How California LE determines maturity of a plant

[motherlode]

my permit says I have an exemption from sb420s guideline and I can grow as much as needed for my condition

my previous permit gave me 50 in flower and 6 lbs

not sure which is better, but I never have near that anyhow

 

[Big Brother]

my permit says I have an exemption from sb420s guideline and I can grow as much as needed for my condition

my previous permit gave me 50 in flower and 6 lbs

not sure which is better, but I never have near that anyhow

Motherload,

So your Dr stated that you can have 50 in flower and 6 lbs or did he just leave it open for interpretation?

 

[Seamaiden]

My doctor, when we discuss it, says that I should feel free to use as much as I need, that I should not feel limited in my needs, especially now. My rec, which is called a Physician's Statement, doesn't make any mention of amount, just need and benefit.

SM,
Correct me if I'm wrong. Since your county hasn't enacted it's own guideline it defaults back to AB420 which is six mature or 12 immature marijuana plants per
qualified patient, correct. Are you trying to grow more than six mature or 12 immature marijuana plants? If so, why not have you wife/friends get a recommendation and have the Dr sign the letter I posted above?

*I* am the wife, my husband also has a rec.

AB420 has been struck down, in particular the plant count limits. This is what has put any county, such as mine, that hasn't specifically voted on the subject, yet has limiting language that refers back to the very bill, the very portion of the bill, that's been struck down by the courts, in a precarious position should they wish to enforce such a limit.

The limit, in other words, no longer exists in this instance. And the police know it.

And, the more salient point, the point of this thread--define immature; define mature.

 

[Seamaiden]

Oh yeah, you bring up another thing in bringing a friend into it. I cannot, very simply, because the courts have rather specifically defined for California what a caregiver is, and were I to even *water* someone's plant, I must qualify (again according to my local LE) as a caregiver. They see it as caring almost 100% for someone, someone who can't get themselves around, needs you to do things like make doctor appointments for them, etcetera.

I know that the definition has been tightened up considerably, but I don't believe it has been tightened up that much, or the collective and cooperative models would be being eliminated elsewhere (were they to not fall within the intent of the proposition under whose purview they fall).

This is how I understand all of this, to this point.

 

[Big Brother]

Oh yeah, you bring up another thing in bringing a friend into it. I cannot, very simply, because the courts have rather specifically defined for California what a caregiver is, and were I to even *water* someone's plant, I must qualify (again according to my local LE) as a caregiver. They see it as caring almost 100% for someone, someone who can't get themselves around, needs you to do things like make doctor appointments for them, etcetera.

I know that the definition has been tightened up considerably, but I don't believe it has been tightened up that much, or the collective and cooperative models would be being eliminated elsewhere (were they to not fall within the intent of the proposition under whose purview they fall).

This is how I understand all of this, to this point.

I understand the definition of a caregiver, however why cant you set it up as a co-op? A few people with Dr's recommendations that grow in one spot?

 

[Seamaiden]

Because all such models are strictly banned in my county.

 

[Big Brother]

Because all such models are strictly banned in my county.

AHH, dare I ask what county you live in?

 

[Seamaiden]

Amador. It wouldn't be too difficult to guess, there are only a handful in the state that have outright bans.

 

[Big Brother]

Amador. It wouldn't be too difficult to guess, there are only a handful in the state that have outright bans.

Sorry to hear that. Beautiful place to live though. I visit the lake every summer.

 

[Backward_Z]

My understanding is that in California, a root structure is considered a complete plant. In the event that police are going to be counting your plants, they're counting individual root structures. If you have 50 non-rooted cuttings in a tray, that's 0 plants, but if they're all rooting, that's 50 plants.

Also, I've been told that males don't count at all.

Amador. It wouldn't be too difficult to guess, there are only a handful in the state that have outright bans.

The way I understand 215, if a jurisdiction doesn't want dispensaries in their town, they have to draft ban legislation or they can do nothing to prevent dispensaries from moving in. The numbers I've seen indicate that upwards of 140 of California's jurisdictions have enacted such measures.

It's also fair to note--if 19 passes, the local jurisdictions clause works the opposite way--prop 19 dispensaries will be banned by default and local jurisdictions would have to draft legislation to create a licensing and legalization framework for that jurisdiction.

