[cristinew]

repeat

 

b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest,

for assisting a qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act

[JohnnyC]

U keep bringing up plants that's not even the issue here. Transfers are and so on. Cops need to go back to worrying about non cardholders breaking the laws instead of patients who are following the laws stated.

Edited July 8, 2012 by JohnnyC

[purple pimpernel]

 

 

where i always read the law since 2009 there has been no changes on the michigan.gov/mmp website as far as im concerned there it is stated clearly.

 

 

that is a true fact ...read the website..nothing changed yet

 

although most of the controllers here seem to want us to read it the way they interpret it and how the courts have ruled

 

it's called unambiguous compliance and it fits into the format being pushed thru 5580 the bill that would sanction provision centers with vetted caregivers and a caregiver standard that would eliminate a lot of smaller growers as they would fail to be able to comply with a lot of the stankards being introduced...especially with regards to providing lab results for the quality of their meds

 

 

as far as the pres of CPU and the head of MACC answering your questions with rebuttals...what would you think if you asked that here?

 

and as malamute posted in the other p-to-p thread if you go back and read..."the question becomes whether the medical use of marijuana permits the sale of marijuana. We hold that it does not because the sale of marijuana is not the equivalent of the delivery and transfer of marijuna. the delivery or transfer of marijuana is only one component in the sale of marijuana---the sale of marijuana consists of the delivery or transfer PLUS the receipt of compensation. The "medical use" of marijuana as defined by the MMMA , allows for the delivery and transfer of marijuana but not for the sale of marijuana". right from e court---

 

you didn't keep a receipt did you? for the sale of marijuana....never say the word pot and sell in the same sentence...let the provision centers do that...and keep the receipts

 

remember you have to use the right words in this forum....unambiguous compliance is what I understand the people here like to see..Nothing outside of the interpretations being presented by the courts

 

and that would make sense if there was an ulterior format being pursued here...

[cristinew]

the law is the law and you keep ignoring 4b

[cristinew]

its our law please respect it,

[JohnnyC]

Like u said if it permits the sale.... Everyone I've talked to knows the sale of marijuana is charged under "delivery" so when one reads medical use defining transfers and delivery. What's one to think.

[cristinew]

if you say you can deliver to any patient then you should be able to sell them 100 pounds,, and call it use

[cristinew]

delivery. in accordance with this act not 100 pounds not any patient the act states to whom a caregiver is protected 4b

[cristinew]

accordance with the act

 

very important ,

[JohnnyC]

its our law please respect it,

 

Respect what this law is as fukt as the economy too many undisclosed areas

Like I said earlier donate a bag to a cop 2yrs..donate a bag to a cop posing as a patient 4yrs. where is one part of this law respectable. Confusable but not respectable. It's our law you say well I guess ours yours and mine are all different.

 

What's it allow u to basically get pulled over harassed let go but still confiscation of your meds anyways. Oh gee thanks

[JohnnyC]

Where do u get ur numbers 100 plants 1000 0zs now 100lbs. I'm stating the obvious no more then 2.5 Ozs

[jamieuke]

and we shall see what we shall see.

 

but no crystal balls exist.... right, jamieuke?

 

Yes. There is no telling, with any certainty, how the Supreme Court will rule. Unless they reverse the ruling on 'sales', McQueen stands.

 

It remains risky, extremely risky in some areas, to participate in behavior that not only was specifically ruled on, but as we know, for behavior that is similar or in question or misunderstood by some law enforcement and prosecutors, as well. In some areas, a hint of questionable behavior, is enough to warrant significant legal trouble.

 

Some people, however, embroiled in legal issues are having their cases stayed pending the forthcoming SC decision in McQueen. The defendants involved in the case, themselves, have a stay, and in some areas, consideration for enforcement is being withheld until the SC weighs in.

 

I am cautiously optimistic about what the SC will do, but it is true that there is no way of knowing until the ruling is written and released.

[JohnnyC]

if you say you can deliver to any patient then you should be able to sell them 100 pounds,, and call it use

 

No u can deliver upto but no more then 2.5

[JohnnyC]

Even on McQueen not like p2p they shouldn't be charging him for delivery or sales all he did was tax20% on anything that came thru the door. Or locker door.

[jamieuke]

delivery includes sales under Michigan csa has been that way for years

 

I do not believe that this is true. The fact that 'sales' is not included, has been argued successfully in the courts. Stuart Dunning, the prosecutor of Ingham County has used the argument himself, when he was a criminal defense attorney.

[cristinew]

No u can deliver upto but no more then 2.5 where did you find that at?

[cristinew]

he is pulling parts of the law he wants and ignoring other parts,,

[Celliach]

that is a true fact ...read the website..nothing changed yet

 

although most of the controllers here seem to want us to read it the way they interpret it and how the courts have ruled

 

it's called unambiguous compliance and it fits into the format being pushed thru 5580 the bill that would sanction provision centers with vetted caregivers and a caregiver standard that would eliminate a lot of smaller growers as they would fail to be able to comply with a lot of the stankards being introduced...especially with regards to providing lab results for the quality of their meds

 

 

as far as the pres of CPU and the head of MACC answering your questions with rebuttals...what would you think if you asked that here?

 

and as malamute posted in the other p-to-p thread if you go back and read..."the question becomes whether the medical use of marijuana permits the sale of marijuana. We hold that it does not because the sale of marijuana is not the equivalent of the delivery and transfer of marijuna. the delivery or transfer of marijuana is only one component in the sale of marijuana---the sale of marijuana consists of the delivery or transfer PLUS the receipt of compensation. The "medical use" of marijuana as defined by the MMMA , allows for the delivery and transfer of marijuana but not for the sale of marijuana". right from e court---

 

you didn't keep a receipt did you? for the sale of marijuana....never say the word pot and sell in the same sentence...let the provision centers do that...and keep the receipts

 

remember you have to use the right words in this forum....unambiguous compliance is what I understand the people here like to see..Nothing outside of the interpretations being presented by the courts

 

and that would make sense if there was an ulterior format being pursued here...

 

You keep saying it says clearly in the law that transfers for compensation are legal, but I don't understand where you think that is in the law.

[cristinew]

they just call sales delivery ,,, same thing same crime same time

[cristinew]

your best bet is if you want to engage in delivery to any patent to make money is you ask your local PA and see how he feels about it,, then you will know how to act,, i know a dispensary owner that did just that,, the PA said he was ok with it, but if a dea special prosecutor came in he had no control of what would happen,,