Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

discogeek t1_iz0ogc1 wrote

First, not sure why we need an application process for this. State government knows who exactly is convicted of marijuana possession, yet they're making people be proactive in a situation where there's no solid reason to do so. I mean, unless there's someone out there who would rather *not* have this removed from their record.

Second, the article is click-bait. the headline states 90% are rejected precisely to piss you off, but if you read the article they state "Although the reasons for so many being denied remain largely unknown..." As in (and I'd suspect) a ton of applications "I murdered my neighbor while smoking pot so I should be pardoned" which doesn't fly.

231

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz0vrdi wrote

90% are rejected because it must only be a charge indicating a small amount of pot. If at all the individual was charged with small pot charge coupled with a paraphernalia charge, they are automatically denied. Which inevitably happens 9/10 times because a plastic bag containing pot is considered paraphernalia. We need to get with the times. It's not a scheduled one narcotic. It is NOT worse than coke or meth.

122

victorix58 t1_iz27wek wrote

As as a criminal defense attorney, I have NEVER seen a small amount of marijuana that wasn't charged with drug paraphernalia.

If they rejected pardons because it has to be separate from this, I'm surprised the pardons were granted in 10% of cases.

Wolf sucks.

39

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz2cved wrote

I agree. Who would carrying it in their pocket without a bag or without a smoking tool? They would probably charge your pocket as paraphernalia for that matter haha. Thank you for your professional advice and comment. Wolf certainly does suck. He makes it seem like he wants to help people out, but does the opposite.

17

uraniumstingray t1_iz2dolc wrote

“Yeah this is my weed pocket I just keep my loose weed in here because a bag is paraphernalia I fill it up every morning when I put my pants on”

19

irishgambin0 t1_iz2lmin wrote

i waa going to say, i know countless people who were caught with weed and every single one of them get a paraphanelia charge along with the possession charge.

8

FHatzor t1_iz33u33 wrote

Yea, and another charge if they used a cell phone to call their dealer, and another charge if they drove with friends to the pickup, and another charge if they were near a park, school or church, and another charge if, and if, and if... ad fucking nauseam.

7

_jeremybearimy_ t1_iz104i0 wrote

Good news, last I heard a few months ago the Biden administration had started the process to re-schedule it federally.

13

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz10hd3 wrote

I'll believe it when I see it. A lot of politicians have said a lot of things about reducing restrictions to pot. Also, the federal government takes FOREVER to get anything done. So, even if this happens, it will take years and years. Hopefully not though.

42

irishgambin0 t1_iz2m265 wrote

same. they did a temporary rescheduling of cannabis a few years back, and that expired recently. so they renewed it again, while putting out statements of permanent rescheduling since the first temporary reschedule. so i'll believe it when i see it.

3

Expandexplorelive t1_iz47702 wrote

Temporary rescheduling? Where did you see that?

1

irishgambin0 t1_iz4gm5m wrote

my mistake, i think it's fentanyl that got temporarily rescheduled. i'm always "weighing" drug scheduling vs. marijuana and fentanyl. and let's just say i smoked a little marijuana yesterday and got them mixed up.

2

little_brown_bat t1_iz3hhuz wrote

Yep, then while it's still in limbo, the next politician to hold the office undoes what the previous one did. Same thing apparently happens with projects at NASA, so nothing ever gets accomplished.

3

djarvis77 t1_iz0vb97 wrote

> As in (and I'd suspect) a ton of applications "I murdered my neighbor while smoking pot so I should be pardoned" which doesn't fly.

Lol, murder. Come on. More like as in (and this was from another article on it) the weed conviction was paired with "Paraphernalia" or a host of any other, lesser, but not pardonable charges.

The thing is, many of the weed busts get pleaded down to the lesser charges in the first place. So people could be sending those in as well. The paraphernalia charge is a big one though, since weed smoking is often paired with some device or another.

You make a great point about the application process, for sure.

28

rcher87 t1_iz10nke wrote

To your final point - there could also be really dumb procedural reasons that are easily rectified that got someone rejected.

eg - you filed it without signing the third-to-last page, so once your lawyer sees that, sign it and resubmit and you’re fine.

I’m hoping for that one - like ballots/fixing ballots.

8

psu3312 t1_iz1jr3q wrote

There is an application process because like anything else, they want $$$ from you in order to remove it from your record. "processing fee"

4

ScienceWasLove t1_iz23g3p wrote

Aren’t some of the rejections because people have plead down higher charges (like dealing) to lesser charges, like possession?

1