Can Police Use A ‘Borrowed’ Marijuana Card?

[zachw]

I will apologize if credible evidence is supplied to the contrary, but for now I say BS.

 

(Clarification: BS that cops use matching fake cards & licenses to bust an otherwise legit transaction under current MMMP laws.)

 

OK, and now I will apologize! I forgot that many LEOs believe that dispensaries themselves are illegal!

[Restorium2]

OK, and now I will apologize! I forgot that many LEOs believe that dispensaries themselves are illegal!

Apology accepted. I posted the pics here of at least 5 cops with cards. Sorry if you missed it. If you pay attention every day here you learn a lot. Like you would know that the Supreme Court said the only legal transfer is to someone on one of your cards. And that's not 'just what cops think'. We all know that dispensaries are going way past that to even be open, they are illegal.

[t-pain]

the supreme court was pretty clear in mcqueen about dispensaries.

[bobandtorey]

Maybe everyone knows that pt to pt is not legal but its hard to even say that to most because they say the stores our open and thats how they see it but with this case its

 

still not right that Leo did this and has been from the start 

 

I have seen it first hand one day i was at a Dispensary when one came it with a picture on there card when know one else had one we all stood up to look at it and then she

 

left the store and came back without the picture on it 

 

I know of someone that had picture's of the undercover Leo's at that one dispensary they got raided with 3 million dollars of cannabis and Eq; so the papers said 

 

and they also got their case dismissed i couldn't believe it when i heard the judge say those words and we where still in Court their case got appealed of course 

 

they are all still in Court today         stay tuned they have a lot of money to fight

[t-pain]

i wonder how the MMT group of 27 is doing in fed court, after the new doj funding thing from congress?

[bobandtorey]

On the final day of a calendar year filled with historic cannabis policy reforms, the parties of an equally historic federal hearing filed their first written arguments based on the five days of testimony heard by Judge Kimberly Mueller in Sacramento, California. Judge Mueller, who held the hearings to determine the constitutionality of the continued Schedule I classification of cannabis in her courtroom in the federal Eastern District of California, has scheduled her next hearing on the matter for early February.

 

This one ?

[t-pain]

no

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/04/feds_allege_medical_marijuana.html

[bobandtorey]

Guilty verdict just came in...guilty on this case no surprise 

[YesMichigan]

"A case from Port Huron features a unique twist; police just “borrowed” a medical marijuana card from a friend and made a marijuana purchase."

 

So the "friend" is in jail now for breaking the law by lending his card to an unauthorized user (i.e., anyone not him). Arrest your friend, cop! Do it now!

Edited January 7, 2015 by YesMichigan

[bobandtorey]

i was told Leo got the card from someone he also raided 

[YesMichigan]

i was told Leo got the card from someone he also raided 

 

The article said he got it from "a friend" was it a euphemism? Seems a material matter of law. I'm sure someone knows the clarified truth but the first sentence of the story should have made the writer ponder at the violation of law he wrote about.

[GregS]

I've said it before. A verifiable, notarized, and and therefore admissible written agreement between the buyer and seller will put a dead stop to police using this practice. It requires that the prospective police officer/patient swears to be a qualified patient and leaves a paper trail that would prove fraud if he were to continue with the transaction.

 

Here ya go. Something like this. Don't overlook the supporting documents. I think it best to edit them to spell out return appointments per the law and, to throw these idiot judges a bone, a prescription designation of prn (take as needed). I am no lawyer. They are reluctant to put any information out to the general public for a number of reasons. Do not take this as legal advice, and consider running them past an attorney. The thread where they are discussed is here: http://michiganmedic...ction-8/page-7 

 

Patient/Caregiver Agreement to Engage in the Medical Use of Marijuana

 

I,______________________________________, swear and affirm that I am a patient under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, Initiated Law 1 of 2008.

__Dr._____________________________, a physician authorized under Part 170 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.17001 to 333.17084, or an osteopathic physician under Part 175 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.17501 to 333.17556, physician license I.D. number____________________ , has stated that in the physician's professional opinion, on or about (date)___________________________, and after having completed a full assessment of the patient's medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship, that I am likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of marihuana to treat or alleviate a debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition (copy attached) .

Or:

__A registry card duly issued by the State of Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) , number______________________(copy attached), has been issued to me which attests to a physician's recommendation that in the physician's professional opinion, and after having completed a full assessment of my medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship, I am likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of marihuana to treat or alleviate a debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition.

I hereby designate_______________________________ as my caregiver under that law, and agree to conform to the Act in the medical use of marijuana.

