Can A Caregiver Provide Marijuana To Twenty Patients Legally?

[trichcycler]

When in doubt read the ballot language. I've used it as a 'reset' byself. The ballot language said there are protections for the unregistered. And if unregistered who is counting? Can patients actaully be counted if not on a list? So how do you quantify how many you can transfer too? I don't think you can with the unregistered.

agreed, but

 

once I actually register with the state as a provider, I am bound to five patients connected to me only ?

 

Had I not registered I would then be offered more protections for selling to more than five people? sounds fishay to me, but I'm no legal beagle.

as a registered provider am I not required to only supply to "registered patients"?

Edited January 28, 2015 by grassmatch

[Restorium2]

agreed, but

 

once I actually register with the state as a provider, I am bound to five patients connected to me only ?

 

Had I not registered I would then be offered more protections for selling to more than five people? sounds fishay to me, but I'm no legal beagle.

as a registered provider am I not required to only supply to "registered patients"?

Why would your unregistered rights change because you registered? Why would you registering change an unconnected patient's rights? This needs to make sense, not Schuette said so. 

[Natesilver]

Grassmatch- let's discuss the law for a minute. Not what a website says, or what you overheard at a gas station, or what a poster says. Have you actually read the law? If so, what aspects of sec 8 are you confused about?

[trichcycler]

Why would your unregistered rights change because you registered? Why would you registering change an unconnected patient's rights? This needs to make sense, not Schuette said so.

The application for registering another patient requires my signing an agreement with the state of MI, one that will not allow me to register a sixth patient. As a registered caregiver I am also bound by the agreement to only provide to the five patients I am connected to, precluding an unregistered patient? why wont the state allow the 6th patient when attempted?

[Highlander]

We need to remind ourselves when someone asks "Is it legal?" if the answer is "Not under Section 4, but yes, it is legal under Section 8," confusion can be generated.

 

A lot of legal professionals would say that an affirmative defense means that what you did was illegal, but there are circumstances involved so that you should not be criminally liable for breaking the law.  To a lot of people, the statement, "It is legal under Section 8" is a misstatement.  And since were are mostly laypeople doing out best to understand the law, this is worth mentioning.

[trichcycler]

Grassmatch- let's discuss the law for a minute. Not what a website says, or what you overheard at a gas station, or what a poster says. Have you actually read the law? If so, what aspects of sec 8 are you confused about?

 

I totally get it now ! thank you. I've no confusion on the matter.

I'm sure anyone wishing to make a market out of the marijuana business would be quick to defend the same way, and indeed have, and lost. The caregivers I know believe the same as I do. The dispensaries admit this single issue, as they close up and take a plea.

This website admin believes the 5patient model to be the legal one.

Your debate is not with me, as much as you want it to be, sorry. I only cared why you believed this way, and now I know. your job with me is over. Unless someone challenges your belief I see no reason for you to carry on?

[Highlander]

Why would your unregistered rights change because you registered? Why would you registering change an unconnected patient's rights? This needs to make sense, not Schuette said so. 

 

Wasn't there something in the SC people vs. King ruling that stated that registering for Sec 4 protections doesn't limit your access to Section 8 defenses? 

 

Yeah - here it is:

 

If registered patients choose not to abide by the stricter requirements of § 4, they will not be able to claim this broad immunity, but will be

forced to assert the affirmative defense under § 8, just like unregistered patients.

 

In that instance, registered patients will be entitled to the same lower level of protection provided to unregistered patients under § 8.  This result is not absurd, but is the consequence of the incentives created by the wider protections of § 4.

[Natesilver]

I totally get it now ! thank you. I've no confusion on the matter.

I'm sure anyone wishing to make a market out of the marijuana business would be quick to defend the same way, and indeed have, and lost. The caregivers I know believe the same as I do. The dispensaries admit this single issue, as they close up and take a plea.

This website admin believes the 5patient model to be the legal one.

Your debate is not with me, as much as you want it to be, sorry. I only cared why you believed this way, and now I know. your job with me is over. Unless someone challenges your belief I see no reason for you to carry on?

 

Then stop feigning ignorance of the law.

[Restorium2]

Wasn't there something in the SC people vs. King ruling that stated that registering for Sec 4 protections doesn't limit your access to Section 8 defenses? 

