Leasing Grow Rooms

[Land Lord]

I have a property in Detroit and am considering building a few separate grow rooms and leasing them to caregivers. 

 

I am however, concerned that the Feds would come and disregard all my state level MMMA safeguards.  The building actually has many plots, so I could potentially keep it one per plot.  I believe each plot is a separate entity.  But, from the impression I'm getting, the Feds don't care about the details too much.

 

Really, if I have a separate legitimate lease for each room, I would think that would legally give only the Lessee possession of what is inside.  But it seems the Feds have a law against providing a place for growing at all.

 

Can this be done safely?

[OG Fire Beaster]

Not after you just posted all of that.

[thecannabiskid]

I would think more then 100 plants on/in same property would be inviting trouble, I think anything under that would be ok, but that wouldn't be very profitable considering a patient/Cg can have up to 72 plants, that would put you at a limit of two Growers with no more then 4 patients.. I would only consider something like that if the monthly profits where more then the 5 to 15k it would cost to mount a section 8 defense ,,, but now that i think about it if the feds come sec. 8 is no good. I hate to say but i think its a no go:(      *72

Edited April 11, 2013 by thecannabiskid

[Land Lord]

Well, I was thinking a legal lease for each separate locked room would prevent them from claiming possession since only the Lessee would have control of their leased property.  But if the trend is for the Feds to come down on people any which way they can, I'm sure they could find a way to charge me just for providing the real estate.

 

It sounds like they don't go by whether or not you are within any certain criteria but rather if the bust is worth their time.  So, 200 guys with small basement setups wouldn't be worth it, but if 4 or 5 guys rooms in a commercial building, that would look good on the news - (big operation).  So, even though there is no difference, they bust them anyway. 

[Herb Cannabis]

I would base my decision on how much I valued my freedom. 

[Highlander]

Well, I was thinking a legal lease for each separate locked room would prevent them from claiming possession since only the Lessee would have control of their leased property.  But if the trend is for the Feds to come down on people any which way they can, I'm sure they could find a way to charge me just for providing the real estate.

 

It sounds like they don't go by whether or not you are within any certain criteria but rather if the bust is worth their time.  So, 200 guys with small basement setups wouldn't be worth it, but if 4 or 5 guys rooms in a commercial building, that would look good on the news - (big operation).  So, even though there is no difference, they bust them anyway. 

 

Yes - conspiracy to  ______________.  Hurts as much as being charged with the crime itself.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Highlander

[imiubu]

Hummm, any one smell fish ?

 

IMHO, you are trying to circumvent OUR LAW for profit.

 

Sounds all too familiar to me.

 

 

 

Wasn't there a few big warehouses busted in The D, sounding very similar

to this proposal of member w/ the user name of Land Lord ?

 

OH YEAH right, there were several...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/russell-industrial-center-raid-detroit-dea-artists_n_1252828.html

 

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/01/20/800-marijuana-plants-seized-in-detroit-drug-bust/

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2011/04/empty_detroit_warehouse_used_f.html

 

 

 

and these to view some discussions :

 

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/30714-big-warehouse-bust-in-detroit/

 

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/37405-feds-raid-detroit-warehouse-in-illegal-marijuana-probe/

 

 

 

get my drift ?

 

right on

Edited April 11, 2013 by imiubu

[abe supercro]

Anything over 72 legit plants in one location (one property addy) is too much and just plain lacking common sense.

 

Yeah, a growers co-op is a great idea, go for it LL!

Edited April 11, 2013 by abe supercro

[itisi]

Yes - conspiracy to  ______________.  Hurts as much as being charged with the crime itself.

Yep know a guy sitting 6 years on conspiracy they couldn't pin the actual crime on him.

[thecannabiskid]

Hummm, any one smell fish ?

 

IMHO, you are trying to circumvent OUR LAW for profit.

 

Sounds all too familiar to me.

 

 

 

Wasn't there a few big warehouses busted in The D, sounding very similar

to this proposal of member w/ the user name of Land Lord ?

 

OH YEAH right, there were several...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/russell-industrial-center-raid-detroit-dea-artists_n_1252828.html

 

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/01/20/800-marijuana-plants-seized-in-detroit-drug-bust/

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2011/04/empty_detroit_warehouse_used_f.html

 

 

 

and these to view some discussions :

 

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/30714-big-warehouse-bust-in-detroit/

 

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/37405-feds-raid-detroit-warehouse-in-illegal-marijuana-probe/

 

 

 

get my drift ?

 

right on

it could be viewed that way, or you could look at in in a different light and say that he is trying to provide a service that would help people help MM patients. As a CG it can be hard to obtain an adequate facility, this would make it easier for some to grow in a facility that was meant to safely accommodate such an operation. Even though i believe an operation like this would be doomed, I wouldn't say that it was morally wrong. 