I, ______________________________________, swear and affirm that I am at least 21 years of age and have agreed to assist with the above named patient's medical use of marijuana in accordance with that law. I have not been convicted of any felony within the past 10 years and have never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs or a felony that is an assaultive crime as defined in section 9a of chapter X of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 770.9a.

Confidentiality: Each party agrees and undertakes that it shall not, without first obtaining the written consent of the other, disclose or make available to any person, reproduce or transmit in any manner or use (directly or indirectly) for its own benefit or the benefit of others, any Confidential Information, save and except that both parties may disclose any Confidential Information to their legal advisers and counselors for the specific purposes contemplated by this agreement. Presentment or disclosure of this information is not prohibited as required by law or in any prosecution pertaining to the medical use of marijuana. 

For the purpose of this Agreement, Legal advisers and counselors shall mean, with respect to any party, any person licensed to practice at law, or any paralegal, legal assistant, or other person directly supervised by an attorney at law who is ultimately responsible for any and all work product. 

Subscribed and sworn before me this date: ____________________________

Patient sign here: _________________________________

Subscribed and sworn before me this date: ____________________________

Caregiver sign here: ________________________________

/s/_________________________________

Print Notary Name: ________________________________

Notary public, State of Michigan, County of _____________________

My commission expires ___________________ 

Acting in the County of ___________________ 

 

 

Supporting documents are here: https://sites.google...attredirects=0, and here
https://sites.google...?attredirects=0

[bobandtorey]

 leaves a paper trail that would prove fraud

 

sorry but what judge will let that be in a Court room       None

 

Most won't even let a card be let into a Court room 

[t-pain]

The article said he got it from "a friend" was it a euphemism? Seems a material matter of law. I'm sure someone knows the clarified truth but the first sentence of the story should have made the writer ponder at the violation of law he wrote about.

 

i think its implied that when the cop said he got the card from a 'friend' on the stand, that he committed perjury...

 

but hey i wasnt there, i dont have the court transcripts and i'm not a lawyer. this is just a guess.

[YesMichigan]

The only protection is to be licensed through LARA as a c.g. for the patient you are transferring the medical marihuana to. You are entitled to recompense for the time, effort and materials to grow it but consideration is not a requirement of transfer between a c.g. and pt.

 

Short of that if you transfer marihuana to someone in Michigan, you just broke the law. Letters from your Priest, Rabbit or Pastor won't help, nor will Boy Scout honor badges or that time you built a house for the poor people from Guatemala. I'm probably too simplistic and kind of look forward to reading how I am wrong but that is totally how I do and will conduct myself in the State of Michigan as the law stands today.

[YesMichigan]

i think its implied that when the cop said he got the card from a 'friend' on the stand, that he committed perjury...

 

but hey i wasnt there, i dont have the court transcripts and i'm not a lawyer. this is just a guess.

 

The name on the card should be a matter of record as the court would have to prove the defendant was not actually a licensed c.g. for the person whose name was on the card. Pretty sad state of affairs if everyone just giggles when the cop lies about how he obtained the card. Banana Republic here we are!!!

[Willy]

The only protection is to be licensed through LARA as a c.g. for the patient you are transferring the medical marihuana to. You are entitled to recompense for the time, effort and materials to grow it but consideration is not a requirement of transfer between a c.g. and pt.

 

Short of that if you transfer marihuana to someone in Michigan, you just broke the law. Letters from your Priest, Rabbit or Pastor won't help, nor will Boy Scout honor badges or that time you built a house for the poor people from Guatemala. I'm probably too simplistic and kind of look forward to reading how I am wrong but that is totally how I do and will conduct myself in the State of Michigan as the law stands today.

 You seem to have got it

[Norby]

Can we sue for impersonation of a patient?  The law allows for patients to buy from anyone and they are going to use that so that no one sells to patients.  Isn't there something in there with not being treated differently?  or use of patients rights for entrapment or something? C'mon man.  That sucks, and I'm giving money to Lara for this shitt?  Something's gotta be against the law with that.

[YesMichigan]

Can we sue for impersonation of a patient?  The law allows for patients to buy from anyone and they are going to use that so that no one sells to patients.  Isn't there something in there with not being treated differently?  or use of patients rights for entrapment or something? C'mon man.  That sucks, and I'm giving money to Lara for this shitt?  Something's gotta be against the law with that.

 

Confiscated or forged card would fall under their normal "undercover work" it has been done upheld too many times to fight.

 

Cop using a legitimate patient's card, a patient who is not a Criminal Informant or affiliated with any outstanding cases should be a violation of the law by the patient. He was never authorized to "lend" his card to anyone - law enforcement or otherwise. There is no stipulation in the law that says the card can be utilized in this manner. How the cop got the card initially seems extremely relevant.

