Golden State Patient Care Collective
2 star rating
based on 2 reviews
Categories: Drugstores, Medical Centers [Edit]
233 Hwy 174
Colfax, CA 95713
(530) 346-2514
www.goldenstatepatientcarecollec...
REVIEWS HERE:
Rx215.com Prop. 215 and SB-420 Online! We are patients helping patients!!
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
StarBuds Personal Sonoma County Delivery Service
Dispensary Name Starbuds Cannabis Club
Dispensary Address delivery service
City Sonoma County
State CA
Zip Code 95448
Phone Number (707) 481-8427
Website URL http://www.starbuds.net
Dispensary Address delivery service
City Sonoma County
State CA
Zip Code 95448
Phone Number (707) 481-8427
Website URL http://www.starbuds.net
S.F. police make second arrest in slaying outside pot club Chronicle Staff Report Tuesday, December 9, 2008
S.F. police make second arrest in slaying outside pot club
Chronicle Staff Report
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
(12-08) 16:17 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- San Francisco police have arrested a second suspect in connection with the slaying of a man in September outside a Mission District medical marijuana dispensary, authorities said today.
Julius Hughes, 24, was arrested Friday at his home in Brentwood, police said. He is accused in the slaying of Roshawn Holden, 23, who was shot to death the night of Sept. 14 as he left the Mr. Nice Guy cannabis club at Duboce Avenue and Valencia Street.
Court records show that Hughes has a history of drug- and weapons-related offenses.
On Sept. 23, police arrested Ijeoma Ogbuagu, 30, in connection with the slaying.
Police said Holden and a friend had just left the marijuana club when they were approached and ordered out of their car at gunpoint. After Holden was robbed, he ran away and was shot as he fled.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Self-Help Law: People v. Mentch Defines Marijuana Caregiver
Self-Help Law: People v. Mentch Defines Marijuana Caregiver
The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Act) (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.5, added by voter initiative in the November 1996 general election provides partial immunity for the possession and cultivation of marijuana to two groups of people: qualified medical marijuana patients and their primary caregivers.
Roger Mentch was arrested in 2003 and convicted in 2005 for possession and cultivation of marijuana for sale in Santa Cruz County. His conviction was overturned on appeal in October 2006, primarily because the appeals court believed the trial judge should not have instructed the jury Mentch was not authorized by the law to sell or distribute marijuana.
The California Supreme Court examined the appeal, and on November 24 held a person is not a "primary caregiver" under the Compassionate Use Act merely because that person is in charge of getting someone's medical marijuana. Giving someone care doesn't mean you're their "primary" caregiver.
A "primary caregiver" is defined in the Compassionate Use Act as "the individual who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that person," The court went further, and unanimously held that not only does a primary caregiver under the Compassionate Use Act have to be what we might traditionally call a primary caregiver, but further held this relationship must also have been commenced at or before the provision of medical marijuana. The court stated: "[W]e conclude a defendant asserting primary caregiver status must prove at a minimum that he or she (1) consistently provided caregiving, (2) independent of any assistance in taking medical marijuana, (3) at or before the time he or she assumed responsibility for assisting with medical marijuana."
Some pertinent language from the Mentch decision is " a primary caregiver must establish he or she satisfies the responsibility clause based on evidence independent of the administration of medical marijuana. Under the Act, a primary caregiver relationship is a necessary antecedent, a predicate for being permitted under state law to possess or cultivate medical marijuana. The possession or cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes cannot serve as the basis for making lawful the possession or cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes; to conclude otherwise would rest the primary caregiver defense on an entirely circular footing."
News Hawk- BM www.rx215.com
Source: The Willits News
Author: Marc Komer
Contact: The Willits News
Copyright: 2008 The Willits News
Website:Self-Help Law: People v. Mentch Defines Marijuana Caregiver
The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Act) (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.5, added by voter initiative in the November 1996 general election provides partial immunity for the possession and cultivation of marijuana to two groups of people: qualified medical marijuana patients and their primary caregivers.
Roger Mentch was arrested in 2003 and convicted in 2005 for possession and cultivation of marijuana for sale in Santa Cruz County. His conviction was overturned on appeal in October 2006, primarily because the appeals court believed the trial judge should not have instructed the jury Mentch was not authorized by the law to sell or distribute marijuana.
The California Supreme Court examined the appeal, and on November 24 held a person is not a "primary caregiver" under the Compassionate Use Act merely because that person is in charge of getting someone's medical marijuana. Giving someone care doesn't mean you're their "primary" caregiver.
A "primary caregiver" is defined in the Compassionate Use Act as "the individual who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that person," The court went further, and unanimously held that not only does a primary caregiver under the Compassionate Use Act have to be what we might traditionally call a primary caregiver, but further held this relationship must also have been commenced at or before the provision of medical marijuana. The court stated: "[W]e conclude a defendant asserting primary caregiver status must prove at a minimum that he or she (1) consistently provided caregiving, (2) independent of any assistance in taking medical marijuana, (3) at or before the time he or she assumed responsibility for assisting with medical marijuana."
