Where Can I Find Patients?

I would be careful posting things like, 'You may want to brush up on Amendment 20 rights as provided by the state of Colorado and The U.S. Constitution In general. The state CANNOT deny Amendment 20 rights to medically qualified patients who are also married to each other'

That's not the end of the story pal, and I encourage you to not only educate yourself on current legislation, but also current events.

Let's discuss bartkowitz for a moment, can we? Do you understand that since he's being charged with federal crimes, whatever stae/local laws he might be compliant with don't matter, because cultivation of marijuana is still illegal at the federal level? So your interpretation of state law is irrelevant. The US constitution doesn't say anything about pot, so I'm curious what you're referencing when you say, 'and The U.S. Constitution In general.'. Care to elaborate?

I think we need to be clear. I'm discussing a husband and wife who are both caregivers, and you seem to kind of imply 2 patients living together, not caregivers. I'm not arguing that two patients can't live together. I take the position that there can only be one caregiver per house.

Honestly, if we're discussing how to be compliant with larger grows, then the easiest way to grow more is to have multiple grows under the same name at different locations. Obviously this gets expensive.

Why don't we just simplify.

Can me and my wife be individual caregivers to different patients but be in the same household?

Jeepster, you talked about different addresses. Does that mean I can have 5 patients at an address, then another 5 different patients at another address? That seems more illegal than anything else I've heard. No disrespect. Or that may not even be what you are explaining.

I'm ok with just me being a caregiver for right now. Only 5 patients right? Only 5 plants per patients also? I just need the basic info for right now. I can worry about my wife being a caregiver in the future.

Thanks for all the advice everyone

I just looked into the Bartkowicz case a little.

It looks like he was using different stains other than medical. It also looks like he was bragging to a TV reporter who did a story on his whole basement grow opperation.

The Government doesnt want people thinking that MJ is LEGAL. I guess its embarrasing to them. Bartkowicz's problem was that he was too cocky and was showing off.

MJ is legal in certain states with certain criteria. But when you are broadcasted on the local news showing everyone your grow, they HAVE to do SOMETHING.

Its not legal yet. He was acting like it was.

To me, as long as you just grow and shut your mouth then I don't think you will really have a problem. Along with just following the rules. If he was growing to just show people, then he isn't a grower, nor should he be allowed to. Bartkowicz is the type of person that deserves his punishment

He also had over 200 plants and 12 patients.

I don't know why we are even talking about him. He was completely abusing the system. Which in turn makes it harder for the people that really enjoy growing and puts a bad label on people who do.

Bartkowicz shouldn't even be considered in the conversation. He broke the law in my opinion.

If he didn't know, then he should have hired a lawyer to consult him. Instead he went on tv bragging how much he made and how invisible he is in the neighborhood.

He was also operating 1000 ft within a school.
He was arrested within hours of the broadcast

The Bartkowicz case is irrelevant to this thread - you should really check out that youtube page I posted. It has all the attorneys and people who know their stuff talking about what you want to know.

It will answer every question you have plus some!

Good luck

MzHerbalistFarmer said:

The Bartkowicz case is irrelevant to this thread - you should really check out that youtube page I posted. It has all the attorneys and people who know their stuff talking about what you want to know.

It will answer every question you have plus some!

Good luck

Click to expand...

You are most correct- BARKOWITZ was also charged with "trafficing" which is the federal definition of plant counts over 99. Google that if you will. What Jeepster fails to realize is that the Affirmative Defense was enacted for those charged with plant counts over the state allowed '6'. If you claim Affirmative defense you have to PROVE to the court that the number you had was medically required and your doctor will have to also. As almost any patient who has an edibles plant count increased from anywhere from 12 to 24 I have seen. Also I mentioned in BOLD a few times SELF, Not Caregiver. So growing for others is also irrelevant if you have checked off SELF on the Caregiver desigantion form. Bottom line: If you grow more than 6 plants for your self, be prepared to back it up in court with your doctor. When the cards fall, and the jury rules in your favor, YOU SUE THE CRAP OUTTA THE STATE! Ka-Ching, Ka-ching. Remember talk may be cheap or free, but good Lawyers are not! The state cannot afford too many lawsuits esp. when they are already in the hole.