[Norby]

Well, in the right and wrong category it's pretty slimy to impersonate a sick person to make an arrest.  I hope he gets a disease that lets him have his own card soon enough and then he won't have to "borrow" a friends.  Scumbag Azzhole!!(not you)

Edited January 7, 2015 by Norby

[YesMichigan]

Well, in the right and wrong category it's pretty slimy to impersonate a sick person to make an arrest.  I hope he gets a disease that lets him have his own card soon enough and then he won't have to "borrow" a friends.  Scumbag Azzhole!!(not you)

 

There are people on the fringes of the medical "needs" category so the police are seeking them out. Think of how much that costs? To find this one guy they spent how many thousands of dollars? That's the program. They need ghosts to chase and every now and then unmask mean old Mr. Caruthers like a bad Scooby Doo episode. Face it, not enough people get raped, stabbed or beaten in most counties. That's a lot of cops with a lot of free time. At some point the citizens will say "Maybe we don't need so many police since we have so few problems." Oh no! Here comes the Narcotics Entrapment Team (NET) to save the day!

 

Hehe, I figured but thank you all the same! Some days you never know who you're gonna get riled. I don't wish disease on anyone - cop is doing his job just as dealer is. They need each other. Without cops making it illegal the value of the product drops to that of oregano. They know it and we know it. That's the entire scam. Cocaine is worth tenths of pennies. Make it illegal and it is worth more than gold. Amazing! It makes me laugh really hard when I think about it. As I type this I am laughing and having to correct it. Just take a moment and ponder the sheer brilliance that has been carefully crafted to appear as idiocy. They had to get everyone in on it (see Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961) so they could fully profit.

 

Cat and mouse - the cat and the mice will die and be replaced by a new cat and new mice. The Owner of the house will remain the same.

[GregS]

The only protection is to be licensed through LARA as a c.g. for the patient you are transferring the medical marihuana to. You are entitled to recompense for the time, effort and materials to grow it but consideration is not a requirement of transfer between a c.g. and pt.

 

Short of that if you transfer marihuana to someone in Michigan, you just broke the law. Letters from your Priest, Rabbit or Pastor won't help, nor will Boy Scout honor badges or that time you built a house for the poor people from Guatemala. I'm probably too simplistic and kind of look forward to reading how I am wrong but that is totally how I do and will conduct myself in the State of Michigan as the law stands today.

Please read sec. 8 and revisit these remarks. While it does expose a seller to more risk than registration under sec. 4, it is nonetheless as authoritative as and is separate and distinct from sec. 4, per the State Supreme Court.

Edited January 8, 2015 by GregS

[YesMichigan]

Please read sec. 8 and revisit these remarks. While it does expose a seller to more risk than registration under sec. 4, it is nonetheless as authoritative and is separate and distinct from sec. 4, per the State Supreme Court.

 

Break it down for me as you see it, please.

Sec. 8.

(2) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were collectively in possession of a quantity of marihuana that was not more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marihuana for the purpose of treating or alleviating the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition; and

(3) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28x5uumy55ox1ok145mpqmsxz5%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-333-26428

 

You're right and my wording as "only protection" was in error. I won't go too far though because asserting an affirmative defense at a trial is not my idea of "protection" but you are correct that you'll have a leg to stand on for sure.

 

Love this place. I learn so much everyday. Thank you.

[GregS]

Break it down for me as you see it, please.

Sec. 8.

(2) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were collectively in possession of a quantity of marihuana that was not more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marihuana for the purpose of treating or alleviating the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition; and

(3) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28x5uumy55ox1ok145mpqmsxz5%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-333-26428

 

You're right and my wording as "only protection" was in error. I won't go too far though because asserting an affirmative defense at a trial is not my idea of "protection" but you are correct that you'll have a leg to stand on for sure.

 

Love this place. I learn so much everyday. Thank you.

I don't expect that it is necessary to parse it much further than the written text in sum. The entire section is only a few very short provisions, is plainly written, and I hope and expect that you can fully comprehend what the language means and the voters' intent is.

 

You're welcome.

[YesMichigan]

I don't expect that it is necessary to parse it much further than the written text in sum. The entire section is only a few very short provisions, is plainly written, and I hope and expect that you can fully comprehend what the language means and the voters' intent is.

 

You're welcome.

 

As a seller I am still not seeing it being plainly written as a protection. If it was then dispensaries would be legal under Section 8 defense as they assist a card holding patient with the "medical use" of marihuana. We saw elsewhere that McQueen defines asymetrical protections for sellers and medical patient purchasers. I'm not claiming to have an answer I just enjoy the conversation.

 

I don't think voter intent has anything to do with what LEO will do to people. Not trying to be radical just one person's observation.