Authored By:  Patrick McKnight

Published By: Cannabis Law Report


June 21, 2020


On Thursday June 18, 2020, the New Jersey Assembly voted to decriminalize marijuana. The invoice would make up to two ounces of marijuana punishable by a $50 high quality and eradicate the opportunity of jail time. Possession for quantities between two ounces and one pound might be punishable by up to $1,000 in fines or six months in jailtime. The proposal cleared the decrease home of the New Jersey legislature by a 63-10 majority. The Garden State is scheduled for a statewide referendum to legalize marijuana in November.


The invoice, A1897, would mandate a “legal presumption” that possession of up to two ounces “is the authorized possession of medical cannabis or a medical cannabis product” beneath New Jersey legislation. Notably, the proposal additionally requires “virtual expungements.” These expungements would apply to penalties diminished beneath the invoice and can be out there “without need to petition a court for an expungement order granting such result.”


Plans to carry an adult-use legalization invoice for a vote have been scrapped in late 2019 in favor of a November 2020 referendum. A1897 will now proceed to the state senate for approval earlier than going to the Governor’s desk for signature. The New Jersey Senate launched its personal decriminalization which might take away felony penalties for up to one pound. This invoice has not come up for a vote and stays in committee.


Polls counsel 61% of New Jersey voters plan to help the poll measure in November.


On the identical day because the historic vote, hashish reform additionally gained an essential victory on the opposite facet of the Delaware River. In Gass v. 52nd Judicial District, Lebanon County, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dominated {that a} county’s probation coverage banning hashish use couldn’t coexist with immunities supplied to sufferers beneath the Medical Marijuana Act. The court docket heard the case beneath its King’s Bench jurisdiction.


“We are cognizant of the district’s concerns that medical marijuana use by probationers may, in fact, cause difficulties with court supervision and treatment,” Chief Justice Thomas Saylor stated. “Nevertheless, ‘[w]here the language of the governing statute is clear (or clear enough) … the solution is legislative — and not judicial — adjustment.’”


The case concerned three individuals who have been allegedly pressured to cease utilizing medical marijuana beneath Lebanon County’s coverage for people beneath court docket supervision.



Author Patrick McKnight is an Associate within the Litigation Department of Klehr Harrison in Philadelphia, PA.

Source link