Patient To Patient Transfers?

[JohnnyC]

ok or not?

[Dlo]

Not

[Kingdiamond]

No patient to patient transfers are against the law .

[Croppled1]

No patient to patient tranfers are against the law .

 

Is this a case where a missing comma starts a war ? Third answer ...patient to patient for compensation clearly illegal per COA and should receive respect of law though currently being sent up to Supreme Court . Patient to patient non remunerated unclear but for a qualified participant the penalties could be much higher then a regular citizen . Midomeanor vs Felony . I personally would suggest people avoid and treat them as 100% illegal to be safe for now . Very sad the penalties could be worse for a patient then a regular Citizen but that is the reality when I read the act about transfering to someone your not suppose too .

 

When it comes to transfers and it is my own opinion many want to only allow them in narrow cicumstances that often support their ends inside our community . The truth is if all qualified participants are able to transfer freely among all others this program would work much better with way less conflict able to occur between any Citizens whether involved in the program or not . At least cannabis would be more affordable for patients and people could without fear donate for patients flat on their backs dieing in hospices , nursing homes or hospitals who are broke .

 

One other thing that needs to be mentioned is people who are on disabillity becoming caregivers . While I personally support this 100% where one can acheive it and understands what their getting into . People must be aware of how they could loose benefits under self employment for a activity the Federal Government doesn't even allow legitimate expenses to be deducted for . When I hear of individuals on disabillity who are legally determined disabled currently desireing or actually becoming caregivers it cuases me to have great fear for them . I have never heard one person warn others about this but I guess we all assume everyone understands they could loose their insurance coverage and benefits for being involved in what their insurance payer says is illegal activity . Or at the very least may have to speak of it in a Federal Disabillity Court where I wouldn't believe they will be impartial and receptive . Disabled and dehabillitated individuals may need these things pointed out to them politely but bluntly while giving them the respect they deserive .

 

When you cannot work due to injury or illness your disabillity payments are all that stands between life and death , some dignity and self determination or none at all .

Edited July 1, 2012 by Croppled1

[Kingdiamond]

I'm not out to become a test case when it comes down to someones interpretation of our law way too many dissenting views amungst law enforcement and prosecutors wanting to keep things they way they were find a seed rob us blind legally via forfeiture laws.

[trix]

Welcome to the site JohnnyC,

 

This is a question that has been asked and answered many times on the forum, I see that you are a new member. If you use the search bar at the top on the right hand side of the page, you find many of your questions and answers by running a simple search for you questions.

 

As it stands today NO p2p is NOT legal, by law you can only transfer medications between yourself and your CG and or your 1-5 PT's. Any kind of tranfer outside your PT/CG network at this time is deemed NOT legal.

 

Glad to have you as a member on the forum, try to utlize the search bar option, you may find many of your answers without having to post a new question/topic. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to PM myself or another member of the staff. Again welcome to the site, I hope you find the relief your looking for as well as many of the questions you have to stay on the Legal side of the law.

 

Trix

[JohnnyC]

But if it states you cannot be prosecuted for "medical use" meaning delivery possession transfers or transportation then what are protected rights?

[Kingdiamond]

But if it states you cannot be prosecuted for "medical use" meaning delivery possession transfers or transportation then what are protected rights?

 

Its how the attorney general and the michigan supreme court feel no transfers outside who you are connected to via the medical marijuana registry .

 

(News report on the ruling)

 

 

Last week a unanimous panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals released an opinion interpreting the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, or MMMA.

 

The court interpreted the plain meaning of the MMMA in conjunction with the Public Health Code provisions regarding the possession, use and distribution of marihuana.

 

In the McQueen decision the Court of Appeals, citing earlier court rulings, stated: “The MMMA did not legalize the possession, use, or delivery of marihuana....Rather, the MMMA sets forth very limited circumstances in which persons involved with the use of marihuana, and who are thereby violating the PHC, may avoid criminal liability. Specifically...the MMMA does not authorize marihuana dispensaries. In addition, the MMMA does not expressly state that patients may sell their marihuana to other patients.

 

“[T]he “medical use” of marihuana does not include patient-to-patient “sales” of marihuana…”

 

 

 

 

The court also ordered that the McQueen opinion was to have immediate effect.

[FunDMental]

I never understood why the MPP wrote the law the way they did. To describe the "distribution" part of the law you need to include the word Cluster.... It's all fine and dandy if you have a room you can devote to growing your own, not to mention waiting 4 months before you can get a litle relief. It really gets bad for folks like a friend of mine, her caregiver just packed up and moved out of the state, giving her no warning or time to set up a new caregiver. According to this screwed up law, she has to do without until she can line up another caregiver, or she has to go to some dangerous back alley and hope she gets her meds and not robbed.

 

The idiots in Lansing meanwhile seem to think 1 of 2 things, either they believe that patients are just a bunch of burnout kids, or they believe that the whole law was nothing but a "Fringe issue". Of course anyone with more than 2 sizzling synapses in their skull can tell you that 63% voting in favor of Anything is NOT a fringe issue. And you only need to park in front of any compassion club for an hour to easily see that the vast majority of the patients going in haven't been kids for Decades. (I'm 52)

 

We have far too many local officials and judges coming up with their own interpretations of a pretty simple law. I see a large part of the problem as the counties see the state bringing in millions from registrations, and the counties get jack squat. I'm beginning to believe the only way we are going to straighten this mess out is to just flat out legalize it for anyone over 21, and tax/regulate the sales, then everyone gets what they want.

