P.O.M. (Possesion of Marijuana

[theonew/the?]

What is the name of your state? CA


A few friends and I were pulled over in Bishop due to a window tinting violation. After the officer had told us the reason for the stop and wrote the ticket for the driver, he then handed the ticket to the driver. As he did so, he could smell the scent of burnt marijuana. He asked the driver to step out and ask him where it was in the car. After being told where it is was, he asked everyone to step out and search us and the entire car. He found that all of us had marijuana on us with about 2 grams of it on each person. After searching the car and taking the marijuana, he wrote us all tickets for Possesion of Marijuana and also a ticket for the window tint for the driver. A month had pasted and the court date had come up. We all had the same court date and the same court time. When we appeared, we talked to a public defender to discuss the situation. He had to told us that there were 2 options which were: Pay the ticket fine of $375 w/ losing our license for 1 year, or taking PC 1000 classes and pay $100 and being on a probation period of 18 months. I chose the classes w/ the fine and the probation period becuse i would like to keep it off my record personally. I just wanted to ask if you think the punishment was "too harsh" due to it was less than 1 oz. of marijuana and i was not the driver at the time. I find it to be very difficult to attend these classes not to mention the other 20 AA/NA/MA meeting that i am supposed to attend along with these other classes. I work full time and do school full time so my time is limited as it is. To believe that all this punishment for a simple marijuana ticket is fair would be absurd. Even my counselor in my PC 1000 classes says the only way i should be forced to take these classes is if i were cited for P.O.M. with over 1 oz, or if i were cited on a school campus. Once again i would like to just know your thoughts on this subject and how you feel about this punishment.

Thank you.

 

[seniorjudge]

Once again i would like to just know your thoughts on this subject and how you feel about this punishment.

Sounds like a good deal to me!


(I am avoiding the problem of whether dope should be legal.)

 

[garrula lingua]

That is the fine ($100.), including court penalties and assessments, as set by state law. ($375)

Many Prosecutors form their own diversion program because the consequences are rather high(heh).... that's their choice.

You are very lucky that you were allowed to do DEJ - I could argue successfully in court that mj is excluded from the DEJ program. That leaves you with a drug conviction, and as you are under 21 yo, a loss of your DL for a year.

At least you've managed to keep your DL.
Additionally, you only have to stay on Probation for 18 months -- you can complete the DEJ program in a few months.

My opinion - you got a Prosecutor who doesn't like mj & followed the statute. Fair enough.
You carried the mj; you take the consequences.

You should quit whining and just concentrate on getting this off your record.
A conviction could affect grad school, student aid funding, future employment and also driving for a year.
PS: you could complain to the Judge; but, be prepared to be sentenced. You can be found eligible for DEJ, but not suitable. You don't sound suitable for DEJ to me.

Take the conviction. That way, there's no probation at all.

 

[JustRandy]

The punishment IS absurd! And I think most people would agree with you. Check out LEAP (law enforement against prohibition). Google it. If you don't agree with the laws, get involved in changing them. Until then, you have to abide by them.

Btw, now you can't own a gun either.

 

[CdwJava]

The punishment IS absurd! And I think most people would agree with you. Check out LEAP (law enforement against prohibition). Google it. If you don't agree with the laws, get involved in changing them. Until then, you have to abide by them.

Btw, now you can't own a gun either.

That's new ... where is the gun prohibition for possession of marijuana?

Note that marijuana is the ONLY crime in California that is expunged after two years. No other crime is so blessed. It is already, effectively, decriminalized. The OP can choose to accept the deal and have NO record at all, or he can fight it and likely have a criminal record. Even if expunged, there are many circumstances that will still require his revealing the conviction.

- Carl

 

[JustRandy]

Well, I've just done some digging in recent days and I've discovered that if you get a controlled substance violation, you cannot own a gun. MJ is a controlled substance. I read that at the NCIC site, and/or the ATF site. At first I thought it was just a GA law, but now I see its a nationwide thing. I wish I was wrong.... and I still could be, but from what I read on those sites I came away with the idea that I can't own a gun due to my mj possession charge. I posted it on this forum and no one disagreed with me or corrected me, so I assumed everything I posted was in line.

 

[CdwJava]

Well, I've just done some digging in recent days and I've discovered that if you get a controlled substance violation, you cannot own a gun. MJ is a controlled substance. I read that at the NCIC site, and/or the ATF site. At first I thought it was just a GA law, but now I see its a nationwide thing. I wish I was wrong.... and I still could be, but from what I read on those sites I came away with the idea that I can't own a gun due to my mj possession charge. I posted it on this forum and no one disagreed with me or corrected me, so I assumed everything I posted was in line.

I don't see any prohibition under CA law for the possession or ownership of a firearm as a result of a conviction for marijuana.

Further, I don't see that federal law prohibits it, either, so long as CA does not.

So, as far as I can tell there is no firearm restriction attached to a conviction for marijuana possession (misdemeanor) in CA.

- Carl

 

[JustRandy]

In Cali, It is unlawful for anyone convicted of a felony, or who is a drug addict, present or former mental patient,..... to possess a firearm. http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/CASL.pdf

I don't know what it takes to be labeled a drug addict.

I'm still looking for the federal restriction. Hang on, I have to retrace my footstep.

 

[JustRandy]

The following definitions from the Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 124, outline categories of persons prohibited from receiving firearms included in the NICS Index:

1) Persons who are aliens and are illegally or unlawfully in the United States

Criteria for Entry

The United States Immigration Naturalization Services (USINS) and state law enforcement have the authority to enter and update records for individuals who are aliens and are unlawfully and illegally in the United States.