 

Yeah - here it is:

 

If registered patients choose not to abide by the stricter requirements of § 4, they will not be able to claim this broad immunity, but will be

forced to assert the affirmative defense under § 8, just like unregistered patients.

 

In that instance, registered patients will be entitled to the same lower level of protection provided to unregistered patients under § 8.  This result is not absurd, but is the consequence of the incentives created by the wider protections of § 4.

Makes sense. What is more comforting than your SC making sense? Thanks for hitting the nail on the head so well.

[phaquetoo]

How many times do u need to be told it's covered by sec 8!!! Can you read?!?! Have you read the law???

 

Why are you on a jihad against sec 8?

why would you encourage people to do things that would cause them to use section 8?

 

look at most of the section 8 defenses than tell me how well it worked out for them people!

 

Im not looking up any articles I have already read them, most are posted in this sight some where, the only way to use a possible win sec 8 is if your a pt that only has the dr.s records that says mm would provide you releif, and you didnt get your card from the state but you could have, if you have dr. records that say mm would help you than you have a good sec 8 case, any others including selling to people you are not registered to thru the state dont work out to well, why would you want a case that you cant even mention mm or that your a pt or c.g? and why would you want to be in court that long,

 

most of us dont have the kinda money it takes to have a section 8 defense, even the rich guy umm the brownie guy who has more money that all of us wanted us to pay for his trial, he is the idiot that got caught and made oil and tinctures ilegal, im not carruthers, Im pissed at carruthers and dont give 2 schits what happens to the greedy phaq!

 

oops forgot my head meds, I guess I will use the rest of my oil now!

 

Peace

[trichcycler]

Has anyone sold to a sixth patient

and ended up in court for it, and won their case ?

[trichcycler]

Edited January 28, 2015 by grassmatch

[Natesilver]

why would you encourage people to do things that would cause them to use section 8?

 

look at most of the section 8 defenses than tell me how well it worked out for them people!

 

Im not looking up any articles I have already read them, most are posted in this sight some where, the only way to use a possible win sec 8 is if your a pt that only has the dr.s records that says mm would provide you releif, and you didnt get your card from the state but you could have, if you have dr. records that say mm would help you than you have a good sec 8 case, any others including selling to people you are not registered to thru the state dont work out to well, why would you want a case that you cant even mention mm or that your a pt or c.g? and why would you want to be in court that long,

 

most of us dont have the kinda money it takes to have a section 8 defense, even the rich guy umm the brownie guy who has more money that all of us wanted us to pay for his trial, he is the idiot that got caught and made oil and tinctures ilegal, im not carruthers, Im pissed at carruthers and dont give 2 schits what happens to the greedy phaq!

 

oops forgot my head meds, I guess I will use the rest of my oil now!

 

 

Peace

You are engaging in your own behavior independent of me which will necessitate a sec 8 defense- oil. Does that provide a good example to board members- an upstanding member engaging in sec 8 behavior (oil), what's the harm? Do your posts encourage members to engage in sec 8 behaviors? Not any more than my posts do. I hope you see my point. Edited January 28, 2015 by Natesilver

[fishhead]

ugh you guys are confusing me...what is happening..."round and round, what comes around goes around..."

 

Am sorry couldn't help the song quote...so are we saying its legal for a cg to transfer to a card carrying patient that is not connected to that cg?

                                                                                                                                            or

                                                                    are we saying its legal for a pt to transfer to a card carrying pt? 

[YesMichigan]

an upstanding member

 

That's the best insult I've heard in a longtime. It works on so many levels.

[phaquetoo]

You are engaging in your own behavior independent of me which will necessitate a sec 8 defense- oil. Does that provide a good example to board members- an upstanding member engaging in sec 8 behavior (oil), what's the harm? Do your posts encourage members to engage in sec 8 behaviors? Not any more than my posts do. I hope you see my point.

I do see your point, but the dif between me and others is I wouldnt be on here looking for help for my own phaq up!

 

Peace

[trichcycler]

ugh you guys are confusing me...what is happening..."round and round, what comes around goes around..."

 

......saying its legal for a cg to transfer to a card carrying patient that is not connected to that cg?

that^^

some believe this to be true. some believe it to be defensible. some sell at farmers markets and some open dispensaries. Those both believe it to be true of course.

[GregS]

Has anyone sold to a sixth patient

and ended up in court for it, and won their case ?

That would be telling. OTOH, are there no cases because it works five years into the act?

