Judge To Cops: Return Mans Marijuana

[Tombs]

Marijuana has a shelf life? Doesn't it have to be dry in order to burn?

No clue about weed, but tobacco isn't too good after it has sat around for an extended period. Haven't really had an issue with cigarettes besides them getting a little bland.

 

[remauto1187]

Marijuana has a shelf life? Doesn't it have to be dry in order to burn?

It gets all dried out and crumbles and for some reason loses its potency when it gets to that state. I would guess that for some reason the THC breaks down.

But thats what a friend of a friends cousins friend told me!

 

[Bunnykid68]

Marijuana has a shelf life? Doesn't it have to be dry in order to burn?

Just like cigarettes and cigars, don't want them too dry I would assume

 

[IndyDave1776]

This reminds me of a certain farm in Kentucky where I am sure they periodically laugh at about a particular dumb Yankee story. Tobacco which is to be used for smoking (as opposed to chew) has to be smoked (in the sense of using the barn for a giant smokehouse) before it is suitable for use as cigarette, cigar, or pipe tobacco. As it happened, a certain truck driver saw a barn being used for this purpose near an exit and stopped (to verify before calling the fire department) thinking the barn was on fire. The amused farm hands explained the process of harvesting and smoking the tobacco, suppressing a chuckle while doing so. Immediately afterward, the owner arrived paying particular attention to the unexpected visitor and managed to suppress laughter after hearing the story repeated.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

True enough, but then why do they not either appeal the order in the state appellate court or go federal and appeal to Caesar?

All good questions for their city legal. I don't know that you CAN appeal it to federal court, though. You can't appeal a trial that hasn't happened. They also aren't trying to appeal the lack of conviction, so how do you get an appellate court to hear it?

I've never been in the position of having been given an illegal order by a judge, and how one goes about appealing it is well beyond both my experience and my knowledge.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Using your logic on just this issue, I would take you to be one of the first police officers to sign up for gun confiscations right?

And this is why other nations are surpassing us as far as education is concerned. Clearly reading comprehension isn't one of your stronger suits, as your post illustrates a complete lack of understanding of a clearly written, and basically understood post.

I would be interested on what planet your "logic" takes these statements:

I'm not some mindless automoton that will go blindly following their orders without question....

....especially when it contadicted by another law, and involves employing force upon another individual.

and tries to imply that I "would.... be one of the first police officers to sign up for gun confiscations."

I suggest if you try to paint anyone, as anything, you use something that actually makes sense, and doesn't make you appear as if you simply want to say something, just to say it... content be damned.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Personally, I like the idea of giving it to a judge to return. Let him put his butt on the line, we will see what he says when the DEA (trying to make a point) locks him up.

 

[Fargo]

All of which is irrelevant. The fact the case was tried in state court doesn't mean you can now break federal law. If you do, you may end up with a brand new trial but with YOU as the defendant in a federal court.

They aren't protesting the outcome of the trial. They are refusing to comply with an order that would, apparently, put them at odds with federal law. Big difference.

How does obeying the court's order break federal law? I am far from certain that it does.

Joe

 

[Fargo]

All good questions for their city legal. I don't know that you CAN appeal it to federal court, though. You can't appeal a trial that hasn't happened. They also aren't trying to appeal the lack of conviction, so how do you get an appellate court to hear it?

I've never been in the position of having been given an illegal order by a judge, and how one goes about appealing it is well beyond both my experience and my knowledge.

Any final order of a court in any proceeding is generally appealable as a matter of right. Many other orders are appealable with leave on interlocutory appeal.

There doesn't have to be a trial or a conviction or anything like that. There just has to be an appealable order from the court. In this case, it appears there is, specifically the order to return property.

Filing the appeal is easy, you figure out which trial or appellate rule the order falls under and the rule will spell out for you what is necessary to perfect the appeal. Generally you file a notice of appeal and then the formal appeal and supporting brief but the precise process varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. It happens every day.

