Are We Criminals?

[GregS]

The problem with considering wet cannabis as 'usable' is that it is heavy and easy to go over weights.

 

I think it goes back to common sense.  We can't say that wet cannabis is usable because of the weight issue.  We can't say it is not usable for a prolonged period of time to suit our needs- by this I mean we are not safe if we have 40 pounds of 'curing' cannabis with 'ready dates' well into the future.  This comes in to play with outdoor grows- I don't think harvesting 72 plants in the fall all at once and then taking that large amount of cannabis, packaging it in weekly containers, and writing 'cure' dates every week until the Spring will protect us.  Especially if one container from our fall harvest is ready in a month, yet another from the same harvest wont be ready for 4 months.

 

In this case, the reasonable approach would be to look at the wet plants, roughly estimate how much that would represent dry, and see if it is reasonable.  One thing that could be helpful is to get an on line database going here that we could reference.  How much did the wet plant weigh, how much did the dry, usable material weigh when all was said and done.  That way, if this comes up in court, we can counter the prosecutor with DATA not estimates.  Yes the guy had 14 pounds of wet plants (make sure they removed the root ball), based on our data, that would have resulted in x number of ounces of dry, usable marijuana.  

 

But we have to remember, thou shalt not estimate what can be measured.  If they want to claim 14 pounds represents y pounds of marijuana (or count all of it) demand they properly cure and trim the plants, then MEASURE the weight of the resulting usable dry marijuana.  Then question the moisture content, quality of the trim, etc with your experts.  Typically prosecutors are lazy.  They will take the plants and weight them- root ball, dirt, pot, everything, and try and get the biggest number they can.  Don't let them.  Follow the definitions of the MMMA.

 

Dr. Bob

You are suggesting that the courts should manipulate evidence? I thought you were going to read Kormon's post. He clearly argues, and conclusively, that the court does not have that prerogative. As for coming up with our own estimates, that would be nothing but shooting ourselves in the foot. Variations in, well, varietals yield different amounts of usable product. Extraction methods are likewise imprecise and yields will vary between strains and even within the same method, depending on an individual's knowledge and ability. As citizens who enjoy a medicinal garden herb, we are not required to prepare any of it within precise standards, just as we do not necessarily use precise standards to cook. There are simply too many variables.

 

Imaginings about holding courts accountable in their refusal to return mj in good condition or to compensate the cost are naive . Qualified immunity is the first protection they have against that. Otherwise they hold a great legal hand, and know how to cheat. The government, through the courts, has a monopoly on coercion, just as it has the monopoly on violence through the police. That is the nature of the beast.

[GregS]

Section 8, then, is the go to relief we need in these circumstances?

[Dr. Bob]

Attorneys vary on their thoughts on trimming the evidence.  Some, such as Michael, do not seem to support it.  Others do.  The courts seem to be of the opinion that you cannot estimate that which can be measured, and that means it has to be trimmed to have an accurate weight.

 

Section 8 clearly is one defense that can be used after the arrest (that is where the database and oil experts come in).  Your thoughts on the database shooting us in the foot is also a valid consideration as it could be used against us- while it would generally help our argument it could be used to show that 100 pounds would yield far more usable dried/oil/etc than could be possessed for example.  I don't agree with your idea that requiring payment for seized/ruined plants is out of the question, it is a matter of proper legal preparation for the claim and is best addressed by attorneys.

 

Dr. Bob

[peanutbutter]

It is not reasonable. Usable material is dry. It is not usable until that takes place.

 

Patients have to have the opportunity to destroy excess.

 

I think an interesting question is how do you destroy the excess as it is discovered. Properly ...

 

In this case, the reasonable approach would be to look at the wet plants, roughly estimate how much that would represent dry, and see if it is reasonable.  One thing that could be helpful is to get an on line database going here that we could reference.  How much did the wet plant weigh, how much did the dry, usable material weigh when all was said and done.  That way, if this comes up in court, we can counter the prosecutor with DATA not estimates.  Yes the guy had 14 pounds of wet plants (make sure they removed the root ball), based on our data, that would have resulted in x number of ounces of dry, usable marijuana.

[peanutbutter]

Excellent post.  What kind of strategy would you employ if you were growing for oil?  Have you come up with any ideas on how to protect the amount you would need?  My only thought for a 5 patient caregiver would be to take 15 ounces and make an ounce and a half of oil at a time, clearing the amount and dispensing the oil, then repeating the process the next day.

 

Dr. Bob

 

 

WOW .. My heart skipped a beat when I read that!!

 

Also .. juicing .. if the material is never dried, it is never usable material. It is common to harvest a plant for juice about half way through flower cycle.