Edited July 1, 2012 by FunDMental

[AmishRnot4ganja]

Forgive me here, but I need clarification also.

 

The SC specifically banned P2P "sales" stating that the law does not expressly state that patients may sell their marihuana to other patients. However, the law does expressly state that the transfer of marijuana is OK and I don't think that it stipulates that the transfer must be between CG and patient.

 

The whole issue seems like a red herring anyway. If it is legal for me to possess marijuana and it is legal for you to possess marijuana, why is it a crime for each of us to share? I would like to hear that explained to a jury

[GregS]

But if it states you cannot be prosecuted for "medical use" meaning delivery possession transfers or transportation then what are protected rights?

 

That is absolutely correct. To see that xfers are allowed, plz read secton 4(a) in tandem with section 3(e). Many of us understand that transfers are allowed, with or without compensation. The COA got many things wrong, as did the Attorney General, all of whom have been b!tch slapped by the Supreme Court. The McQueen case is now with the Supreme Court, which should rule on several aspects of transfers and other protections. As long as they maintain the integrity they showed in their last mm ruling, we should be golden. There are other cases in the queue that should treat us favorably.

[GregS]

Forgive me here, but I need clarification also.

 

The SC specifically banned P2P "sales" stating that the law does not expressly state that patients may sell their marihuana to other patients. However, the law does expressly state that the transfer of marijuana is OK and I don't think that it stipulates that the transfer must be between CG and patient.

 

The whole issue seems like a red herring anyway. If it is legal for me to possess marijuana and it is legal for you to possess marijuana, why is it a crime for each of us to share? I would like to hear that explained to a jury

 

It was not the SC, but the Court of Appeals that ruled that. The SC will rule on the issue soon. The law specifically states that patients are protected in all aspects of medical use, to include transfer. Plz see my last post, read those sections, and get a cup of coffee while you read the law in its entire three pages.

Edited July 2, 2012 by GregS

[JohnnyC]

Yea I need to sue the state of michigan for writing such a shaded law and prosecuting people every chance they get

[GregS]

Yea I need to sue the state of michigan for writing such a shaded law and prosecuting people every chance they get

 

Have you read it thoroughly?

[JohnnyC]

I've read the 2009 laws and rules on the Michigan.gov site around 4-5xs a day since may and there is such moo poo between what's it says and what charges are being pressed on people. The terms and definitions say one thing and police and prosecutors are saying others. It's moo poo like 2.5oz usable meds, but if it's cut not cured yet how is it usable "still wet" but they charge u with wet weight ?

[JohnnyC]

Same as p2p if u never told someone an amount for compensation but they hand u some anyways how's that illegal what constitutes a sale

[CedarSpringsCG]

Yea I need to sue the state of michigan for writing such a shaded law and prosecuting people every chance they get

 

The state didn't write the law, it was a voter initiated act. And the biggest problem is, our now Attorney General was the one leading the Anti-MMJ movement to stop it from becoming law, and now he is trying to get his way like a tired 4 year old with a power trip.

 

P2P transfers, according to the COA in McQueen, say that "sales" are not legal at all, and because it was a third party (in the program or not) doing the transfer, it was a sale. They specifically say that they are not ruling on anything else except that relationship with a third party. 3 parties in the grower/CG is one, the Patient is 2, and the dispensary is 3.

 

I would recommend not getting compensation for now until the SC rules one way or the other, however, in my opinion, the COA specifically stayed away from P2P.

[JohnnyC]

Patient/grower not using a caregiver

[Celliach]

Forgive me here, but I need clarification also.

 

The SC specifically banned P2P "sales" stating that the law does not expressly state that patients may sell their marihuana to other patients. However, the law does expressly state that the transfer of marijuana is OK and I don't think that it stipulates that the transfer must be between CG and patient.

 

The whole issue seems like a red herring anyway. If it is legal for me to possess marijuana and it is legal for you to possess marijuana, why is it a crime for each of us to share? I would like to hear that explained to a jury

If we both get Vicodin from the doctor we can't share them.

[Celliach]

Yea I need to sue the state of michigan for writing such a shaded law and prosecuting people every chance they get

The state didn't write the law. We, the people, did.

[anonymousgrower?]

If you sell marijuana for profit the charge is delivery and manufacturing of marijuana....

 

Our law states delivery is legal.. Explain that one?

[Celliach]

The only delivery that is unambiguously legal in Michigan is between a caregiver and his/her registered patient.

 

P2P with renumeration is definitely illegal. You cannot transfer meds to anyone that is not your registered patient for anything. You cannot trade for smoothies, labor, or anything else!

 

There are other types of transfers that have not been ruled on in court, but I don't see the courts ruling any differently than they have at this point in time.

[MiDelServ]

Boy, for a word that does not appear ANYWHERE in the Mi Law, this site sure love that word Unambigeous.

 

 

Never thought I would see a site such as this call its membership criminals for following a law.

un believeable this site even has any members.

[SFC]

You have it backwards. This site is trying to make sure its members do not inadvertently become criminals. Big difference.

[Dr. Bob]

If you sell marijuana for profit the charge is delivery and manufacturing of marijuana....

 

Our law states delivery is legal.. Explain that one?

 

Actually, delivery is not legal. Nor is marijuana, and the act clearly states that, under both federal and state law. It is simply not prosecuted under the terms of the Act.

 

As for the rest, looks like some plants trying to restir the same old p2p so I can make some money argument. That has been settled, and was answered in the first couple of posts. The answer is no, p2p is not allowed at this time.

 

Dr. Bob