Best,


Joe

 

[np241or]

Take the guns away and give everybody pot.

 

[steveh_131]

Take the guns away and give everybody pot.

This times zero.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This times zero.

I think, and hope, he was pointing out the anti-2A mindset. I would love to see what his opinion would be if the pot was replaced with a Class III item.

 

[steveh_131]

I think, and hope, he was pointing out the anti-2A mindset. I would love to see what his opinion would be if the pot was replaced with a Class III item.

Yeah, I know what he was pointing out. I just think it's silly to equate this with 'giving everybody pot'.

And I don't like the attitude that I like guns so they should be legal, but I don't like pot so it should be illegal.

 

[IndyDave1776]

All good questions for their city legal. I don't know that you CAN appeal it to federal court, though. You can't appeal a trial that hasn't happened. They also aren't trying to appeal the lack of conviction, so how do you get an appellate court to hear it?

I've never been in the position of having been given an illegal order by a judge, and how one goes about appealing it is well beyond both my experience and my knowledge.

The judge himself offered the choice between returning it or appealing his decision. As for going federal, I would assume that a call to the DEA would be all that would be necessary in order to initiate federal involvement is there were to be any under any circumstances. If not, then let the man have his weed with the DEA's implied blessing.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The judge himself offered the choice between returning it or appealing his decision. As for going federal, I would assume that a call to the DEA would be all that would be necessary in order to initiate federal involvement is there were to be any under any circumstances. If not, then let the man have his weed with the DEA's implied blessing.

They may not be appealing the decision. They may be taking up option #3, working with the DEA and building a case against the judge.

But seriously, reading though the info on the subject, Tacoma is the PD that made the arrest, and the County SD is holding the property. The subject went to the SD to get his dope, and they refused stating that Tacoma should be the ones to retrieve the dope and disperse it. And apparently, and I don't know how this works, the judge has no power over the SD.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I'm sure if that were the case, the specifics of the judge's order would be for the TPD to retrieve the weed and disburse it to the victim.

 

[Trigger Time]

And this is why other nations are surpassing us as far as education is concerned. Clearly reading comprehension isn't one of your stronger suits, as your post illustrates a complete lack of understanding of a clearly written, and basically understood post.

I would be interested on what planet your "logic" takes these statements:





and tries to imply that I "would.... be one of the first police officers to sign up for gun confiscations."

I suggest if you try to paint anyone, as anything, you use something that actually makes sense, and doesn't make you appear as if you simply want to say something, just to say it... content be damned.

Ok well the way your defending this departments actions makes me believe otherwise and your post does conflict your precious posts on the issue.
Don't insult my intelligence sir. The fact that you wear a badge does not make you anymore intelligent than me. You might get away with a power complex at work but on here we are equals. Good day.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ok well the way your defending this departments actions makes me believe otherwise and your post does conflict your precious posts on the issue.
Don't insult my intelligence sir. The fact that you wear a badge does not make you anymore intelligent than me. You might get away with a power complex at work but on here we are equals. Good day.

I agree 100%. I've never needed a badge to point out poor logic. You tried to be "cute," with that lil quip about me being the first to "sign up for gun confiscation," and you got called on it. I responded, and now, you want to cry foul? Word of advice, If you want to keep a discussion civil, how about you address members in the same fashion.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm sure if that were the case, the specifics of the judge's order would be for the TPD to retrieve the weed and disburse it to the victim.

Not quite, Tacoma PD was supposed to send a release over to the county, rather than simply say "give this back to so-n-so." I don't know if they did, but County says it's not releasing anything, and that Tacoma needs to pick up the dope and give it to the guy themselves. This seems like a classic case of CYA.

 

[HotD]

There are three choices that I can see. Is there another one?

1. Do what the judge orders, or go to jail. If there is a LEO who will arrest the cops.
2. Appeal the judge's decision and comply with the appeal court's decision.
3. Make a phone call and have a federal agency seize the substance, placing it outside the judge's scope of jurisdiction.