 

If you were to split the proceeds between four or five people, people could easily consume a pound of wet weight per day.

 

It is common to get 10%-15% from wet material that has most of the fan leaves knocked off and the major stalks taken out. Trim it down to nugs on small branches, 25%.

[Highlander]

Why not focus on what the law actually says?  Is says a patient cannot have MORE cannabis than 12 plants and 2.5 oz. of usable.  If I have 12 plants at the end of the flower cycle and no dry meds on-hand, I do not have MORE than 12 plants and 2.5 oz. usable.

 

If I cut down those 12 plants tomorrow, even if they would dry out to more than 2.5 oz, do I suddenly have MORE cannabis than I did the day before?  No.  That would be absurd.  And absurd results get kicked out based on the most simple of statutory interpretation rules.

 

On the other hand, if I have 12 plants growing, and 2.5 dried on the shelf and one or more wet plants hanging, do I have MORE marijuana than 12 plants and 2.5 oz usable?  Of course I do.

[thecannabiskid]

"Usable" is specifically defined in the act as the dried leaves and flowers, or any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include seeds, stalks, or stems. Any wild imaginings about what is and is not usable that disregards that definition is useless.

Unless your leo.. their "useless" definitions have been landing patients in court since the act took affect.

 

The point i was trying to make was, at what point does it become usable? Would semi dry cannabis hanging on lines be confiscated and presented in court as usable? Or does it have to be weighed and placed in jars to be called usable?

 

I would think PB was correct in saying that "Patients have to have the opportunity to destroy excess"

 

Most of us know very well what the act says, but we are not judged by the act, we age judged by Judges, and the leos who initially confiscate medicine with flawed interpretations of the law.

[thecannabiskid]

Excellent post.  What kind of strategy would you employ if you were growing for oil?  Have you come up with any ideas on how to protect the amount you would need?  My only thought for a 5 patient caregiver would be to take 15 ounces and make an ounce and a half of oil at a time, clearing the amount and dispensing the oil, then repeating the process the next day.

 

Dr. Bob

I would take it off the drying lines as I processed it, and not package anything extra left hanging, then i would take the overages right to the burn barrel.

[thecannabiskid]

if it needed to be dried first..

 things like cold water extraction don't require the cannabis to be dry, in this case i cut down the plants and take them right to the big freezer for 24 hours before processing.

I think that's a pretty scary situation.. 24 hours of fear!

[+Malamute]

This is a case that mr komorn used an argument to get his client out of trouble.  At this point, it means nothing except relief for his client.  If the Judge wishes to let someone go on a questionable argument,.... well cool. Shut up about it and be happy a judge was lenient; whether they were right or wrong doesn't matter at this level of court proceedings except for the client themselves..

[thecannabiskid]

This is a case that mr komorn used an argument to get his client out of trouble.  At this point, it means nothing except relief for his client.  If the Judge wishes to let someone go on a questionable argument,.... well cool. Shut up about it and be happy a judge was lenient; whether they were right or wrong doesn't matter at this level of court proceedings except for the client themselves..

yeah "Shut up about it and be happy" like malamute said.. Why would you ever question a Judges ruling? after all.. "whether they were  right or wrong doesn't matter at this level of court proceedings except for the client themselves.." ..Who cares about this poor soul, who could have got 7 years in prison? It probably only cost him several thousand dollars, and untold stress and hardship.. what was he thinking.. trying to help sick people anyway?

[+Malamute]

Clueless.

 

People are acting as if this is precedent or something.  Did the guy get let go in circuit court after the district court made a stupid ruling?

 

 It only matters to the client that he was let go.  It effects no one else in any fashion whatsoever.  An argument was used, whether legit or not, to get this client absolved from their charges.

 

 It worked.

 

 Moving on.

[Dr. Bob]

I tend to agree with Mal. This was a bad ruling which only dealt with this case, the attorney used a strategy to overcome it successfully at the circuit court level. The ruling meant nothing, and the section 8 argument was only one of several Michael could have used. I'm glad it worked and the case was dismissed, but it really means nothing in any other case.

 

Acting in such a way as to help a potential section 8 defense down the road is always a good idea. So is following section 4 in the first place. Recent suggestions that somehow section 8 gave people more rights, or was a way around the limits of section 4 not withstanding, it is a defensive move when you violate the basic rules of the act for good reason, nothing more. You have to be able to convince the court/jury what you did was for good cause.

 

Self defense/justifiable homicide is a similar strategy, if you can prove it, great, if not you fry. The fact it is a defense available to you doesn't mean it is ok to go pop your ex or that somehow it is ok.

 

Dr. Bob

[GregS]

Without the District Court Judge making this ruling, would the charges have been dismissed there, negating the necessity to take it to Circuit Court sans an appeal by the prosecutor?

