Homeless in Arizona

Second this isn't the solution to the problem, but it may be a possible temporary fix for the problem. And it is a very risky fix that could lead to you being put in jail.

Third I would run this by some lawyers before using it, which is why I included them in this email.

Currently police officers in Arizona are falsely arresting medical marijuana patients who are stone cold sober for DUI, simply because they have marijuana metabolites in their body.

Police officers in Arizona are also falsely arresting medical marijuana patients for possession of hashish and other concentrated forms of marijuana.

I think this might be a way for those people to get a judge to allow a jury to see the laws that tell their side of the story.

Who every wrote Arizona's medical marijuana laws almost certainly intended to allow medical marijuana patient to use any form of medical marijuana, which includes hashish and other concentrated forms of marijuana to treat their ills.

In ARS 36-2801.7 and ARS 36-2801.15 of Arizona's medical marijuana laws it gives the following definition of marijuana, which if you ask any reasonable person includes hashish and other concentrated forms of marijuana:

”MARIJUANA” MEANS ALL PARTS OF ANY PLANT OF THE GENUS CANNABIS WHETHER GROWING OR NOT, AND THE SEEDS OF SUCH PLANT.

and

”USABLE MARIJUANA” MEANS THE DRIED FLOWERS OF THE MARIJUANA PLANT, AND ANY MIXTURE OR PREPARATION THEREOF,

ARS 36-2802.D, clearly says if you are a medical marijuana patient you can not be arrested for DUI simply because you have marijuana metabolites in you body:

ARS 36-2802.D Operating, navigating or being in actual physical control of any motor vehicle, aircraft or motorboat while under the influence of marijuana, except that a registered qualifying patient shall not be considered to be under the influence of marijuana solely because of the presence of metabolites or components of marijuana that appear in insufficient concentration to cause impairment.

Those DUI laws are:

28-1381.A. It is unlawful for a person to drive or be in actual physical control of a vehicle in this state under any of the following circumstance

3. While there is any drug defined in section 13-3401 or its metabolite in the person's body.

13-3401. Definitions

4. "Cannabis" ...

Peter Wilson who is a Phoenix NORML member has a similar problem when he went on trial for marijuana possession.

Arizona law used to require that people that sell illegal drugs, such as marijuana purchase an Arizona Dope Dealers license.

Peter Wilson had purchased such a license, but the judge in his kangaroo trial would not allow him to show his Arizona Dope Dealers license to the jury.

Arizona law used to require that people who are licensed to sell illegal drugs in Arizona purchase tax stamps for their illegal drugs and affix them on to their illegal drugs.

Again Peter Wilson had purchased marijuana tax stamps for all of his marijuana and had affixed a marijuana tax stamp on to each of his baggies of marijuana as required by Arizona law.

But again the judge in his kangaroo trial ordered that the marijuana tax stamps be removed from the bags of marijuana so that the jury in his trial could not see the tax stamps.

Ricky Duncan had a similar problem when it came to Arizona concealed weapons laws.

Ricky Duncan came up with what I think is an ingenious way to get the judge to let the jury see the laws that allowed people to carry concealed weapons.

Currently Arizona has probably the most liberal concealed carry laws in the nation. Almost anyone in Arizona can carry a concealed weapon without getting any licenses or permits.

But it wasn't that way at the time Ricky Duncan came up with his "concealed carry document".

In those days carrying a concealed weapon was illegal per ARS 13-3102. Something that Ricky Duncan discovered was unconstitutional.

Ricky Duncan had read the "Records of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910" and found that on pages 678 and 679 they specifically voted that the soon to be state of Arizona would NOT have the power to regulate concealed weapons.

You can find that book at in the ASU Law Library, the U of A Law Library or in the law library in the Arizona State Capital complex.

Ricky Duncan had the same problem as NORML's Peter Wilson.

If you get arrested for possessing a concealed weapon the judge in the kangaroo court is going to say you can't show the jury the transcripts of the Arizona Territorial Convention where they voted that the state of Arizona did NOT have the power to regulate concealed weapons.