Just to clarify-
As far as MARRIED CAREGIVERS living together and GROWING for up to 5 patients, YES it is legal as of right now, and maybe the scumbags of the state want to reduce that number for their own selfish reasons(to eliminate as much of the home growers as possible). No surpise there, HB1284 and SB 109 are all about that anyways. And as far as plant counts are concerned it really doesn't matter one iota how 'many' you have as long as you have one or more, you are still illegal in the Feds red eyes. They would def take enormous heat for wasting manpower and tax dollars on busting a PERSON for ONE plant though, but hey...the government does it best...wasting our money. Doesn't mean we will tolerate it much longer either.

So again, if you are married, and both people can legally grow for up to 5 patients each, they are legal in the eyes of the state and HB1284. If you can point out the specific lines (with numbers) in HB1284 that says you cannot, I'd (we'd) love to see it. Because it ain't there and it's a loophole that the dumbass politicians didn't even see... again. And better yet, it's a loophole they cannot ever close... because denying two married people the right to legally grow for others is discrimination based on marrital status... again. The defense rests.

So pretty much you're saying if two roomates wanted to be caregivers one would have to move out, correct? Pretty lame!

Is this pretty much standard state to state?

No disrespect macgyver, but I'm not failing to recognize anything.

It seems like there are two parts to this.

First, whether or not two caregivers can grow in the same house for 10 patients and themselves. My position is no, that there can only be one caregiver per house/address/whatever. That's open for interpretation.

Second, my point using bartkowitz was simply that he thought he was compliant as well, just as you all are talking about being, even though none of you have any idea until someone comes knocking or there is a court case. It is silly to me to think that people are totally ignorant of the law/enforcement just by thinking they have the 'right' to act as they wish.

LOL at anyone thinking they can sue the state for something MMJ related. I'll happily eat my words but it won't happen. Good luck though.

edit. we can argue and disagree all we want until there is a court case. The way I am compliant, it won't be me.

Mr. Weash first off a good idea would be to get involved where you currently live, If you are wanting to help people why not help those around you. If you live in a state where there is no MMJ, Who better to start the movement or further the movement then yourself,we can add more states to the list. The market is flooded with "xtra Meds" since MMC's have to provide 70% of thier meds. If you do sell to MMC's you need a federal tax I.D. Read h.b.1204 a couple of times. Watch for patients trying to milk the caregivers for free meds on craigslist. I will only help those I trust, If you think you are their CG, (You sign up a pat. and agree to what ever for compinsation, and they go out and sign up another CG, and dont tell you they signed up somebody else) and you get introuble you will be SOL. I call them CG jumpers a bunch of bs. In theroy it would be easier to be in the black market less restictions just more jail time, if you are dumb enough to get cought!

jeepster420 said:

No disrespect macgyver, but I'm not failing to recognize anything.

It seems like there are two parts to this.

First, whether or not two caregivers can grow in the same house for 10 patients and themselves. My position is no, that there can only be one caregiver per house/address/whatever. That's open for interpretation.

Second, my point using bartkowitz was simply that he thought he was compliant as well, just as you all are talking about being, even though none of you have any idea until someone comes knocking or there is a court case. It is silly to me to think that people are totally ignorant of the law/enforcement just by thinking they have the 'right' to act as they wish.

LOL at anyone thinking they can sue the state for something MMJ related. I'll happily eat my words but it won't happen. Good luck though.

edit. we can argue and disagree all we want until there is a court case. The way I am compliant, it won't be me.

Click to expand...

Jeepster- Fair enough if you think you are also in compliance. But you failed to post the rebuttal to my statement that 2 married caregivers can grow for 5 patients each and live in the same house. That statement simply does not exist in HB1284 as it stands right now. No interperatation required. (unless you can show us all where that is). Until you, or someone else posts that info, I (actually my lawyer) is correct. Again, the cards are thrown down, and I call your bluff.