Edited April 26, 2013 by GregS

[thecannabiskid]

I understand the case don't hold precedent. I'm not sure what does make a case hold precedent though COA, MSC? i think idk, I also understand Mr. Komorn did his job by making whatever argument he had to to get the dismissal.

I still think its worth discussing. This is just another rabbit in the courts hat. They could use this kind of thinking to move forward toward a conviction, or at least force a defendant to have to go to Sec. 8 then maybe to the COA.(bleeding him dry along they way) IMO this guy should never have seen a court room.

I would also disagree about the judge being "lenient". I think they had all three prongs of Sec. 8 covered and by law the Judge had no choice but to dismiss. IMO this case shows that they will do and say whatever it takes to try and get a conviction, and that they lack clarity and consistency on what is or isn't protected by the MMMA  It also shows that they could drag almost anyone into court if they wanted.

And telling people to "shut up".just isn't nice.

[phaquetoo]

I understand the case don't hold precedent. I'm not sure what does make a case hold precedent though COA, MSC? i think idk, I also understand Mr. Komorn did his job by making whatever argument he had to to get the dismissal.

I still think its worth discussing. This is just another rabbit in the courts hat. They could use this kind of thinking to move forward toward a conviction, or at least force a defendant to have to go to Sec. 8 then maybe to the COA.(bleeding him dry along they way) IMO this guy should never have seen a court room.

I would also disagree about the judge being "lenient". I think they had all three prongs of Sec. 8 covered and by law the Judge had no choice but to dismiss. IMO this case shows that they will do and say whatever it takes to try and get a conviction, and that they lack clarity and consistency on what is or isn't protected by the MMMA  It also shows that they could drag almost anyone into court if they wanted.

And telling people to "shut up".just isn't nice.

Shut up!    bawahahahahahahaha!

 

I had to do it!

 

Peace

Jim

[Dr. Bob]

Without the District Court Judge making this ruling, would the charges have been dismissed there, negating the necessity to take it to Circuit Court sans an appeal by the prosecutor?

If the district judge had ruled that the patient had a legal amount (which the circuit court did) the case would have stopped there.  It appears the defendant had less that he was allowed to possess.  The act gives limits under section 4, and that amount or less is presumed medical use.  There is no need to justify numbers under the limit.  Limits=section 4, Justification=section 8.

 

He was in limits.

 

Dr. Bob

[peanutbutter]

Why not focus on what the law actually says?  Is says a patient cannot have MORE cannabis than 12 plants and 2.5 oz. of usable.  If I have 12 plants at the end of the flower cycle and no dry meds on-hand, I do not have MORE than 12 plants and 2.5 oz. usable.

 

Umm .. that's kind of the wrong slant ..

 

If a patient is within those limits, then the officers are restricted. They are not allowed to arrest. If they ignore their restriction, then the PA is restricted from prosecuting. And if the PA ignores the law and their own restriction, it is the responsibility of the judge to recognize the entire procedure is illegal.

 

THAT is the slant ..

[GregS]

If the district judge had ruled that the patient had a legal amount (which the circuit court did) the case would have stopped there.  It appears the defendant had less that he was allowed to possess.  The act gives limits under section 4, and that amount or less is presumed medical use.  There is no need to justify numbers under the limit.  Limits=section 4, Justification=section 8.

 

He was in limits.

 

Dr. Bob

Dunno 'bout that. Section 4 possession quantities are not necessarily per se limits under sec. 8. One zip could be required to be justified. That sec. 4 protection extends to the AD is not a sure thing. That some judges consider the sec. 4 limits as the standard is to our advantage, but not assured. This is an opinion from an involved attorney, and makes pretty good sense to me.

Edited April 26, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

Under the limits of section 4 is presumed medical use, period.  I was questioned once by a prosecutor about someone with 23 plants and allowed to have 36.  I replied he was under the limit a presumed medical use under the act and that brought his line of questioning to a screeching halt.  His next line was to try and question the bona fide relationship and you can guess how that turned out with me...lol

 

There is no reason to show justification under section 4.  Justification comes with section 8.

 

Dr. Bob

[thecannabiskid]

Shut up!    bawahahahahahahaha!

 

I had to do it!

 

Peace

Jim

lol

[peanutbutter]

Shut up!    bawahahahahahahaha!

 

I had to do it!

 

Peace

Jim

 

Umm .. is that like "pull my finger" on the internet?

[phaquetoo]

Umm .. is that like "pull my finger" on the internet?

 

 

Hey p.b come here, come on come here, pull my finger, aw come on pull my finger,,,hurry hurry pull my finger!!!!  aw man to late!!

 

Peace

Jim

[Sledge]