2015 Senate Decrim (Not Legal) Bill

[legacy]

I haven't seen any news for SB 80... possibly because of its being sentenced to Jones' Judiciary committee. Is it in another thread?

 

https://legiscan.com/MI/bill/SB0080/2015

http://www.michiganvotes.org/2015-SB-80

[bobandtorey]

Don't know but just a few days ago i tried looking it up on the States site  i got the same thing

Edited February 17, 2015 by bobandtorey

[t-pain]

irwin's bill went nowhere last year. call up jonesy and tell him to vote yes on it.

[bobandtorey]

 

SENATE BILL No. 80

 

 

February 4, 2015, Introduced by Senator YOUNG and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

 

 

 

     A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled

 

"Public health code,"

 

by amending sections 7403 and 7404 (MCL 333.7403 and 333.7404), as 

 

amended by 2012 PA 183.

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

 

     Sec. 7403. (1) A person AN INDIVIDUAL shall not knowingly or 

 

intentionally possess a controlled substance, a controlled 

 

substance analogue, or a prescription form unless the controlled 

 

substance, controlled substance analogue, or prescription form was 

 

obtained directly from, or pursuant to, a valid prescription or 

 

order of a practitioner while acting in the course of the 

 

practitioner's professional practice, or except as otherwise 

 

authorized by this article.

 

     (2) A person AN INDIVIDUAL who violates this section as to:

 

     (a) A controlled substance classified in schedule 1 or 2 that 

 

is a narcotic drug or a drug described in section 7214(a)(iv), and:

 

     (i) Which is in an amount of 1,000 grams or more of any mixture 

 

containing that substance is guilty of a felony punishable by 

 

imprisonment for life or any term of years or a fine of not more 

 

than $1,000,000.00, or both.

 

     (ii) Which is in an amount of 450 grams or more, but less than 

 

1,000 grams, of any mixture containing that substance is guilty of 

 

a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or a 

 

fine of not more than $500,000.00, or both.

 

     (iii) Which is in an amount of 50 grams or more, but less than 

 

450 grams, of any mixture containing that substance is guilty of a 

 

felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a 

 

fine of not more than $250,000.00, or both.

 

     (iv) Which is in an amount of 25 grams or more, but less than 

 

50 grams of any mixture containing that substance is guilty of a 

 

felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a 

 

fine of not more than $25,000.00, or both.

 

     (v) Which is in an amount less than 25 grams of any mixture 

 

containing that substance is guilty of a felony punishable by 

 

imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not more than 

 

$25,000.00, or both.

 

     (b) Either of the following:

 

     (i) A substance described in section 7212(1)(h) or 7214©(ii) 

 

is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 

 

10 years or a fine of not more than $15,000.00, or both.

 

     (ii) A controlled substance classified in schedule 1, 2, 3, or 

 

4, except a controlled substance for which a penalty is prescribed 

 

in SUBPARAGRAPH (i) OR subdivision (a), (b)(i), ©, or (d), or a 

 

controlled substance analogue is guilty of a felony punishable by 

 

imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than 

 

$2,000.00, or both.

 

     © Lysergic acid diethylamide, peyote, mescaline, 

 

dimethyltryptamine, psilocyn, psilocybin, or a controlled substance 

 

classified in schedule 5 is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 

 

imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than 

 

$2,000.00, or both.

 

     (d) Marihuana:

 

     (i) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN SUBPARAGRAPH (ii), is guilty 

 

of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 

 

year or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.

 

     (ii) IF THE VIOLATION INVOLVES 1 OUNCE OF MARIHUANA OR LESS, IS 

 

RESPONSIBLE FOR A STATE CIVIL INFRACTION AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE 

 

AS FOLLOWS:

 

     (A) IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS NO PRIOR CONVICTION OR FINDING OF 

 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL ORDINANCE 

 

SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION, MAY BE FINED NOT 

 

MORE THAN $25.00.

 

     (B) IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS 1 PRIOR CONVICTION OR FINDING OF 

 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL ORDINANCE 

 

SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION IN ANY COMBINATION, 

 

SHALL BE FINED NOT LESS THAN $25.00 OR MORE THAN $50.00. 

 

     © IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS MORE THAN 1 PRIOR CONVICTION OR 

 

FINDING OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL 

 

ORDINANCE SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION IN ANY 

 

COMBINATION, SHALL BE FINED NOT LESS THAN $50.00 OR MORE THAN 

 

$100.00.

 

     (e) A prescription form is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable 

 

by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than 

 

$1,000.00, or both.

 

     (3) If an individual was sentenced to lifetime probation under 

 

subsection (2)(a)(iv) as it existed before March 1, 2003 and the 

 

individual has served 5 or more years of that probationary period, 

 

the probation officer for that individual may recommend to the 

 

court that the court discharge the individual from probation. If an 

 

individual's probation officer does not recommend discharge as 

 

provided in this subsection, with notice to the prosecutor, the 

 

individual may petition the court seeking resentencing under the 

 

court rules. The court may discharge an individual from probation 

 

as provided in this subsection. An individual may file more than 1 

 

motion seeking resentencing under this subsection.

 

     Sec. 7404. (1) A person AN INDIVIDUAL shall not use a 

 

controlled substance or controlled substance analogue unless the 

 

substance was obtained directly from, or pursuant to, a valid 

 

prescription or order of a practitioner while acting in the course 

 

of the practitioner's professional practice, or except as otherwise 

 

authorized by this article.