So Ricky Duncan came up with this ingenious way to get the judge to let the jury see the laws that allowed people to carry concealed weapons.

First I should say that Ricky Duncan's "concealed carry document" is not a magic "get out of jail card".

It won't prevent a cop from falsely arresting you on bogus concealed weapons charges.

If you use Ricky Duncan's "concealed carry document" you could be convicted of violating Arizona's concealed weapons laws and spend some time in prison.

Ricky Duncan told me that the handful of people have used his "concealed carry document" were all convicted of concealed weapons violations after being arrested.

According to Ricky all of these people did appeal the convictions, and at that point the charges were dropped.

Probably because the prosecutor thought that Arizona's concealed weapons law could be declared unconstitutional if the appeal was successful.

I am certain that if you Ricky Duncan's 'concealed carry document' is modified to be used for medical marijuana users who are arrested for either DUI or possession of hashish are facing the same risks that people who used it for illegally carrying concealed weapons faced.

Ricky Duncan's 'concealed carry document' attempts to get a judge to allow you to show a jury copies of the Records of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910, in which they voted that the state of Arizona did NOT have the right to regulate concealed weapons.

Ricky Duncan's intent was to show a jury that the concealed weapons laws are unconstitutional and hopefully get the jury will vote to acquit you of the charges.

And of course the same line of reasoning applies when you change the subject from concealed weapon laws to medical marijuana laws.

The document won't prevent you from being arrested, but hopefully it will get the judge to allow you to show a jury the laws that say it is legal for medical marijuana patients to have marijuana metabolites in their body with out being guilty of DUI, and that it is legal for medical marijuana patients to possess hashish and other concentrated forms of marijuana.

Here is how Ricky Duncan's 'concealed carry document' works and how it can be modified to work for medical marijuana patients.

First create the 'concealed carry document'.

Second sign the document and have it notarized.

Third file this document with the COUNTY RECORDER in the county you live in. I think that will cost you $9.

This is a MUST! This gives the document and YOU an official government number and which is used to get the judge to allow the jury to see the document, and the laws the document mentions.

Fourth - If you are arrested give the cop the document and tell the cop that the document gives you the RIGHT to carry concealed weapons in Arizona.

The cop will be jumping with joy, and will be thinking "Wow! This nut job is giving me a document that will make the conviction a slam dunk".

The cop will then give the document to the prosecutor who will use the document as evidence against you.

Of course that is Ricky Duncan's plan.

If the document is show to a jury, the jury will be forced to see the part of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910 which says the state of Arizona does not have the right to regulate concealed weapons.

And of course the hope here is that the jury will acquit you.

Of course don't count on that. It didn't happen in any of the initial cases this document was used in.

Here Ricky Duncan's 'concealed carry document'

Declaration of Intent to Carry Concealed Weapons

Pursuant to an Act of the United States Congress signed by President Taft [21 August 1911] and a concurrent vote of the people of the Territory of Arizona [12 December 1911] in accordance with the Enabling Act [10 June 1910] (authorizing Arizona statehood) which demands that the intent of all articles and sections of the Arizona Constitution shall be in accordance with the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence;

I, ______________________________, now domiciled in the County of ________________, State of Arizona, hereby accept, without bias, the intent of Article II, Section 26 of the Arizona Constitution, determined by a vote of the Constitutional Convention [25 November 1910], granting the State of Arizona no power or authority to regulate my right to bear arms (openly or concealed), I hereby declare my intent to exercise this right in defense of self or the state, without the impairment of a state-issued permit. This declaration is made public as a courtesy to all peace officers in recognition that ignorance of these facts could jeopardize their bonds.

The Records of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910 Pages 678 and 679. Edited by: John S. Goff (C) The Supreme Court of Arizona

Mr. Chairman: Are there any objections or corrections to Section 32?

