Quote Originally Posted by cannasense
Don't you think that the fact that you have three qualifying conditions yet you still got convicted by a jury of your peers for possession speaks negatively towards both your interpretation of the law and your "logical conclusions"?
Not one bit, because none of them was "positively" diagnosed till 2008...which are not part of my appeal...nor was I allowed any defenses by the judge, not the jury...which is contrary to the mmj public policy and due process of law violation, the judge robbed the jury of it province...not to mention the jury wasn't allowed to hear any evidence of any medical necessity, aff. def. or any prior mmj cases( entrapment by estoppel) in which the same open-ended authorization was found to be valid and I recovered all my meds without a return for seized property hearing, thereby recognizing my property rights in the act(chapter), my dr. never invalidated my authorization and to this day still hasn't..state v. tracy made it clear that a practitioner must be licensed in wa. for the testimony to be relevant...a non-medical licensed person under rcw 18.71 cannot validate an authorization in wa. state, the same would apply to any business owner/operator claiming the same status to invalidate an authorization which was authorized by a practitioner licensed under rcw 18.71...

Get it yet? The district court don't have jurisdiction to go after the clinic owner, yet, the superior courts do...my crystal ball says the courts will overturn my conviction and make the stance doc-in-the-box's are illegal in wa....and since i was at all times seen for services in oregon by a wa. licensed practitioner, my authorization was valid because I met all the "requirements" of the act...and there is no 1 yr. "requirement" to be met in the act at all...see state v. fry...lol.

silly man cannasense.