Some pertinent language from the Mentch decision is " a primary caregiver must establish he or she satisfies the responsibility clause based on evidence independent of the administration of medical marijuana. Under the Act, a primary caregiver relationship is a necessary antecedent, a predicate for being permitted under state law to possess or cultivate medical marijuana. The possession or cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes cannot serve as the basis for making lawful the possession or cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes; to conclude otherwise would rest the primary caregiver defense on an entirely circular footing."
News Hawk- BM www.rx215.com
Source: The Willits News
Author: Marc Komer
Contact: The Willits News
Copyright: 2008 The Willits News
Website:Self-Help Law: People v. Mentch Defines Marijuana Caregiver
Pot DEALER Choice Ends in Death
A California Medical Cannabis Patients Collective CO-OP
http://cpc.neeetz.com/blog/1903MHB73RCW/view/1269
Pot DEALER Choice Ends in Death
http://cpc.neeetz.com/blog/1903MHB73RCW/view/1269
Pot DEALER Choice Ends in Death
Rachael Hoffman had to choose between prison or working as an informant...
"THE POLICE USED A mini-dealer smoker female to target a medium dealer for a few pounts and they risk'd her life. What right did they have to risk her life for the investigation? Why didn't they Notify the AG like the video says? Why didn't they back out after the sudden changes? Then she was also buying a hand gun....huh with that much cash?? wow I know it doesn't make sense to me.. They claim she offered although they most likely gave her very little option.
Prime example - Never lay down or never roll over. Please patients, friends and community. Let's stop things like this, let's not be tempted by the laws "easy investigation tactics" - "
Read more here http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=5454035
"THE POLICE USED A mini-dealer smoker female to target a medium dealer for a few pounts and they risk'd her life. What right did they have to risk her life for the investigation? Why didn't they Notify the AG like the video says? Why didn't they back out after the sudden changes? Then she was also buying a hand gun....huh with that much cash?? wow I know it doesn't make sense to me.. They claim she offered although they most likely gave her very little option.
Prime example - Never lay down or never roll over. Please patients, friends and community. Let's stop things like this, let's not be tempted by the laws "easy investigation tactics" - "
Read more here http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=5454035
California NORML Release - Dec 21, 2008 News: (1) California NORML agenda for 2009 targets changing federal law: http://www.canorml.org
California NORML Release - Dec 21, 2008 News: (1) California NORML agenda for 2009 targets changing federal law: http://www.canorml.org
California NORML Release - Dec 21, 2008
News:
(1) California NORML agenda for 2009 targets changing federal law:
http://www.canorml.org/news/2009agenda.html
(2) California Police Chiefs Association called on the DEA to raid
medical marijuana facilities and undermine state law, according to a
letter submitted to the House Juciciary Committee.
http://www.canorml.org/news/CPCAtoDEA.html
(3) Warning: Marinol patients being tested for marijuana!
Cal NORML has recently heard increasing reports that Marinol
patients are being drug tested and denied employment for use of
marijuana. In particular, we have heard from legal Prop. 215
patients who were denied jobs despite presenting Marinol
prescriptions after being re-tested specifically for marijuana.
Until recently, Marinol and marijuana were indistinguishable on
the standard drug tests, so that patients with a Marinol prescription
had a valid medical excuse under federal law for testing positive for
marijuana. However, special testing techniques have been developed
that make it possible to distinguish the two by testing for
non-standard cannabinoids that appear in marijuana but not Marinol.
Until recently, these tests were expensive and rarely used except in
high-profile criminal cases. However, it appears that they are now
being routinely used by certain laboratories in cases where Marinol
use is claimed. In particular, we have heard reports of such
testing being used to disqualify Marinol-using Prop 215 patients by
the transportation industry and by Walmart.
Cal NORML has accordingly altered its drug testing advice to
warn against relying on Marinol RXs as a screen for marijuana use.
http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/testing.tips.html
There is of course no valid scientific or health justification
for allowing patients to use Marinol but not marijuana. The only
purpose is to enforce compliance with the law. It is a tribute to
the power and influence of the drug testing industry that they have
prevailed in foisting the costs of this unnecessary and obnoxious
procedure on employers.
Friday, December 19, 2008
a/k/a Tommy Chong (Special: 'Rolled in Paper' Edition) DVD
Hey mannnn,
The deadline for domestic Christm@s orders is Saturday at 12PM (New York time).
We've got a really farrrr out deal for you.
5 percent off your total order (before s&h) from 12AM tonight through 12PM tomorrow (New York time). The 5 percent will be refunded after your lid, I mean your order, ships.
Plus...
Frrrree keychain with every order.
Frrrree CD or DVD. (restrictions apply)
While you're there, pick up the double CD, Where There's Sm*ke, There's Cheech and Chong. It contains two essential, hilarious holiday trax, Santa Claus and His Old Lady, and Moe Money (featuring Rudolph). "Santa Claus is not a musician, Man."
Also pick up... a/k/a Tommy Chong (Special: 'Rolled in Paper' Edition) DVD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)