First Doctor Convicted For Improperly Recommending Medical Marijuana

[Teh One Who Knocks]

CBS 4 Denver


http://i.imgur.com/nT1wy08.jpg

LOVELAND, Colo. (CBS4) – The distinction Dr. Joseph Montante now holds is something he does not welcome.

Montante is the first Colorado doctor convicted of prescribing medical marijuana without conducting a proper exam.

In the state of Colorado a doctor must find that the patient has a debilitating condition to recommend the use of marijuana. Many see that as being open for interpretation, so law enforcement has stepped in.

Montante’s problems started when an undercover officer visited his office in Loveland. He said he wanted to get a medical marijuana card but he did not have any of the required conditions.

In a tape recording obtained by CBS4 from the visit Montante can be heard asking if the undercover officer had any pain. The officer then told Montante that he hurt his ankle several years ago playing basketball in high school.

“So I guess I had better look at your ankle right?” replied Dr. Montante.

Colorado law requires a bona fide doctor-patient relationship, but the undercover officer’s visit with Montante only took a matter of minutes.

Drug investigators say the doctor’s supervision is incredibly important because although 18 to 21 year olds are not eligible for recreational pot, they are eligible for medical marijuana.

“It’s no different than if they were using prescription pads and writing prescriptions for anyone that comes in with a few bucks in their pocket,” said Jim Gerhardt of the Colorado Drug Investigators Association.

CBS4 Investigator Rick Sallinger traveled to Montante’s home in Northern Colorado and asked him if he ever recommended marijuana for anyone who didn’t need it.

“No, never,” said Montante. “And I never attempted to deceive anyone.”

Montante was sentenced to 30 days in prison plus 3 years probation for attempting to influence a public servant. His medical license was suspended as well. Montante claims he was entrapped.

“The undercover agent lied to get into my office,” Montante claimed.

His attorney does not feel that the charge is appropriate to the alleged crime and plans to appeal.

[FBD]

damn right it was lies and entrapment

[redred]

they're coming to get you porky :lol:

[FBD]

I dont understand how it is permissible for law enforcement to use lies and obfuscation to entrap someone into doing something illegal. Same shit as the prostitute thread there...the fuggin cop gets ASKED if he is a cop, but somehow he refuses to answer it?

extrapolate...

and we have federal LEOs doing the same fuggin thing with "potential terrorists"...here, I can provide bomb stuff for you, you wanna buy?

god damn stasi

[Teh One Who Knocks]

You do know that in undercover stings that police officers don't need to announce/admit that they are law enforcement? It's been upheld in court.

[redred]

i can't believe one of your laws are that if you ask a cop if they are a cop they have to answer it :lol:

[Teh One Who Knocks]

i can't believe one of your laws are that if you ask a cop if they are a cop they have to answer it :lol:

I just said above that a cop DOESN'T have to identify themselves when undercover :slap:

[redred]

but it has been the case hasn't it ?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Not when undercover :nono:

[redred]

so you ask a cop in uniform if they're a cop ?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

What are you on about? :-s

[PorkChopSandwiches]

I got my "recommendation" over a skype meeting, I actually think the camera was just pointed at a picture of a guy who looked like a Dr. because he never moved :lol:

[Noilly Pratt]

I've been trying to get tickets for my niece for the Dr. Who celebration (successfully), and she's immersed me in all things Who...my first thought at reading the headline was -- didn't William Hartnell die?

Appropriate smiley - :mrgreen:

So many more things the law could be concentrating on...

[Pony]

i can't believe one of your laws are that if you ask a cop if they are a cop they have to answer it :lol:

Yea, it's an often believed myth. I don't know if it ever was really a law.

[redred]

are you a cop?:-s

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Yea, it's an often believed myth. I don't know if it ever was really a law.

Pinched from another place:


Do Undercover Police Have to Identify Themselves?
"Entrapment" and Deception by Law Enforcement
by Fire Erowid
Nov 2003


Brief Description of the Myth
There is a persistent rumor that if you ask an undercover police officer or police informant if they're a cop, they are required to tell you. Based on this myth, many people believe they can safely conduct illegal transactions just by making sure to ask "Are you a cop?" first.