 

     (2) A person AN INDIVIDUAL who violates this section as to:

 

     (a) A controlled substance classified in schedule 1 or 2 as a 

 

narcotic drug or a drug described in section 7212(1)(h) or 

 

7214(a)(iv) or ©(ii) is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 

 

imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than 

 

$2,000.00, or both.

 

     (b) A controlled substance classified in schedule 1, 2, 3, or 

 

4, except a controlled substance for which a penalty is prescribed 

 

in subdivision (a), ©, or (d), or a controlled substance 

 

analogue, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for 

 

not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

 

     © Lysergic acid diethylamide, peyote, mescaline, 

 

dimethyltryptamine, psilocyn, psilocybin, or a controlled substance 

 

classified in schedule 5 is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 

 

imprisonment for not more than 6 months or a fine of not more than 

 

$500.00, or both.

 

     (d) Marihuana, catha CATHA edulis, salvia divinorum, or a 

 

substance described in section 7212(1)(i) is guilty of a 

 

misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or 

 

a fine of not more than $100.00, or both.

 

     (E) MARIHUANA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A STATE CIVIL INFRACTION AND 

 

IS SUBJECT TO A FINE AS FOLLOWS:

 

     (i) IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS NO PRIOR CONVICTION OR FINDING OF 

 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL ORDINANCE 

 

SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION, THE INDIVIDUAL MAY 

 

BE FINED NOT MORE THAN $25.00.

 

     (ii) IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS 1 PRIOR CONVICTION OR FINDING OF 

 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL ORDINANCE 

 

SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION IN ANY COMBINATION, 

 

THE INDIVIDUAL SHALL BE FINED NOT LESS THAN $25.00 OR MORE THAN 

 

$50.00.

 

     (iii) IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS MORE THAN 1 PRIOR CONVICTION OR 

 

FINDING OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATING THIS SUBDIVISION OR A LOCAL 

 

ORDINANCE SUBSTANTIALLY CORRESPONDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION IN ANY 

 

COMBINATION, THE INDIVIDUAL SHALL BE FINED NOT LESS THAN $50.00 OR 

 

MORE THAN $100.00.

[bobandtorey]

Senate lawmakers are considering legislation, Senate Bill 80, to decriminalize minor marijuana possession offenses.

Under 

present law

, marijuana possession offenses involving any amount of marijuana are classified as a criminal misdemeanor, punishable by up to 1 year in prison and a maximum fine of $2,000. Senate Bill 80 reduces personal use possession penalties to a civil, non-criminal offense, punishable by not more than a $25 fine for first offenses -- no arrest, and no criminal record. Second offenses will also be punished by a fine only between $25 to $50.

According to 2010 arrest data, police in Michigan make nearly 18,000 marijuana possession arrests annually. This total is the 16th highest in the nation.

Minor marijuana possession offenders, many of them young people, should not be saddled with a criminal record and the lifelong penalties and stigma associated with it. 

[Restorium2]

An ounce is too small, needs to be ONE POUND. Many of us have been around the block a few times and have been charged for very small marijuana offenses more than once.  Why punish the punished? Makes no sense other than bullying. Old style bullying that needs to stop now if you are trying to help us stay out of prison like We The People want. 

[AbominableDro-Man]

I don't see why anyone would need to transport any more than their max allowance per pt at any time.- sticking to those fun little rules and that jazz.

Edited February 18, 2015 by AbominableDro-Man

[Restorium2]

I don't see why anyone would need to transport any more than their max allowance per pt at any time.- sticking to those fun little rules and that jazz.

Then you don't want to see it. Your life experience and your imagination are lacking. So I will go to the other end of the spectrum and ask you why should anyone be limited at all? I can cram my car full of alcohol, no limit. Why should I be limited when it comes to cannabis?

And this isn't just about transporting. This is in your home also. 

Edited February 18, 2015 by Restorium2

[Restorium2]

People get all wound up in rules and don't know how to act when the rules might actually go away. Like being in a warm fuzzy caccoon of rules. They call it co-dependancy. Spread your wings. 

[bobandtorey]

If there is anything I have learned in the past five years, it is that "fun little rules," when broken or unclear, result in felony charges for patients and their caregivers.

 

The point of any cannabis law should be to protect cannabis users, including those that grow it for themselves and others. Anything less is trickery.

 

Especially when they are written like this, an exception to a statute THAT MAKES ALL CANNABIS POSSESSION ILLEGAL.

Did i miss something because i live in Oakland County so i can agree All Cannabis is illegal for growers, users or even standing in a room with cannabis or thinking you may use some cannabis  today

 

A card does help don't leave home without it 

[bobandtorey]

Whatever, Bob.

you forgot this part

 

A card does help don't leave home without it 

[bobandtorey]

Sorry i know you have a lot on your mind and many people do because of all the BS going on 

[nsmn8r]

"  ... amount of 1,000 grams or more of any mixture containing that substance is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for life or any term of years or a fine of not more than $1,000,000.00, or both."

 

That's messed up. Doesn't matter what drug it is. I hope this never happens.

[slipstar059]

That's already the law as it stands. Nsm8r.

[nsmn8r]

That's already the law as it stands. Nsm8r.

Holy crap you're right.  Imprisonment for LIFE?  And these are the 'liberals' proposing this?  It's like the whole freking world has gone nuts!

[t-pain]

Holy crap you're right.  Imprisonment for LIFE?  And these are the 'liberals' proposing this?  It's like the whole freking world has gone nuts!

 

thats the current law and any bill that modifies the current law must provide the entire law for context. thats why that part is displayed in this bill. yes the current law is disgusting. please dont be confused by the decrim bill however.