The statement that you cannot grow your own meds if you are growing for others IS in HB1284, I did see that. Which is also discriminatory as the state assumes you cannot provide for yourself even though you can provide for others. Have to see about getting that trash overturned. It seems the politicians here are very self centered and it shows in their handiwork. November is right around the corner and I cannot wait. Time to de-throne more asshats.

Barkowitz was/is a fool- No doubt there. Not only was he very illegal, he bragged about it. Politicians, TV and the media cannot help you...they can only hurt you.

There are already lawsuits against the states of California, Colorado and Michigan for MMJ related issues, and it looks like the patients will win. I post some current examples in a separate thread if anyone wishes to see them. A quick Google search returns over 425,000 hits. Lots to see there.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=MMJ+lawsuit&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

MacGuyver4.2.0 said:

Jeepster- Fair enough if you think you are also in compliance. But you failed to post the rebuttal to my statement that 2 married caregivers can grow for 5 patients each and live in the same house. That statement simply does not exist in HB1284 as it stands right now. No interperatation required. (unless you can show us all where that is). Until you, or someone else posts that info, I (actually my lawyer) is correct. Again, the cards are thrown down, and I call your bluff.

The statement that you cannot grow your own meds if you are growing for others IS in HB1284, I did see that. Which is also discriminatory as the state assumes you cannot provide for yourself even though you can provide for others. Have to see about getting that trash overturned. It seems the politicians here are very self centered and it shows in their handiwork. November is right around the corner and I cannot wait. Time to de-throne more asshats.

Barkowitz was/is a fool- No doubt there. Not only was he very illegal, he bragged about it. Politicians, TV and the media cannot help you...they can only hurt you.

There are already lawsuits against the states of California, Colorado and Michigan for MMJ related issues, and it looks like the patients will win. I post some current examples in a separate thread if anyone wishes to see them. A quick Google search returns over 425,000 hits. Lots to see there.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=MMJ+lawsuit&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Click to expand...

I hope it's clear that I'm just looking to have a discussion regardless of whether we agree or not. I'm not trying to be disrespectful.

I don't have the time right now, and I will happily eat my words, but doesn't the new legislation say something along the lines of, 'caregivers can't come together (live together) for the purposes of caregiving/growing/whatever. To me, that says that under no circumstances can there be two caregivers in one house. I think you're saying that marriage would trump 1284 or something, but then we're assuming you've been arrested or otherwise charged, why else would we be having this talk? Obviously you could grow for ten patients, but I'm assuming we're discussing legal, compliant grows.

I'm curious if you're attorney is MMJ related or not. Would you care to post which attorney? You seem to be standing on the opinion of your attorney, and I'm curious whether MMJ related attorneys are actually recommending this practice of 2 caregivers per house, or if your attorney said something like, 'I'm sure you'll be fine. We'll sue if you get in trouble.' It's an important distinction.

I'll do my research and find the language I'm looking for, but I hope for you to expand on you throwing the attorney card.

MacGuyver4.2.0 said:

Jeepster- Fair enough if you think you are also in compliance. But you failed to post the rebuttal to my statement that 2 married caregivers can grow for 5 patients each and live in the same house. That statement simply does not exist in HB1284 as it stands right now. No interperatation required. (unless you can show us all where that is). Until you, or someone else posts that info, I (actually my lawyer) is correct. Again, the cards are thrown down, and I call your bluff.

The statement that you cannot grow your own meds if you are growing for others IS in HB1284, I did see that.

Click to expand...

Ummm I don't think you were very good at the interpretation of on that last statement. HB10-1284 says that if you list somebody as your caregiver, then you can not grow for others.
I believe their intent was that if you are incapacitated enough to require a caregiver, then you really wouldn't be able to grow for others. Here is the actual verbiage from HB10-1284, read it carefully:
(c) A PATIENT WHO HAS DESIGNATED A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FOR HIMSELF OR HERSELF MAY NOT BE DESIGNATED AS A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FOR ANOTHER PATIENT.