2) Persons who have renounced their U.S. Citizenship

Criteria for Entry

The Department of State alone has the authority to enter and update records on persons who have renounced their United States citizenship.

3) Persons who have been adjudicated as a mental defective or have been committed to a mental institution

Criteria for Entry

The Department of Veteran Affairs, the Depart-ment of Defense, and state law enforcement have the authority to enter and update records on persons who have been adjudicated as mental defectives or have been committed to mental institutions.

4) Persons who have been discharged from the armed forces under dishonorable discharge conditions

Criteria for Entry

The Department of Defense and the U.S. Coast Guard have the authority to enter and update records on persons who have been discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces.

5) Persons who are unlawful users of or addicted to any controlled substance

Criteria for Entry

The Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, and state law enforcement have the authority to enter and update records on persons who have been unlawful users of or addicted to any controlled substance.

6) Persons who are federally disqualified when a record is not already included in NCIC, III, or the NICS Index

Criteria for Entry

State law enforcement has the authority to enter and update a record on persons who are federally disqualified when records are not already included in the NCIC, III, or the NICS Index.


http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/nicsindex.htm

 

[JustRandy]

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person:

(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) who is a fugitive from justice;

(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;

(5) who, being an alien:

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States;or

(B) except as provided in subsection (2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26));

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) who is subject to a court order that:

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child;and

(C) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child;or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;or

(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition;or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.


http://www.nraila.org/federalfirearms.htm#Sec. 922

Although I can't find anything on this site pertaining to the actual act of possession (outside of commerce or interstates), I'm still left with the impression possession is illegal if you are an "unlawful user of any controlled substance".

 

[JustRandy]

Also, I've read accounts on this forum of people who get phone calls from the ATF telling them they can't own a gun due to a controlled substance violation. Anyway, I've researched for days on the subject and came away with the impression that I better not have any guns around me or risk getting a felony possession charge.... all over a bag of weed I had yrs ago. If I'm wrong on the subject, please let me know. I would love to get another 22 to have around my homestead. The other day I just seen a bunch of erie footprints in the woods after the snow melted. Not sure what they are, but hopefully a little flashlight and a key chain knife will protect me, since that's all the government will let me have.

 

[CdwJava]

In Cali, It is unlawful for anyone convicted of a felony, or who is a drug addict, present or former mental patient,..... to possess a firearm. http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/CASL.pdf

I don't know what it takes to be labeled a drug addict.

I'm still looking for the federal restriction. Hang on, I have to retrace my footstep.

In CA it generally requires a narcotics registration or commitment to a treatment program for said addiction to qualify under 12021(a)(1). While IN treatment for marijuana, he may be forbidden to possess a firearm, but I would seriously doubt that anyone would kick in his door checking. Marijuana is not a huge deal out here.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

There are exceptions under federal law that allow the states to make a determination restoring a person's firearms rights. And since it is the state that most closely monitors and enforces firearms purchases and not generally the feds, if the state of CA is not going to forbid possession of a firearm for less than an ounce of pot, I doubt the feds are going to waste their time, either.

And the federal defintion for addict is:

As used in this subchapter:
802 (1) The term "addict" means any individual who habitually uses
any narcotic drug so as to endanger the public morals, health,
safety, or welfare, or who is so far addicted to the use of
narcotic drugs as to have lost the power of self-control with
reference to his addiction.​

That will be nearly impossible to prove for a charge of marijuna possession. The threshold is too high.

- Carl

 

[JustRandy]

That's the federal definition of addict, not necessarily california's definition. And if you read on down from where you copied that from you'll see a definition for controlled substances. It appears to include mj too since every schedule seems to be listed. But anyway, are you saying that if I move to california I can own all the rifles n shotguns I want, legally? Even though I have a conviction in OH for possession under xx grams (I had about 3 grams at the time). I just want to be very clear on this because if it is indeed against the law, the punishment is harsh and includes a felony charge. Please understand when you use phrases like, "I doubt they will do anything..." or "I don't think"... it doesn't make me feel much more confident.

 

[CdwJava]

That's the federal definition of addict, not necessarily california's definition.

CA does not define a marijuana user as an addict for purposes of 12021(a)(1). If so, no one bothered to inform law enforcement.

Per H&S 11156:

(b) (1) For purposes of this section, "addict" means a person
whose actions are characterized by craving in combination with one or
more of the following:
(A) Impaired control over drug use.
(B) Compulsive use.
(C) Continued use despite harm.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a person whose drug-seeking
behavior is primarily due to the inadequate control of pain is not an
addict within the meaning of this section.​

And in the Penal Code an addict is one who is a registered narcotic registrant - which excludes marijuana. An argument can be made per 12021(a)(1) that a marijuana user currently in a court-ordered treatment program is subject to the firearms prohibition, but not simply the conviction.

But anyway, are you saying that if I move to california I can own all the rifles n shotguns I want, legally? Even though I have a conviction in OH for possession under xx grams (I had about 3 grams at the time). I just want to be very clear on this because if it is indeed against the law, the punishment is harsh and includes a felony charge. Please understand when you use phrases like, "I doubt they will do anything..." or "I don't think"... it doesn't make me feel much more confident.

Ohio is the one that makes the determination for the prohibition - not CA. If you go to CA from OH and are not otherwise prohibited from purchasing a firearm, sure, you can buy one. But, if under OH law your conviction disqualifies you on state or federal grounds, then you're out of luck.

I don't know OH law, but in CA a red light ticket is a more serious offense than a marijuana ticket (based upon the fine, anyway), and marijuana possession by itself is not an exclusion under CA law to firearms possession.

- Carl