3 caregiver questions please

1. I am currently in Denver but thinking of moving to another city. Does anyone have an opinion on which cities or counties would be the best for a caregiver to operate in.

2. I know that if my plant count is higher than 3/3 that I no longer have can keep my medical records private if going to court. My question is if I grow my 3/3 and my 5 patients 10/10 would I still have the full protection of my 3/3 even though my patients have elected to have a higher plant count? (hopefully I worded that correct)

3. Can anyone recommend a lawyer that would be best suited for a caregiver. It seems that a lot of lawyers are getting bashed for siding with disp's so are there any that seem to be leaning more towards the patients and caregivers?

Thanks again,

1. I am currently in Denver but thinking of moving to another city. Does anyone have an opinion on which cities or counties would be the best for a caregiver to operate in.

Boulder County, hands down.

2. I know that if my plant count is higher than 3/3 that I no longer have can keep my medical records private if going to court. My question is if I grow my 3/3 and my 5 patients 10/10 would I still have the full protection of my 3/3 even though my patients have elected to have a higher plant count? (hopefully I worded that correct)

Most likely. That is affirmative defense.

3. Can anyone recommend a lawyer that would be best suited for a caregiver. It seems that a lot of lawyers are getting bashed for siding with disp's so are there any that seem to be leaning more towards the patients and caregivers?

tough one. let us know what you do and how it goes.

I have heard Boulder County more than a couple of times. I really like Denver and things are "were" good but it as though a move might be better for me. Does anyone know if there are any breed bans in Boulder or Nederland?

After reading a little more on the topic it seems as though any affirmative defense allows access your doc and your records.

"(10) Affirmative defense. IF A PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER
RAISES AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 14 (4) (b) OF
ARTICLE XVIII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION, THE PATIENT'S PHYSICIAN
SHALL CERTIFY THE SPECIFIC AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF TWO OUNCES THAT ARE
NECESSARY TO ADDRESS THE PATIENT'S DEBILITATING MEDICAL CONDITION
AND WHY SUCH AMOUNTS ARE NECESSARY. A PATIENT WHO ASSERTS THIS
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE SHALL WAIVE CONFIDENTIALITY PRIVILEGES RELATED
TO THE CONDITION OR CONDITIONS THAT WERE THE BASIS FOR THE
RECOMMENDATION."

Thanks guys,

Yeah, but an affirmative defense only helps you once you get arrested and find your way to the courtroom. You have already lost at that point. Even if you win it has cost you dearly.

When I was a caregiver, i would not grow more than 6 per patient even if they had expanded recs. Law enforcement will go by 6. More than that and you and your high paid lawyer will pleading for your freedom in front of a judge.

Just my unsolicited $.02 worth. I tend to be pretty conservative when it comes to these laws... for good reason.

I am pretty conservative as well SoCO, some friends might say to a fault at times. Thats why I ask the questions though, as I like to see what others have to say about these gray lined issues.

Thanks again and good night fellas

ps. What other cities in Boulder County would be good besides Boulder? Homes are quite a bit more up there than around here.

I've always wondered why the affirmative defense has not been tested, or has it? Isn't the recommendation for 'edibles' the reason for extended plant count? And that's based on what it takes to produce the usable medicine. What do your medical records have to do with your choice to medicate without smoking? Isn't 'it takes 5 times as many plants to produce the medicine to provide the same pain relieving effect' the defense? Shallow I know but just a thought I've had.

I think the defense has been used. Couldn't find the story...maybe others remember this (?) but from my memory.... there was a guy maybe 2 years ago or so in Boulder or FC who was in a wheelchair and obviously in need who used the defense and had 2 pounds given back to him. I personally think this is when other folks took this to heart and jumped on the edibles variance wagon whether they ate it or not, using this guy as an example/etc. Problem is, most folks claiming such a need aren't in a chair/etc and would have a much harder time proving their case, IMO. Am I remembering this story correctly? (yes, it's the drugs)

And FWIW, I too am conservative in my approach to plant counts. One of my 3 patients has a 12/12 edible variance but because she works in a dispensary/etc. and I know her well i know she doesn't EAT her meds so i stick to the 3/3 rule even though i could take it a bit higher, so to speak, with more plants.

Jason Lauve used affirmative defense in Boulder and won. 34 oz's and ~30 plants if I remember correctly. They gave him his weed back and he went home. He did have a ride through hell first though.

Colorado 420 Coalition

Thanks guys

I think the real problem with the laws is it flips what we are supposed to guaranteed by the judicial system. We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty but with MMJ it seems if they 'bust and charge' you, you are basically guilty until you can somehow prove your innocence? The plants are their proof and the rest is interpretation. The shit is backwards to me.

i hear ya, polish. Backwards as fuck...but @ the same time we must not lose sight of the fact that there is a semblance of protection at hand..however sketchy it is. Dunno about any of the rest of you, but I was plugged in pre-2000 and even with the glitches and uncertainly we are seeing @ present, all of this still feels a couple zillion times safer than "the good old days".

Somethin i've been wondering about and would like to hear what others think is this; 1284 says no 2 'caregivers" can share a garden space. What about patients sharing space? Could a person who had 10 patients (or more) keep 5 registered with the State and "donate" garden space to the 5 others? (aka, still growing their plants...but...yeah...um...) Rope off the space if needed and mark the plants with the patient names? "Those are john's...those over there behind the blue tape are Mary's"

Where's the flaw in my thinking here, guys? (be kind, dammit) Advantages? Disadvantages?

blackhash

I've seen that idea tossed around a few times. in theory, it sounds good.

someone needs to be charged and it go through court before we can have *any* certainty about multi-patient-no-caregiver grows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

someone needs to be charged and it go through court before we can have *any* certainty about multi-patient-no-caregiver grows.

---

Not sure how it would survive in court, but I'm pretty sure if LEO saw 60 plants in a caregiver's garden somebody is getting hauled for felony cultivation.

That's the piece you want to avoid.

But "Centers" can have as many plants as they want? Such BS.

I do hear ya though, socommj. You just gotta grow TREES and keep those counts down.

In the long run tho, should bad things happen, being a caregiver goin down with "only" 60 is gonna look damn good to most dispensary folks who are currently growing over Federal levels. I can tell you FOR SURE that I'd rather deal with the State with 60 than to deal with the Fed @ over 100.

The memo yesterday talking about Obama's new drug czar/dick/cunt-bitch bei9ng in favor of MMJ/dispensary raids continuing doesn't bode well for the folks counting on this Admin to stand down on all of this, IMO.

I STILL say that they were speaking to EXISTING laws when they said they wouldn't come...not a NEW State law that OK grows above Federal levels as 1284 has done.

Kinda reminds me of one of those arcade games where the gopher pops out of the hole and you try to whap it with yer club....

'cept this is no game.

be safe

blackhash