CA Supreme Court Hears Case On Medical Pot Limits

  • Thread starter Zeldar
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
S

Socachi

414
0
I read an article in LAJEMM it's source was the LA Times and it talks about how cities and counties are banning dispensaries. So far 120 cities (a quarter of all cities in CA) have done this and more to follow and 8 of 58 counties. The state courts have sided with the cities and counties. And evidential the Coalition for a Drug Free California is behind this.
 
Z

Zeldar

23
1
That's dispensaries though....make sure you don't get that mixed in with numerical patient limits...which are/will be unenforceable.
 
S

Socachi

414
0
A concern I have is if they're successful with dispensaries what their next step will be. LA has a DA on a mission and when he wasn't successful in court he turned to the city council to do his dirty work. But I do hope the SC throws out those sections, but even then a court will be deciding what is best for me, and I'm very uncomfortable with that.
 
Z

Zeldar

23
1
Thanks Zeldar...but in laymans terms what exactly does this mean ? I may be heavy on the meds this morning but I'm a bit confused on this.

Does this mean the 6/12 plant limit is out the door ? If so, whats the new limit if there is one ?

Lol...sorry guys :rauch08:

Correct, limits are now out the door. There is a catch though, as cops can still use their discretion and are still allowed to make a decision on whether or not your amounts are within your 'legal necessity.' Yes, a bit confusing but this is, and has been, the way it is.

In layman's terms - Yes, you can now grow 5 - or 50 - plants 'legally,' as long as you are willing to face the possible clusterfuck of having a peace/police officer deciding that you are over 'what you medically need' and putting you through the legal gauntlet. (Yes, I agree, very fucked up.) What this decision did though, is it gave you a real defense in court against the prosecution of 'illegally' growing more than 'x amount of plants' ....if that makes sense. Basically, if you can justify the amount that you have there is nothing any prosecutor can do. So, in the end, if your not willing to possibly lawyer up and run the legal gauntlet, don't fill up a warehouse just yet. On the other hand though, anybody who has been cramped by following the 6/12 limits, and who might want/need a higher count can do so without worry now.

:party0033:
 
P

pucker

47
0
Correct, limits are now out the door. There is a catch though, as cops can still use their discretion and are still allowed to make a decision on whether or not your amounts are within your 'legal necessity.' Yes, a bit confusing but this is, and has been, the way it is.

In layman's terms - Yes, you can now grow 5 - or 50 - plants 'legally,' as long as you are willing to face the possible clusterfuck of having a peace/police officer deciding that you are over 'what you medically need' and putting you through the legal gauntlet. (Yes, I agree, very fucked up.) What this decision did though, is it gave you a real defense in court against the prosecution of 'illegally' growing more than 'x amount of plants' ....if that makes sense. Basically, if you can justify the amount that you have there is nothing any prosecutor can do. So, in the end, if your not willing to possibly lawyer up and run the legal gauntlet, don't fill up a warehouse just yet. On the other hand though, anybody who has been cramped by following the 6/12 limits, and who might want/need a higher count can do so without worry now.

:party0033:


Thanks for clarifying that. It makes a lot more sense the way you put it. Cheers
 
Seamaiden

Seamaiden

Living dead girl
23,596
638
What? Does the ruling affect the limit on plants placed by SB 420? Yes, it does, unless one acquires the state ID card, in which case you are voluntarily agreeing to limit yourself.

The exception(s) to this ruling are in counties and districts, cities, etcetera, where plant limits have already been voted on, such as in Mendocino County. If a county's plant limiting language refers one back to SB 420, then that language is now null. That county or municipality, if desired, may hold a vote on plant limits which would then be enforceable. I'm waiting for my county DA to figure this simple kind of shit out, because I don't think they're even aware that SB 420 has essentially been struck down.
 
P

paulycali

2,479
163
There are no limits! Wasn't SB 420 abolished a few months ago? I think where there are limits that is from something new the city has done to regulate how many plants you grow. I hear people saying upto 64 square ft statewide. Never heard of that. Were stuck in a pickle for sure, but we should get out of this bull pretty soon. I still stay within my counties limits just to be safe. Till i see something 100% legit telling me i can grow more.

I still believe theres no limits in California. When prop 215 was passed a law was made giving people who need medical marijuana to use it and cultivate it. It is unconstitutional to go and modify or change a law yrs after the law has been passed. Like when they added SB 420 to the list. Which gave you limits on how much you could posses and cultivate

That's what i know or heard so far and would like to hear more from you farmers
 
N

noone88

726
63
Too much misinformation regarding limits and such.

Read Bruce Margolin's guide:



There is no such thing as "no limits". You can be arrested for anything. It is up to the evidence, testimony of officers, and discretion of the district attorney to whether or not the state will pursue charges.
 
markscastle

markscastle

Well-Known Farmer
4,825
263
Hell my doctor told me that she will testify in court to that she told me to consentrate the thc and use as a sapository as needed.They can try to determine just how many plants I`d need to make consentraits in order to stick it up my ass to get relief from my medical problems if they want to,but there seems little medical studies to go by in order to make a dertermination! LOL! I`m not to sure that a jury would dilibrate very long on in such a case. Even the most hard core conservitive in the bunch is likely to consede that the largest amount of consentrates should be used as possible! LOL!

