CDPHE Emergency
- Thread starter pikes peak 69
- Start date
StrictlyGateway
Member
good point! now that i think about...it also coincides quite nicely with them very recently accepting ads for dispensaries....
StrictlyGateway
Member
obviously not rob corry. you can speak with warren edson (if you can get ahold of him). barry russell fink (shares office w. warren, a bit more available, yet not as experienced or expensive as warren), brian vicente from sensible colorado (see comments about warren), sean mcallister from breck (everybody's hero...he wrote that ballot measure that just passed).
[/quote]I'm not giving up.[/quote] not until we are all breckenridge!
[/quote] Also does anyone have a link for the lobby that was talked about earlier?[/quote] i've got a name and am hesitant to just post a name without knowing much more about her. i can tell you 2 things....she is supposedly opening a 'high-end' dispensary in cherry creek, and she was high up (perhaps in charge) of fundraising for barak obama in CO...CONNECTED!! hope this doesn't cross any lines, but that's what i know about this person, and i can't find anything else yet.
This is not underhanded. This is something you don't like, but that doesn't make it underhanded. The law was being interpeted in a manner which has swung directly against caregivers in a numbr of states, and this is going to continue, absent a specific statutory change.
Every lawyer saw this coming.
The so-called "underhandedness" came in the recent decision in the Colorado Court of Appeals in People v. Clendenin, which essentially applied the same standard to "caregiver" as has the state of Wasington in State v. Mullins and as the Supreme Court of California did one year ago in People v. Mentch.
In Colorado, the relevant statutory guidance is:
"Primary care-giver" is defined as "a person, other than the patient and the patient’s physician, who is eighteen years of age or older and has significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a patient who has a debilitating medical condition." Colo. Const. art. XVIII, § 14(1)(f) (emphasis added).
This wasn't underhanded, it was a time-bomb contained within the MMJ provisions of the state Constitution. It was only a matter of time before it went off, as it has already gone off in other MMJ states.
The only "End of Story" element is that the Colorado Court of Appeals has ruled that a caregiver must do more in order to shelter under the provisions of the Constitution of Colorado relating to MMJ. Moreover, given the defnition in the state Constitution, one can hardly blame the Court of Appeals for doing so.
The problem is that the Colorado Court of Appeals held in Clendenin what a primary caregiver was not. They did not provide more useful guidance on what it is. As matters stand, caregivers in Colorado are without guidance and are now groping in the dark
Without a new guidline supplying a more fulsome practical basis on how to rely upon the primary caregiver definition, (and I admit that the guideline which may be promulgated by the Board of Health will not supercede the state Constitution) Colorado caregivers are without guidance on how to obtain certain protection as a primary caregiver and are open to prosecution.
I am not saying that the new guideline may not result in what many here will see as an overly restrictive requirements. But what Colorado has right now? Is ZERO guidance and it's open season on caregivers under the current law.
Absent some new guideline aimed at clarifying what a caregiver is, prosecutions of a vast number of Colorado caregivers will be inevitable in the wake of People v. Clendinin.
ColoMediCann
Member
I can´t see what benefit there would be for the state to start a caregiver witch hunt, other than padding the stats for the AG and DAs for re-election bids.
Since Stacy Clendenin was only sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation and 48 hours of community service it´s not like even the judge thinks it´s a big deal. Sure, she has a massive black mark on her record, but all in all she got off pretty light.
I can´t imagine the courts getting clogged with caregiver prosecutions and appeals if the result in the end is community service. If nothing else, the county budgets will be strained with these pointless court cases and the DAs will be instructed to spend their time elsewhere.
Now that's useful info. BTW love the Alex Grey Painting avatar! Keep up the fight People! Don't let our government tell us how to utilize our marijuana. To save us from ourselves. right? haha ya right.....
Hadn't noticed that. Westword FTW though!
Nor can I. But I'm not a prohibitionist and I presume you aren't either. We don't think like they do.
Arrests and prosecutions rarely make sense. But that sure as hell has not stopped them so far -- and it won't now, either.
G
guest123
Rob corry filed a lawsuit today to invalidate te
G
guest123
Rob Corry filed a lawsuit today seeking to block the CDPHE ruling: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13725590?source=searchles
An idiot Republican senator has come up with a bill to make walgreens sell the pot and the state grow it, at 100$ an ounce and half being tax.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13725539?source=rss
An idiot Republican senator has come up with a bill to make walgreens sell the pot and the state grow it, at 100$ an ounce and half being tax.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13725539?source=rss
Spacecadet01
Member
wow..that republican bill is insane. wonder if hes being lobbied by any pharmacies? yaaa think??
Except his idea would exclude the many of us who have been fighting for the cause for a long time, being as many growers have been convicted felons ,do to our war on drugs. I don't think the state hires felons. I also don't trust our government to grow our medicine , just like I wouldn't want them to grow my food. This shit is getting more and more ridiculous everyday, why can't we just fucking legalize it already?
Spacecadet01
Member
would be hard pressed to find the gov hiring us to do any of the growing. It would all be done by companies that got contracts from the GOV. Im betting that the republicans and there supporters already have those companies picked out. Which no doubt will contribute to there campaigns for the receiving of there GOV contract. (THINK HALIBURTON NO BID CONTRACT)
.02
SC
G
guest123
Well, only solution would be back to overgrowing them altogether... which is probably what we shoulda stuck with in the first place.
COhomegrown
Member
Government inefficiency, Government quality, government jobs?... no THANKS! Why don't we just call the arsonist to come fight the house fire??
I went to Alabama a few years ago and the State runs the liquor stores.. ABC is what they are called, they all look the same they all carry the same things and they are all run by some old man who would love to deny your purchase. They all have the same hours, they all have the same sales, they all have the same prices. Imagine going to ten pharmacy's to have your chose between: Blueberry, Chronic, AK-47, Big Bud, Skunk... etc whatever massed produced shit they can come up with. And for those of us who like organic meds, i can almost guarantee that these places will be pushing chemmy massed produced commercial hydro.. because it's cheap!
I mean seriously look at everything they touch and it goes to shit... and for those who think that it's "republican" bill, yes he may have the title of a republican but regardless of party all i see is, Elephants and Asses screwing the masses.
Good find Movado!
This guy needs to get out more, and maybe actually talk to people before writing these bills...
Some good news from Boulder today though:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13728946
StrictlyGateway
Member
i don't even know where to begin on this one....i'm pretty sure that case law trumps the cdphe anyhow, but who knows???
this article has infuriated me to no end. ditch weed??? i know this mf has never seen my weed. and wtf does he think some mass-produced walgreens bs would be??? just another dipshit repub legislating for corporate america and against small biz......PHUCKER!
where's that lobby?? who do i make the check out to??? let's go.
I imagine we'll end up with something similar to what Maine has done. As far as Pharma, if the state starts taxing green meds, what's going to stop them from taxing opiates or other meds? I think they (Pharma) may end up on our side. Politics makes for strange bedfellows.