Regarding SB420--it is correct that the portions of SB420 that sought to cap patient plant/dried limits were found unconstitutional in People v. Kelly and subsequently revoked. Currently, the only limit is your doctor's recommendation. Previously, the statewide limit was 8 ounces of dried and 6 mature or 12 immature plants, again, whatever that actually means. Local jurisdictions had the power to raise those limits as many did--for example Oakland changed it to 3lbs of dried and 32ft. of canopy space.

link: http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/People_v._Kelly

 

[Seamaiden]

My understanding is that in California, a root structure is considered a complete plant. In the event that police are going to be counting your plants, they're counting individual root structures. If you have 50 non-rooted cuttings in a tray, that's 0 plants, but if they're all rooting, that's 50 plants.

Also, I've been told that males don't count at all.



The way I understand 215, if a jurisdiction doesn't want dispensaries in their town, they have to draft ban legislation or they can do nothing to prevent dispensaries from moving in. The numbers I've seen indicate that upwards of 140 of California's jurisdictions have enacted such measures.

It's also fair to note--if 19 passes, the local jurisdictions clause works the opposite way--prop 19 dispensaries will be banned by default and local jurisdictions would have to draft legislation to create a licensing and legalization framework for that jurisdiction.

Regarding SB420--it is correct that the portions of SB420 that sought to cap patient plant/dried limits were found unconstitutional in People v. Kelly and subsequently revoked. Currently, the only limit is your doctor's recommendation. Previously, the statewide limit was 8 ounces of dried and 6 mature or 12 immature plants, again, whatever that actually means. Local jurisdictions had the power to raise those limits as many did--for example Oakland changed it to 3lbs of dried and 32ft. of canopy space.

link: http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/People_v._Kelly

Backward, I've been hoping you'd see this and drop in.

My local LE told me any part of any plant of which sex is known, rooted or not, is considered a mature plant. Sex of the plant doesn't matter (to them, see why I feel they're kinda making this up as they go along?), presence of a root mass doesn't matter.

While I have read and have had confirmed through news articles, LE, et alia, that my county has specifically banned all product-sharing models, I have yet to find the actual language anywhere. We have at least two cities in the county, Jackson and Sutter Creek, that have drafted up ordinances placing specific bans on dispensaries where they previously allowed them.

The last problem is that my local LE will not talk about counts in terms of what direction the county is taking in terms of enforcement. At this point I'm getting in touch with an attorney just about anywhere so I can make a better determination.

The big problem I have with all of this is that the enforcers are making themselves also be the interpreters of the law, and that is not how it works.

 

[Backward_Z]

At this point I'm getting in touch with an attorney just about anywhere so I can make a better determination.

This is always the best answer.

Regarding the plant numbers/root structure question, the advice comes from a trustworthy source but could be mistaken. The source on this isn't a legal professional, at least my source. I'm banking that his source was a legal professional.

But it's definitely, definitely worthwhile to bite the bullet and pay a lawyer to sit down and explain to you what your rights are and how those laws work.

This bit I was actually told by a lawyer: regarding that the only limits you legally have are what your doctor recommends--this particular lawyer said he prefers to see/defend scripts that don't set any limit whatsoever rather than have his clients seek out doctors that write higher numbers. His contention is that when/if a case comes to trial, he can bring in the doctor as a witness who can THEN determine appropriate limits to your needs, retroactively.

A platitude comes to mind: "It is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."

 

[Big Brother]

Were you able to consult your lawyer yet SM?

Curious to what he/she had to say

 

[Green Mopho]

The whole thing is stupid, isn't it? Mature, not mature, sexed, or unsexed?

The state of Colorado defines a mature plant as anything over 12 inches. Mother plants that are kept in veg forever are considered mature....sheesh....

 

[Seamaiden]

It's incredibly stupid, yes! The police here will count 3" unrooted clones as mature plants, just because the sex is known (ya think I'm gonna start cloning unsexed plants?).

I'm considering trying to grow my own Belladonna after all of this.

Were you able to consult your lawyer yet SM?

Curious to what he/she had to say

Yes, we spent a good hour with him. Basically, it's like this--once the sex is known the plant is legally considered mature. That surprised me.

