DELETED

[lifeofduty]

DELETED

[Socaliente]

Its still a illegal to transport pot in a vehicle. Card or not. But its generally not known/enforced due to pot without a card only being an infraction. More than an ounce in a car is a felony. As far as driving under the influence, there are ways to tell that will not be mentioned on here.

Regarding his work, I'm sure he can do whatever he wants, but dont be surprised if he is fired on the spot regardless if he has a card or not. Idiots in Colorado are finding out they are not exempt to drug testing just because they can smoke recreationally. If hes high at work and not able to care for himself he can be hit with public intox

[NuGunner]

Recommendations are not get out jail free cards. The person can only use/smoke when they need to medicate (People vs Trippett (1997)), they cant just use whenever the hell they want. He can also still get a DUI for being under the influence of marijuana.

Use this example. If on a bottle of hydrocodone (aka vicodin) it says do not operate heavy machinery (and you can get a DUI for this as well) what makes him think marijuana is any different. Impaired driving is impaired driving.

Also if he really wants to medicate, tell him about the Rx Marinol. Does the same thing marijuana does, EXCEPT get you high.

[Socaliente]

Also if he really wants to medicate, tell him about the Rx Marinol. Does the same thing marijuana does, EXCEPT get you high.

But then he wouldnt be "Cool" and part of the revolt against oppression. Its amazing how many 18 year old's have back pain now a days.

[omgwtfbbq]

There are a whole host of penal codes that having a 215 reccomendation does not exempt you from. Just giving someone else marijuana can get you cited or arrested for furnishing. In addition, you can still be cited for simple possession if you are carrying more than the amount of marijuana listed on your reccomendation.

Cultivating without a reccomendation that specifically allows you to grow or possess plants is still a felony as well. (11358 H&S)

Something we are seeing a lot in my jurisdiction is 215 card holders making concentrated cannabis, namely honey oil, under the assumption that it is protected under their reccomendation, which it is not. Possession of concentrated cannabis, 11357(a) H&S is a felony. Being in possion of the materials to make honey oil is a violation of 11379.6 H&S, also a felony. It's also the same code for operating a meth lab.

[RickD427]

If you read the law closely, marijuana remains illegal both federally, and in the state.

California's medical marijuana statute was very carefully written to avoid unnecessary conflict with federal law. While marijuana remains illegal under state law, Health and Safety Code section 11362.765 provides that there is no state law criminal liability, for specified sections of law (primarily dealing with simple possession) for users who possess a medical recommendation. Please note the "weasel wording" in the law. It doesn't make medical marijuana legal, it only removes the sanction. That's the strategy to avoid a conflict with federal law.

As a practical matter, if the amount of marijuana is for personal use and the subject has the card, I'm going to wish them a nice day and send them, and their marijuana, on their way. The voters of the state have made their desires on the issue known, and I have a duty to carry out the spirit of the law.

Driving under the influence is a separate crime, not affected by the medical marijuana statute. A driver under the influence of marijuana is arrestable. There is a chemical test for THC, but California does not have a presumptive level like we do for alcohol. What that means is that we have to prove impairment at trial. When we arrest for driving with a BAC above .08, we don't have to prove impairment.

An employer has the right to fire a worker for using medical marijuana. The question was tested before the California State Supreme Court in Ross v Ragingwire Communications.

[corrections]

Possession of concentrated cannabis, 11357(a) H&S is a felony.

Hi omgwtfbbq,

You are correct that possession of concentrated cannabis without a recommendation is indeed illegal, but you're wrong about it being exempt from the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The California DOJ has issued statements to that effect, specifically stating that concentrated cannabis is considered cannabis and accordingly that it is legal for individuals with a valid recommendation to possess:

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/03-411.pdf

This has been borne out over the past decade in at least hundreds of cases despite many in the law enforcement community being unaware of it; although many officers still believe concentrated cannabis is not covered under the Compassionate Use Act, the cases they generate under this misconception do not make it to prosecution due to the DOJ's position.

[CHIEFone]

concentrated cannabis in CA is a felony wobbler depending on how much you are caught with in your possession. if caught with this you have two options, DEJ (deferred entry of judgement) http://www.shouselaw.com/drug-diversion.html

or prop 36 http://www.shouselaw.com/proposition-36.html

not sure how this applies with a card or not. most cops would prolly haul you in and let the court and your attorney figure it out.

[NuGunner]

But then he wouldnt be "Cool" and part of the revolt against oppression. Its amazing how many 18 year old's have back pain now a days.

Haha seriously. My favorite ones are the people that suffer from "insomnia."

[lifeofduty]

///

[omgwtfbbq]

Hi omgwtfbbq,

You are correct that possession of concentrated cannabis without a recommendation is indeed illegal, but you're wrong about it being exempt from the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The California DOJ has issued statements to that effect, specifically stating that concentrated cannabis is considered cannabis and accordingly that it is legal for individuals with a valid recommendation to possess:

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/03-411.pdf

This has been borne out over the past decade in at least hundreds of cases despite many in the law enforcement community being unaware of it; although many officers still believe concentrated cannabis is not covered under the Compassionate Use Act, the cases they generate under this misconception do not make it to prosecution due to the DOJ's position.

I will admit to being unaware of this AG opinioin. However an AG opinion doesn't necessarily mean a person can't be convicted for possessing concentrated cannabis while having a 215 card. It would certainly be something that the defense would use though.

That being said, I have first hand knowledge of people who have been convicted in my jurisdiction for possessing honey oil with a reccomendation that did not explicitedly allow its use.

[RickD427]

I will admit to being unaware of this AG opinioin. However an AG opinion doesn't necessarily mean a personal can't be convicted for possessing concentrated cannabis while having a 215 card. It would certainly be something that the defense would use though.

That being said, I have first hand knowledge of people who have been convicted in my jurisdiction for possessing honey oil with a reccomendation that did not explicitedly allow its use.

You're correct, an AG Opinion does not state the law. It only communicates the AG's opinion as to what the law is (that's why they call it an opinion). Courts are free to rule contrary to an AG opinion.

[tyrist]

The recommendation is only an affirmative defense in court. You can still be cited and arrested in the field.

[AR15Man]

Patients forget that, at the time of issuance of their medical marijuana card, they automatically become a "Prohibited Possessor," and can no longer legally buy, possess or own a firearm under federal law.

[lifeofduty]

---