I also seriously doubt that 2 caregivers can combine their grows, and I don't think that being married will allow an exception to the law. But that's my opinion and not a legal basis. Please be careful about misleading people with legal advice that may have yet to be proven in a courtroom. Here is exactly what the law states:
(b) TWO OR MORE PRIMARY CAREGIVERS SHALL NOT JOIN TOGETHER FOR THE PURPOSE OF CULTIVATING MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to provide further information showing that your opinion is just that, an opinion. It would really suck for somebody to get arrested on you opinion without seeking out actual legal advice.

Jeepster may be a new law student or a paralegal.

Barkowitz knew he wasn't in compliance. If he didn't then he shouldn't have been growing anyway.

SoCoMMJ said:

Ummm I don't think you were very good at the interpretation of on that last statement. HB10-1284 says that if you list somebody as your caregiver, then you can not grow for others.
I believe their intent was that if you are incapacitated enough to require a caregiver, then you really wouldn't be able to grow for others. Here is the actual verbiage from HB10-1284, read it carefully:
(c) A PATIENT WHO HAS DESIGNATED A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FOR HIMSELF OR HERSELF MAY NOT BE DESIGNATED AS A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FOR ANOTHER PATIENT.

I also seriously doubt that 2 caregivers can combine their grows, and I don't think that being married will allow an exception to the law. But that's my opinion and not a legal basis. Please be careful about misleading people with legal advice that may have yet to be proven in a courtroom. Here is exactly what the law states:
(b) TWO OR MORE PRIMARY CAREGIVERS SHALL NOT JOIN TOGETHER FOR THE PURPOSE OF CULTIVATING MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to provide further information showing that your opinion is just that, an opinion. It would really suck for somebody to get arrested on you opinion without seeking out actual legal advice.

Click to expand...

Wow. Maybe it was late or I missed the boat entirely, not sure. But the posts I made SHOW clearly that you DO NOT have to designate another party as your 'primary caregiver'. You can select- SELF in the little box on the caregiver form (I posted part of it in this thread for all to see). This means you have NOT designated anyone else 'Primary Caregiver'. Now if one is providing their OWN meds, they CAN also be named as 'caregiver' for OTHERS, correct? For up to FIVE patients, if I am not mistaken. By the logic you have posted, husband and wife patients who LIVE together in the same house (because they are married, and were long before 1284 or Amendment 20) cannot be caregivers for others simply because they live in the same dwelling... because they are married. I hate to spell it out again but that is highly unconstitutional and against CO Amendment 20 at it's core. If it came down to a trial by jury I am quite sure that the jury would rule in favor of a happily married couple who are persecuted by the state for an alledged violation of HB1284 on grounds of being married. NOWHERE in HB1284 does it mention that married couples cannot be patients, be caregiver and cultivate in compliance with the law. Show me the exact verbiage please.

If people have already been licensed BY THE STATE, prior to the passge of HB1284 within the scenario above, then I'd venture to say that the STATE itself is now GUILTY of creating the so-called illegal situation in the first place. There are scores of married 'patients' who are also named primary caregivers for others in CO and I know quite a few. Maybe it's time for a major class-action lawsuit. I'm ready... how about the rest of you?

Mr. Weash said:

Jeepster may be a new law student or a paralegal.

Click to expand...

Not even close. Just a patient.

I read your previous post.

I am not a lawyer and I suspect that you aren't either.
Shouting to the world that married caregivers have an exception to the law and can go right ahead and combine grows for 72 plants may not be the best advice to give people looking to stay out of jail.

SoCoMMJ-
Duly noted. It is of course, up to each individual and their respective legal counsel to determine what is at stake, as always. But you, nor anyone else can disagree that the state just created this situation with the passage of the poorly conceived HB1284. Already the lawsuit gears are turning... stay tuned.

I would rather not risk getting busted and the related court costs and chaos in my personal life than try to interpret the law yourself.

The people making the arrest and everyone involved in the enforcement/incarceration complex would probably see things differently than you do. It's important to realize that different people and groups will interpret this legislation differently.

I've seen that springs MMC's are suing, but are individual growers doing anything more than complaining on web forums?