Discloser,Read at your own discretion,MC does not take any responcibility for bursting of guts or any other harm do to reading this post.Read at your own discretion!
 
420Gator

420Gator

1,281
83
If I ever get busted this is definitely gonna be my excuse, as crazy as it sounds this is exactly the type of defense to get you outta trouble, in America that is, sometimes you just have to act like an idiot to get your way

Hell my doctor told me that she will testify in court to that she told me to consentrate the thc and use as a sapository as needed.They can try to determine just how many plants I`d need to make consentraits in order to stick it up my ass to get relief from my medical problems if they want to,but there seems little medical studies to go by in order to make a dertermination! LOL! I`m not to sure that a jury would dilibrate very long on in such a case. Even the most hard core conservitive in the bunch is likely to consede that the largest amount of consentrates should be used as possible! LOL!

Discloser,Read at your own discretion,MC does not take any responcibility for bursting of guts or any other harm do to reading this post.Read at your own discretion!
 
Seamaiden

Seamaiden

Living dead girl
23,596
638
There are no limits! Wasn't SB 420 abolished a few months ago?
It was struck down according to a very specific case in which prosecutors used an excess of limits (weight of dried bud in the People vs Kelly case, IIRC) as the sole meter for said prosecution.

What the court did not strike down is the voluntary participation in the state ID card system, which falls under the purview of each county's health department. This is what the counties of San Diego, San Berdoo and Marin (IIRC) were fighting that went to the SCOTUS--they argued that forcing them to participate in the program was tantamount to forcing them to violate federal law.

In any event, as I said previously, if one participates in the state ID system, one is voluntarily agreeing to limit themselves to the previous 12/6 & 8oz bud paradigm.
I still believe theres no limits in California. When prop 215 was passed a law was made giving people who need medical marijuana to use it and cultivate it. It is unconstitutional to go and modify or change a law yrs after the law has been passed. Like when they added SB 420 to the list. Which gave you limits on how much you could posses and cultivate

That's what i know or heard so far and would like to hear more from you farmers
Not so much unconstitutional, as it has to be done the right way. Think of Proposition 8, which changed California's constitution, specifically to deny a right, which quite technically should be illegal from the get-go because it's right up there with anti-miscegenation laws (laws that prevent people from marrying outside of their own race).
Too much misinformation regarding limits and such.

Read Bruce Margolin's guide:



There is no such thing as "no limits". You can be arrested for anything. It is up to the evidence, testimony of officers, and discretion of the district attorney to whether or not the state will pursue charges.
A great deal of confusion, indeed. In perusing these 'guidelines' I find I am more confused about such issues as 'limits' than I was previously.
Medical Marijuana Program Act


(Senate Bill 420) 2005
Protection from Arrest and Seizure
The act provides that a physician (M.D. or O.D.) who has conducted a medical examination and taken responsibility for an aspect of the medical care and has concluded that the patient has a serious medical condition that medical use of marijuana is appropriate, may recommend or approve its use.
See 11362.7
In order to give law enforcement much needed guidance as to what amounts are presumptively legal and to provide qualified patients protection against unnecessary arrest and prosecution the California Legislature enacted Senate Bill 420.

Patients/caregivers may possess, cultivate, and transportation up to 8 ounces, 6 mature and 12 immature plants.

Health and Safety Code 11362.77 sets out that only the dry processed flowers are to be considered when evaluating the permissible possession amounts. Leaves and stalks are not to be considered. A patient may possess any amount consistent with the patient’s current medical need. See People v. Kelly (2010)

Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) 11362.765 H&S (Senate Bill 420)
Protects qualified patients who collectively and cooperatively cultivate marijuana for medical use by patients from prosecution for marijuana offenses, including:
Possession
Health and Safety Code 11357
Cultivation
Health and Safety Code 11358
Possession for sale
Health and Safety Code 11359
Sale, possessing, transporting, etc.
Health and Safety Code 11360 etc.

<snipped>
As I predicted...The California Supreme Court recently ruled that the limits set by SB 420 (8 ounces, 6 mature and 12 immature plants) are unconstitutional when applied to court proceedings. All other provisions of SB 420 remain including
patient’s rights to collectively cultivate, etc. See People v. Kelly (2010).


Local safe harbor policies exist to provide guidance to the police and to keep patients from being arrested, prosecuted and to avoid confiscation of their medical
marijuana.

The physician’s opinion regarding the amounts consistent with the patients’ needs takes precedence over the limits set by SB 420. (Trump Card)
Then he further goes on to outline which cities and counties are not adherent to the guidelines set forth in SB 420.
COUNTIES AND CITIES NOT LISTED BELOW ADHERE TO CA STATE DEFAULT GUIDELINES OF 6 MATURE OR 12 IMMATURE PLANTS AND 8 OZ. OF DRIED PROCESSED MARIJUANA.