So, here's the rub for California LE--it doesn't matter! Why? Counts, numbers and amounts have all gone out the window.

I learned a couple of other things, too. For instance, EVEN WITH A PROPER 215 RECOMMENDATION, SMELL = PROBABLE CAUSE. That surprised the hell out of me.

Another thing, and this one is very important for those people who love to put up signs informing LE that there's a legal grow on site--that sign equals probable cause. You think I'm gonna be putting up any signs?

They can handcuff you while they get a warrant. They can prevent me from making any phone calls unless I am arrested. They can actually do quite a few things that I didn't think they could.

My level of naiveté with regard specifically to how criminal law enforcement operates was brought out in extremely sharp relief yesterday. But I also have a new confidence for the next time I have to deal with ACCNET (our local county's narcotics team).

Who knows, this may lead to my very first arrest ever, just for getting cheeky. (I've never been cheeky with a cop!)

 

[Backward_Z]

Another thing, and this one is very important for those people who love to put up signs informing LE that there's a legal grow on site--that sign equals probable cause. You think I'm gonna be putting up any signs?

Whoa whoa whoa, really?

It's better to have an unmarked garden rather than one with photocopied and laminated scripts on the wall because the signs are probable cause? I haven't heard this.

The lawyer I spoke to told me that he didn't like the signs just because say the po-pos crash your spot and find all of your collective's recs, they have phone numbers and names and start calling right away, "Hello, is Mr. So and So there? Yes, this is the police--about this marijuana garden," and people on the other end go into deny-deny-deny mode. This is what they want--so when the case goes to trial and Mr. So and So goes on the stand to say, "Yes, I was a member of the collective and to the best of my knowledge all of that cannabis was being cultivated legally" or whatever, then the prosecution will cross examine and ask, "So you're a liar, huh? Why did you lie to the police about your garden?" and go through all that haranguing.

 

[markscastle]

I watched Mike Ramsey( Butte Co. DA) state on TV that plant counts could no longer be inforced but that the AB 420 guide lines were just guide lines to deside if an investigation was warrented.He stated in truth if there is even one Dr. recomendation in the garden they could only make a valid arrest if they could prove sales,which was the hardest thing to prove in court.He had taken a chopper ride From Yuba City to Red Bluff over HWY 99 and noted there seemed to be large gardens on about every 5th property in all the rural areas! He also stated to do complience checks on all the MMJ in Butte Co. he would need 20 new officers and 20 years of paid time just to do one complience check each. Lots of gardens this year in Norcal area but most are new growers and yields and quality aren`t there at many of them.More worried about rippers ,weather,and prices than LEO ! I have about 1 1/2 large plants left to cut and trim before the rains come again! Oh my back and trimmer hands are sore!

 

[Seamaiden]

Backward, my issue right now is more complex than what I'm actually posting about. The main thing has to do with them wanting access to an area that cannot be seen at all, into which there is a single metal door for egress/ingress, no windows, and is locked up fairly securely. If I put a sign on that door, that gives them probable cause and the attorney believes they could easily get a judge (here) to sign off on that.

It came up because I brought up the fact that I've been ripped off multiple multiple times, but have a neighbor who's former LE in the area and still has friends and was told that I would be the one examined very closely before the thief would be. And he was right.

I could really go on a serious tear about where my county spends their LE dollars because right as I type this I have a neighbor who's in fear for her son's life because of a roommate he took on. This guy's on probation in another county, but has started tweaking, things went to shit, he was kicked out and now people all over the county have seen him with the weapon he's saying he's going to shoot the neighbors with. They (the neighbors) know exactly where he's staying, have been calling the sheriff's department daily (every time he calls to threaten them, so that's several times a day) and do you think they're spending the kind of time on this guy that they've spent harassing *me*?

It all began with smell, so keep that in mind.

 

[Papa]

The main thing has to do with them wanting access to an area that cannot be seen at all, into which there is a single metal door for egress/ingress, no windows, and is locked up fairly securely.

who's "them?"

 

[Seamaiden]

My local law enforcement. So far no one else has knocked on my door saying they want to see and actually expecting to get in.