This idea is widespread and like many such myths, is most often transmitted by word of mouth. Examples can also easily be found on bulletin boards and newsgroups, in subculture publications, and in the media. The major variations of the myth include:


Police have to identify themselves if specifically asked whether they are law enforcement.

Example: "Are you scared that your friend or enemy is an undercover cop, just ask, they are required to tell you if they are reporting to law enforcement."1


Undercover officers aren't allowed to initiate a drug sale without pre-existing suspicion.2

Example: "An undercover cop comes up to you and asks, 'Do you want to buy some drugs?' You say, 'Yes', and they arrest you. THAT is entrapment, and will be thrown out."3


Undercover officers aren't allowed to ask for an illegal drug by name.

Example: "He tells me that [undercover police] cannot ask you for drugs by name, or even common slang terms. They must call it something else, like 'fun stuff'."4



Entrapment
These types of myths are generally based on the belief that it is illegal for a police officer to entrap a citizen into committing a crime. Following this theory, many people believe that related actions by police, such as lying about their identity, would also be illegal or invalidate a prosecution. While a claim of "entrapment" by police can be used as a defense in a criminal case, it is both uncommon and rarely successful. Additionally, police entrapment itself is not illegal -- just potential cause for a not-guilty verdict.

Loosely defined, entrapment is a situation in which, if not for the actions of the police officer or police informant, the defendant would not have committed the crime. This defense is generally only successful in situations where law enforcement officers create a criminal plan, plant the idea of that plan into an otherwise innocent person's mind, and then instigate the plan for the purpose of prosecuting the suspect.

The mere presentation of an opportunity or request by an officer that an individual commit a crime does not qualify as entrapment. An officer may engage a citizen in conversation and ask to buy an illegal substance -- even if they have no reason to suspect the person of illegal activity.2 They may offer to sell an illegal substance and arrest the buyer after the sale.

They can go out of their way to help a person to commit a crime. What they can't do, is unduly persuade, threaten, coerce, or harass the person, such that a normally law-abiding citizen would participate in the unlawful action. Unfortunately, even in cases where the government does induce a crime, evidence that the defendant was "predisposed" to committing the crime is likely to undermine an entrapment defense. If the prosecution can show that the defendant agreed to participate too quickly or had a record of similar crimes in the past, the entrapment defense rarely succeeds.5 One example of such a case was U.S. v. Bogart (1986) in which Bogart agreed to sell presidential campaign posters to a police informant. When the informant arrived to purchase the posters, he informed Bogart that his only method of payment was with cocaine. Though Bogart initially refused, he eventually agreed because he needed the proceeds from the sale. He was arrested and his entrapment defense was denied based on his "predisposition" to commit the crime.6

Are Police Allowed to Lie?
The question of whether or not the police may lie during the course of their work goes hand in hand with the question of entrapment.

It is well accepted that deception is often "necessary" to catch those who break the law. There is no question that police officers are allowed to directly mislead and/or deceive others about their identity, their law enforcement status, their history, and just about anything else, without breaking the law or compromising their case.5 Conversely, it is illegal for an ordinary citizen to lie to the police in many jurisdictions.

Are Police Allowed to Break The Law?
Police officers working undercover have exceptions from certain criminal laws. For instance, law enforcement officers directly engaged in the enforcement of controlled substance laws are exempt from laws surrounding the purchase, possession, sales or use of illegal substances.7

This means that there's no way to identify an undercover officer based on their willingness or refusal to use an illegal drug. Reverse stings are common in the enforcement of controlled substance laws. In a reverse sting operation, a police officer sells drugs that have previously been confiscated and then arrest the buyer.

Possible Sources of the Myth
The myth that undercover police must admit to being police if asked has been around since at least the mid-1970s. In addition to the belief that entrapment is illegal, it may have roots in requirements that law enforcement identify themselves in some other situations.