 

Might you answer, plz, what you find in sec. 8 that limits the number of patients a caregiver can work with?

Edited January 28, 2015 by GregS

[GregS]

Have you noticed I am not the only one who believes as we are advised to provide to five patients only? no need to take your debate out on me personally man. I wanted to know the validity of your claim is all. I understand exactly now why you claim as you do. Carry on though and thank you for your explanation. Please tell the admins to change their advice on the cg page, as it is inaccurate according to you. Then explain to everyone why/how every sixth patient is denied by the state every time in our registry history? And what happens when we sign the agreement with the state that says we will only provide to five patients-is broken?

 

some of these details will clarify your position for me.

 

peace

By all means. Please tell us before we pee our pants for wanting to know. What happens when we sign the agreement with the state that says we will only provide to five patients-and break it?

Edited January 28, 2015 by GregS

[trichcycler]

By all means. Please tell us before we pee our pants for wanting to know. What happens when we sign the agreement with the state that says we will only provide to five patients-and break it?

I didn't insinuate I knew, but rather asked the question. People have supposedly been arrested for selling to police shills on CR and dispensaries have been hit for the same reason...selling to those not connected....right?

 

 

 

That would be telling. OTOH, are there no cases because it works five years into the act?

 

Might you answer, plz, what you find in sec. 8 that limits the number of patients a caregiver can work with?

I don't find anything in sec 8. I wonder though, why some would see this section 8 as the way to go,(albeit on thin ice??) instead of seeing the others section that prohibits the act. We have conflicting sections aye, then why follow the one that is obviously the road to a court case one likely cannot afford evidently?

[GregS]

I didn't insinuate I knew, but rather asked the question. People have supposedly been arrested for selling to police shills on CR and dispensaries have been hit for the same reason...selling to those not connected....right?

 

 

 

 

I don't find anything in sec 8. I wonder though, why some would see this section 8 as the way to go,(albeit on thin ice??) instead of seeing the others section that prohibits the act. We have conflicting sections aye, then why follow the one that is obviously the road to a court case one likely cannot afford evidently?

Sec. 4 offers protection from arrest and due process. We know that is the better protection in that regard as long as we stay with the requirements. Sec. 8 does not have those protections, but only permits us to present the affirmative defense to keep us out of jail after having been arrested. Having no restrictions that prohibit more than five patients, and for that matter more caregivers than allowed under the registry, we have the option to choose whatever we will.

 

No one is required to choose to travel under sec. 8. No one is required to choose sec. 4.

 

That being said, cases will continue to arise that seek guidance on the issues. Hartwick/Tuttle will do just that. We cannot know the limits of the law without. They will be settled, and I expect very much in our favor. So I'm gloating. I'm okay with that. In the long view we will find those limits, and it is necessary that we push the law to the point that it is enforced as written. Had not so many of us have pushed during all the years we knew of and used the stuff, we would not be here today.

Edited January 29, 2015 by GregS

[GregS]

Say, for the sake of argument, an individual is appointed caregiver by twenty registered patients, only five with whom s/he has filed paperwork with LARA. Is it then possible to make a living from the small cottage industry that the law permits? Is it possible to then earn enough to defend cases? How about putting an attorney on retainer at a monthly fee? My understanding is that a hundred bucks or two a month are typical.

Edited January 29, 2015 by GregS

[GregS]

ugh you guys are confusing me...what is happening..."round and round, what comes around goes around..."

 

Am sorry couldn't help the song quote...so are we saying its legal for a cg to transfer to a card carrying patient that is not connected to that cg?

                                                                                                                                            or

                                                                    are we saying its legal for a pt to transfer to a card carrying pt? 

No. But that person who transfers to the patient can, provided that s/he is appointed the patient's caregiver, perform the transfer and, if arrested, bring the sec.8 defense. Then we look to what is necessary to prove that appointment. If the evidence shows that appointment has been made, it is enough to prove that necessary part of the AD. We are hopeful the SC will tell us what that proof looks like.

 

If all this makes your head hurt, please consider staying within the sec. 4 limits.

Edited January 29, 2015 by GregS

[trichcycler]

no worries, there's always the popular plea bargain, and banks still remortgage homes I suppose.

 

I wonder if a lawyer will take a retainer for a crime not committed yet?

[garyfisher]

Michigan honors out of state MMJ cards.  How does an out of state patient legally acquire meds in our state?