[thecannabiskid]

These differences aside, federal conspiracy statutes share much common ground because 

Congress decided they should. As the Court observed in Salinas, “When Congress uses wellsettled terminology of criminal law, its words are presumed to have their ordinary meaning and 

definition. [When] [t]he relevant statutory phrase is ‘to conspire,’ [w]e presume Congress 

intended to use the term in its conventional sense, and certain well-established principles 

follow.”13

These principles include the fact that regardless of its statutory setting, every conspiracy has at 

least two elements: (1) an agreement (2) between two or more persons.14 Members of the 

conspiracy are also liable for the foreseeable crimes of their fellows committed in furtherance of 

the common plot.15 Moreover, statements by one conspirator are admissible evidence against all.16

Conspiracies are considered continuing offenses for purposes of the statute of limitations and 

venue.17 They are also considered separate offenses for purposes of sentencing and of challenges 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Fsgp%2Fcrs%2Fmisc%2FR41223.pdf&ei=WBJnUeq2OqTfyAGmqoDoDw&usg=AFQjCNF0MXqlK4C4yhg9lbU7xZoJTUPi9A&sig2=pLK_7kHme6XmoCeaURmSpQ

I am no attorney but i think he would have to make an agreement with at least one other person. I don't think considering whether something is legal or not would constitute conspiracy..

[Kingdiamond]

This is a bad risky idea and a good way to lose ones property no way I'm allowing more than one grower rent under one single roof 72 plants fine but even couples who are caregivers have been hassled for being over the 99 plant federal threshold find something else to make ends meet this could cost you more than your property maybe even a conspiracy charge be careful.

[abe supercro]

"morally" wrong, Lol.

 

To the judge or officer, "yes sir I understand the illegal part that you are referencing, but in no way do I believe my operation was morally wrong."

[thecannabiskid]

nor do i,, I think you seen would when i said I wouldn't... I do think anything over 100 under one roof/address is asking for trouble, there is no medical Mj defense in federal court, so if you find yourself in fed court for growing Medical Cannabis your pretty much a done deal. I think co-ops should be legal, unfortunately they are not.

[imiubu]

it could be viewed that way, or you could look at in in a different light and say that he is trying to provide a service that would help people help MM patients. As a CG it can be hard to obtain an adequate facility, this would make it easier for some to grow in a facility that was meant to safely accommodate such an operation. Even though i believe an operation like this would be doomed, I wouldn't say that it was morally wrong. 

 

Yes, there are two sides to the coin so it is said.  I choose to view it as I presented it.

 

I currently do not have a grow due to living circumstances.  Would I like the 'idea' of

renting a space all set up with water, elec, security etc... etc, sure.

 

(hummm, security ? lol )

 

 

Do I feel it is legal, NO.

[pic book]

Those I know still growing in commercial buildings are building owners risking it all, but with 'silent' partners.  They grow trees in a heath robinson style tree grow, usually for 5 relatives, less often trusted employees from their other ventures who are their signed patients, and they use those patients  for their all operations and trade needs (plumbing, wiring, hvac), to keep everything in the blood line.  The CG is always legal as to plant count, but illegal once per cycle (when each bush is cut it produces well over 12.5 per plant dry).  They talk a lot about cancer patients and oil.  These guys contract to buy adult plants in batches as replacements.  And of course, the signed patients are not the primary buyers, which is the second illegality. 

Edited April 11, 2013 by pic book

[t-pain]

if you go looking to lease a 'grow room', thats illegal under fed law.

now you're operating a 'drug house' and the entire property is forfeited to them.

 

the only way you get 'common carrier' status (aka, you provide a legal service, and diligently try not to break the law) is if you lease a house to regular people doing a legal thing. make them sign paper that says they wont grow cannabis. document it all clearly, and then try your best to not hear/see/smell whats going on in your building.

 

but even if you do all that, and you run a reputable business like a hotel. and you cooperate with police and report illegal activites...

the feds may just want your property anyhow:

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/15/feds-give-up-trying-to-seize-a-motel-bas

 

plus since you just discussed it with other people, now its a conspiracy. so theres that.

 

there was some talk about a warehouse in ypsi (or pittsfield?) that grows cannabis. you might want to look into how they are handling it. i think they have local ordinances allowing something or other. dont take this as legal advice.

Edited April 12, 2013 by t-pain

[thecannabiskid]

a discussion is not an "agreement" and i wouldn't call anything hes said here a conspiracy. I think He would have to make an agreement or conspire with someone to break federal law. All he did was inquire as to whether or not something was legal or not. IMO, i could be wrong..

[thecannabiskid]

lol,You guys are going to make this guy go into hiding.. all he did was ask a question. ;

[OG Fire Beaster]

If you want to be a landlord and lease property then do that. Don't concern yourself with what your tenants are doing. If you see something illegal then evict them. Anything else would be a bad idea. Your concern should be finding tenants, not setting up a shanty town specifically for caregivers.

Edited April 12, 2013 by OG Fire Beaster

[abe supercro]

what's your point to that post I won't quote you

[pic book]

'set up a shanty town for caregivers"

 

FUNNY!

[OG Fire Beaster]

Ha!

 

It was the first thing i thought of after reading the OP. I'm all about people making money anyway they can. What was described just seems like a bad idea waiting to happen.

 

1. The intent has been described on a public forum.

2. That would become a juicy target for LEO, criminals, pests, media...

3. I would not want to grow that close to other growers, one person slips up and everybody near there will go down fed style.

4. Your property would end up trashed.

5. Lease to whoever, that's your business, I just wouldn't get involved or have any knowledge of what they are doing there.

 

abe if you were wondering about my post, I was making a joke.

[GregS]

The conventional wisdom is that it is not advised Land Lord.

[abe supercro]

edit.

Edited April 13, 2013 by abe supercro