Mr. Baker: Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out all of Section 32. I never in all my life found it necessary to carry a six-shooter and I have passed through nearly all the scencs (sic) and experiences of this wild and unsettled country. Carrying arms is dangerous. It is a very dangerous thing to oneself and to one's associates and should not be permitted under any circumstances. I have seen lives lost and innocent blood spilled just through the carrying of arms, concealed weapons under one's coat or shirt. It is most dangerous and vile; a practice that should never be permitted except in times of war and never in times of peace. Think of it; carrying a six shooter or a knife or some other terrible arm of defense, and then in a moment of heated passion using that weapon. I do not believe in it and I move to strike out that section.

Mr. Webb: I second that motion for I agree with the gentleman from Maricopa that it is a pernicious thing and should not be included in this bill. I, too, in all my experiences, have never seen the time when it was necessary to carry concealed weapons except in times of Indian troubles, and have had many and varied experiences, in cow camps. I have been in many places where some might deem it necessary to come armed, but I did not, nor do I believe it necessary to do so now. We are no longer a frontier country, and if we did not need arms in the early days of pioneering in this country, we do not now, and I second the motion.

Mr. Crutchfield: I move to amend by inserting after the word "impair" in line 9, page 7, the following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime."

Mr. Baker: That is all right and I second the motion.

Mr. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, I move to amend by striking out all of Section 32 and substituting the following in lieu thereof: "The people shall have the right to bear arms for their safety and defense, but the legislature shall regulate the exercise of this right by law."

Mr. Feeney: I second that motion.

Mr. Chairman: The question comes up on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Cochise, Mr. Parsons, to strike out Section 32, and insert in lieu thereof his amendment. Those in favor of this motion answer "aye", opposed "nay". The motion is lost. The question now comes up on the amendment offered by Mr. Crutchfield to insert after the word "impaired" in line 9, page 7, the following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime." Those in favor of this motion answer "aye", opposed "nay". The secretary will call the roll. Roll Call showed 22 "Ayes" 23 "Nays".

Mr. Chairman: The motion is lost, and Section 32 will stand approved as read unless there are other amendments. Are there any objections to Section 33?

SECTION 32: The right of the individual citizens to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men.

_____________________________
(Signature)
_____________________________
(Date)
State of Arizona, County of _________________________________

sworn and subscribed before me, this _______ day of _________

by ___________________________
Notary Public

I suspect the document also needs a blurb that says "cannabis" is the exact same thing as marijuana, and that medical marijuana patients are allowed to possess and use "cannabis".

That's because the police say "cannabis" is a different drug then marijuana.

Medical marijuana users declaration of Intent to drive and use concentrated marijuana

I, ______________________________, now domiciled in the County of ________________, State of Arizona, hereby declare my intent and right to use and possess hashish and other concentrated forms of marijuana. I also declare my intent and right to drive a vehicle while I have marijuana metabolites in my body, as long as I am not intoxicated.

This declaration is made public as a courtesy to all peace officers in recognition that ignorance of these facts could jeopardize their bonds.

Per the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act ARS 36-2801.7 and ARS 36-2801.15 medical marijuana patients are allowed to use and posses hashish and other forms of concentrated marijuana:

”MARIJUANA” MEANS ALL PARTS OF ANY PLANT OF THE GENUS CANNABIS WHETHER GROWING OR NOT, AND THE SEEDS OF SUCH PLANT.

and

”USABLE MARIJUANA” MEANS THE DRIED FLOWERS OF THE MARIJUANA PLANT, AND ANY MIXTURE OR PREPARATION THEREOF,

ARS 36-2802.D Operating, navigating or being in actual physical control of any motor vehicle, aircraft or motorboat while under the influence of marijuana, except that a registered qualifying patient shall not be considered to be under the influence of marijuana solely because of the presence of metabolites or components of marijuana that appear in insufficient concentration to cause impairment.

sworn and subscribed before me, this _______ day of _________

by ___________________________
Notary Public