ARCATA: City council passed an ordinance on 11/08 allowing no more than 50 square feet for cultivation. In addition, dispensaries will be prohibited from using more than 25% of their property for cultivation when the ordinance takes effect December 19th. The council may revisit the issue during the land use code revision process in six months. Those with special needs may request more grow space. The new standards apply only to areas of Arcata outside the Coastal Zone, which rings Humboldt Bay. A separate but identical ordinance covers those areas, but will not go into effect until approved by the Coastal Commission, which will take at least a year and probably longer.

BERKELEY: Ordinance allows 10 plants and 2.5lbs per patient, or up to 50 plants, 12.5lbs for collectives.

BUTTE CO.: County guidelines: 6 mature or 12 immature plants, 1 pound processed material. Official Butte County policy regarding caregivers, collectives, and co-ops.

CALAVERAS CO.: Board of supervisors approved: 6 plants and 2 pounds.

DEL NORTE CO.: County adopted Sonoma cultivation guidelines with maximum 100 square feet cultivation area and 99 plants or fewer; one pound possession limit (approved by Board of Supervisors 4/22/02). However, as of August 8th, 2008 those limits were thrown out, per People v. Kelly and a BOS action that began with the intent of reverting to state default guidelines.

EL DORADO CO.: Sheriff and DA policy: Indoors: 10 flowering plants + 10 vegging + 1 mother; Outdoors: 20 starters or 10 mature plants, 1-2lb processed marijuana depending on season of year.

HUMBOLDT CO.: County guidelines allow patients 100 square feet and 3lbs with no plant number limit. Cities of Eureka and Fortuna PDs and CHP enforce SB 420 limits (6 mature/12 immature plants; 1⁄2 lb).

MENDOCINO CO.: On December 30, 2008, Mendocino County Superior Court Judge John Behnke ruled Measure B’s limits of eight ounces of dried marijuana and 6 mature or 12 immature plants per qualified patient (unless a doctor allows more) were now the legal limits in Mendocino County, reversing his August ruling throwing out the limits.

NEVADA CO.: Cultivation: 6 mature female plants or 75 square feet of plant canopy (previously 10 plants not to yield more than 2 lbs). Possession: 2 lbs. processed marijuana- consistent with patient’s recommendation.

OAKLAND: Indoors - 72 plants in maximum 32sq. ft. growing area. Outdoors- 20 plants, no area limit. Weight limit 3 lbs dried marijuana per patient. Collective gardens limited to 3 patients. Dispensaries serving 4 or more patients are allowed max. 6 mature and 12 immature plants and 1⁄2 pound per patient.

SAN DIEGO (also CHULA VISTA): City council guidelines allow up to 1 lb. of marijuana, 24 plants in 64 square feet indoors; no outdoors growing allowed except in enclosed greenhouses.

SAN FRANCISCO: Patients allowed up to 24 plants or 25 square feet of canopy; dispensary gardens capped at 99 plants in 100 square feet. Possession limit 8 oz. dried cannabis per patient.

SANTA CRUZ: 100 sq. ft. of canopy and up to 99 plants is allowable under county guidelines, for a patient or a bonafide caregiver. The City of Santa Cruz to adopt guidelines based on People v. Kelly.

SONOMA CO.: Guidelines permit 3 lbs. for possession; maximum 100 sq feet cultivation area with 30 plants or fewer (approved September 2006).

TRINITY CO.: On October 28, 2008, the Trinity Board of Supervisors repealed their medical marijuana ordinance, reverting them to the state guidelines (see below).

See 1800420laws.com for updates
So... this is confusing. Did the court strike down SB 420 limits, or didn't it? If a municipality has not voted on limits and refers back to SB 420, is that still legally acceptable, or not?

Must continue reading!
 
Z

Zeldar

23
1
There is no such thing as "no limits".

o-rly001.jpg


From Bruce Margolin's Guide:

How Many Plants Can a Patient Grow?

The ultimate question is always whether the amount possessed, cultivated or transported is reasonably related to the patient’s current medical needs.
The national medical marijuana prescription standard, established by the National Institute on Drug Abuse in their Compassionate Investigational New Drug Program, is about a half-pound per month or 2 ounces per week per patient, which works out to 6 pounds per year. A large number of plants are needed to cultivate that amount of bud.
Under Prop. 215(Compassionate Use Act of 1996) there are no limits as to how many plants or how much marijuana a patient may possess or cultivate. The quantitative provisions of SB 420 have been invalidated and deemed unconstitutional as diminishing the rights of patients as established by Prop 215. Patients may possess or cultivate that which is consistent with their current medical need.
The doctor’s evaluation is of the patients needs.

Go back and re-read my post, slowly. I have also met with an attorney who has confirmed my explanation.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom