Urdedpal
New Member
In every state it is a crime to cultivate Cannabis. Under federal law the same crime is referred to as "manufacturing" marijuana.
Under federal law, "manufacturing" is defined as "planting, cultivation, growing or harvesting of a controlled substance." It is a violation of federal law, therefore, not only to grow Cannabis, but also to harvest wild Cannabis plants. It is also considered manufacturing or cultivating to extract, process or cook marijuana to create hashish, or any other concentrated Cannabis product. (State v. Horsely [1979] 596 P2d 661.)
In every state, if a person is convicted of cultivating, manufacturing, drying, or processing marijuana, he or she can be sent to prison. The crime does not require a full-scale Cannabis grow operation. Numerous convictions have resulted from people simply harvesting wild marijuana.
In a 1993 case in Arkansas the court reported that David Craig grew a single, large Cannabis plant outside his place of business and in plain view. The plant was approximately seven feet tall and six feet wide. Prior to his arrest, Craig had taken some leaves from the plant and was drying them inside his office.
The Arkansas Supreme court wasted no time in finding that watering, pruning and generally tending a marijuana plant constitutes "manufacturing." The court went further, however, and explained that even if Craig had done nothing more than pinched leaves from the plant his actions would still constitute "manufacturing" of marijuana since in Arkansas (like most states) "manufacturing" is defined to include processing or harvesting marijuana. (Craig v. State [Ark. 1993] 863 S.W.2d 825.)
A manufacturing conviction can be sustained prior to even planting Cannabis seeds. Danny LaMaster, for example, was convicted of manufacturing marijuana in violation of Missouri law and sentenced to three years in prison, after "the sheriff found a plate with [Cannabis] seeds lying in it between two wet paper towels." In another room, the officers found a fully outfitted growroom, complete with plastic covered windows, fluorescent lights, a thermometer, plant fertilizer and potting soil. This was sufficient evidence, said the Missouri court, that Mr. LaMaster was manufacturing marijuana, although he was obviously in only the early stages of the project. (State v. LaMaster [MoApp. 1991] 811 S.W.2d837.)
"Attempted" Manufacture
Under federal law and state law it is illegal to attempt to grow Cannabis. A conviction for attempted manufacture or cultivation requires proof that the defendant: (1) intended to grow Cannabis', and (2) intentionally carried out some act that was a "substantial step" toward that goal.
In one case, a conviction for attempted manufacture was upheld after police found a nearly completed hydroponics growing system with 198 growing chambers, grow lights, fertilizer, starter pots, water pumps, filters, and an electrical timer. This alone would not have been sufficient evidence since the builder of the system could well have intended to grow an innocuous crop such as tomatoes. Unfortunately however, the police also found a container of viable Cannabis seeds. The combination of the seeds and the hydroponic system was held to satisfy the two elements required for a federal conviction of attempted manufacture of marijuana.
Under federal law, "manufacturing" is defined as "planting, cultivation, growing or harvesting of a controlled substance." It is a violation of federal law, therefore, not only to grow Cannabis, but also to harvest wild Cannabis plants. It is also considered manufacturing or cultivating to extract, process or cook marijuana to create hashish, or any other concentrated Cannabis product. (State v. Horsely [1979] 596 P2d 661.)
In every state, if a person is convicted of cultivating, manufacturing, drying, or processing marijuana, he or she can be sent to prison. The crime does not require a full-scale Cannabis grow operation. Numerous convictions have resulted from people simply harvesting wild marijuana.
In a 1993 case in Arkansas the court reported that David Craig grew a single, large Cannabis plant outside his place of business and in plain view. The plant was approximately seven feet tall and six feet wide. Prior to his arrest, Craig had taken some leaves from the plant and was drying them inside his office.
The Arkansas Supreme court wasted no time in finding that watering, pruning and generally tending a marijuana plant constitutes "manufacturing." The court went further, however, and explained that even if Craig had done nothing more than pinched leaves from the plant his actions would still constitute "manufacturing" of marijuana since in Arkansas (like most states) "manufacturing" is defined to include processing or harvesting marijuana. (Craig v. State [Ark. 1993] 863 S.W.2d 825.)
A manufacturing conviction can be sustained prior to even planting Cannabis seeds. Danny LaMaster, for example, was convicted of manufacturing marijuana in violation of Missouri law and sentenced to three years in prison, after "the sheriff found a plate with [Cannabis] seeds lying in it between two wet paper towels." In another room, the officers found a fully outfitted growroom, complete with plastic covered windows, fluorescent lights, a thermometer, plant fertilizer and potting soil. This was sufficient evidence, said the Missouri court, that Mr. LaMaster was manufacturing marijuana, although he was obviously in only the early stages of the project. (State v. LaMaster [MoApp. 1991] 811 S.W.2d837.)
"Attempted" Manufacture
Under federal law and state law it is illegal to attempt to grow Cannabis. A conviction for attempted manufacture or cultivation requires proof that the defendant: (1) intended to grow Cannabis', and (2) intentionally carried out some act that was a "substantial step" toward that goal.
In one case, a conviction for attempted manufacture was upheld after police found a nearly completed hydroponics growing system with 198 growing chambers, grow lights, fertilizer, starter pots, water pumps, filters, and an electrical timer. This alone would not have been sufficient evidence since the builder of the system could well have intended to grow an innocuous crop such as tomatoes. Unfortunately however, the police also found a container of viable Cannabis seeds. The combination of the seeds and the hydroponic system was held to satisfy the two elements required for a federal conviction of attempted manufacture of marijuana.
