Source: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0329/HRS_0329-0122.htm
Timestamp: 2018-09-18 15:56:44
Document Index: 120654092

Matched Legal Cases: ['§329', '§2', '§15', '§3', '§7', '§8', '§3', '§2', '§23', '§329', '§329', '§701']

§329-122 Medical use of cannabis; conditions of use. (a) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the medical use of cannabis by a qualifying patient shall be permitted only if:
(2) The qualifying patient's physician or advanced practice registered nurse has certified in writing that, in the physician's or advanced practice registered nurse's professional opinion, the potential benefits of the medical use of cannabis would likely outweigh the health risks for the particular qualifying patient; and
(1) The qualifying patient's physician or advanced practice registered nurse has explained the potential risks and benefits of the medical use of cannabis to the qualifying patient and to a parent, guardian, or person having legal custody of the qualifying patient; and
(A) Allow the qualifying patient's medical use of cannabis;
(d) For the purposes of this section, "transport" means the transportation of cannabis, usable cannabis, or any manufactured cannabis product between:
For purposes of interisland transportation, "transport" of cannabis, usable cannabis, or any manufactured cannabis product, by any means is allowable only between a production center or retail dispensing location and a certified laboratory for the sole purpose of laboratory testing pursuant to section 329D-8, as permitted under section 329D-6(m) and subject to section 329D‑6(j), and with the understanding that state law and its protections do not apply outside of the jurisdictional limits of the State. Allowable transport pursuant to this section does not include interisland transportation by any means or for any purpose between a qualified patient or primary caregiver and any other entity or individual, including an individual who is a qualified patient or primary caregiver. [L 2000, c 228, pt of §2; am L 2001, c 55, §15; am L 2013, c 178, §3; am L 2015, c 241, §7; am L 2016, c 230, §8; am L 2017, c 41, §3 and c 170, §2]
"Marijuana" changed to "cannabis" to conform to L 2017, c 170, pursuant to §23G-15.
Rule of lenity required the construction, under the specific facts of the case, of §§329-121 and 329-125 and this section against the government, as there was an irreconcilable inconsistency between the authorized transportation of medical marijuana under §329-121, and the prohibition on transport of medical marijuana through "any ... place open to the public" under subsection [(c)(2)(E)]; thus, under §701-115(2)(b), petitioner was entitled to an acquittal because petitioner's evidence, when considered in light of any contrary prosecution evidence proved by a preponderance of the evidence the specified fact or facts with negatived penal liability. 129 H. 397, 301 P.3d 607 (2013).