Most on-duty police are required to wear both a uniform and a uniquely numbered badge identifying themselves as police.
Police must generally identify themselves before executing a search warrant or arresting someone.
Though it varies by jurisdiction, there are some situations in which off-duty police may be required to identify themselves, including if confronted by another police officer or before acting in their capacity as a police officer. The simple summary is that undercover police are given a great deal of latitude when investigating suspected criminals. They may lie, break controlled substance laws, ask to buy substances by name, offer drugs for sale and are not required to identify themselves during the course of their undercover investigations.



References #


Bob L. "Babylon and other important stuff." Posted to St. Louis Raves (Yahoo Groups). Jun 30, 1999. Retrieved Oct 2003 from groups.yahoo.com/group/stl-raves/message/3725
Kukura TV. "Undercover Investigations And The Entrapment Defense." Law Enforcement Bulletin. Apr 1993.
Frank M. "Any Other Brits Here?" Usenet.alt.support.girl-lovers. Jun 3, 2002.
Spyder. "Undercover Cops at Burning Man." Piss Clear. Aug 27, 2003; 19:2.
Greaney GM. "Crossing the Constitutional Line." Notre Dame Law Review. 1992; 67:745.
Lord KM. "Entrapment and Due Process." Florida State Univ. Law Review. 1998; 25(3):463.
21 U.S.C. § 885(d) of the U.S. Code.

[FBD]

so in other words, the almighty state is lord and master over you, and there is no way around it, they can bend you over at a moment's notice, lie about it, even plant evidence if it suits them and the situation vague enough that they can get away with it.

police can lie to you about anything they want,
you will be charged if you lie to the police.

all hail USSA

[Teh One Who Knocks]

so in other words, the almighty state is lord and master over you, and there is no way around it, they can bend you over at a moment's notice, lie about it, even plant evidence if it suits them and the situation vague enough that they can get away with it.

police can lie to you about anything they want,
you will be charged if you lie to the police.

all hail USSA

How do you figure? If you aren't out looking to break the law, then you have nothing to worry about, now do you? ;)

Go ahead and guess how many times I've been arrested by an undercover cop in a sting.

[FBD]

If you aren't out looking to break the law, then you have nothing to worry about, now do you? ;)

hail the refrain, comrade. so long as anyone and everyone follows the law...


...oh wait a minute, that would make sense if the law were applied evenly and subject to everyone equally, but we all know that aint the case.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Yes, let's do away with all laws and just have a free for all....everybody do what they want! :woohoo:

[FBD]

do away with protected classes, do away with the ability for damn near any government entity/employee to disregard whatever laws they see fit to discard (unless of course they're low enough on the totem pole and dont know anybody with influence, then they can be treated like the fackin plebe they are.)

[Hal-9000]

this sort of shit pisses me off...I was diagnosed with trigeminal neuralgia in 2003 and without a bunch of history....it's the type of pain that can reduce a person to tears because there's no triggers and often doctors/dentists make other permanent changes to your body and cause further pain, because they don't understand the cause..

so when people like this get fake prescriptions for what I take as mild complaints, it fucks up the real need for the rest of us


(oh, and I'm not a cop)

[FBD]

if congress never carved out legislation for special interests, innocuous plants would not be cause for jail time.

[Goofy]

I got my "recommendation" over a skype meeting, I actually think the camera was just pointed at a picture of a guy who looked like a Dr. because he never moved :lol:

http://i.imgur.com/aKJuXtp.jpg

[PorkChopSandwiches]

https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/1515053299/my_dr_pepper.jpg

[Teh One Who Knocks]

http://i.imgur.com/4yIiYjC.png

[PorkChopSandwiches]

http://i.imgur.com/XxcGQqb.jpg

[Hal-9000]

http://i.imgur.com/4yIiYjC.png


HELLO EVERY-BODY!


:lol:

[redred]

I got my "recommendation" over a skype meeting, I actually think the camera was just pointed at a picture of a guy who looked like a Dr. because he never moved :lol:

http://i.imgur.com/xVzsPhc.jpg
dr greenthumb?

[PorkChopSandwiches]

paging dr greenthumb

[deebakes]

HELLO EVERY-BODY!


:lol:

hi dr. nick!