THE OREGON CODE AT ORS 475.125(3)(c) ALLOWS ME TO LAWFULLY “POSSESS” MARIJUANA BECAUSE I AM THE ORS 475.

005(22) “ULTIMATE USER.”
Oregon Law at ORS 475.125 at subsection (3)(c) clearly reads that:

“ 475.125 Registration requirements. . . . (3) THE FOLLOWING PERSONS need not register and MAY LAWFULLY POSSESS controlled substances under ORS 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.940 to 475.999: . . . (c) AN ULTIMATE USER or a person in possession of any controlled substance pursuant to a lawful order of a practitioner or in lawful possession of a Schedule V substance, unless otherwise prohibited.”
It is a undisputed fact that Oregon Law at ORS 475.125 at subsection (3)(c) clearly states that an “ULTIMATE USER” need NOT register AND MAY LAWFULLY POSSESS MARIJUANA. Furthermore, Oregon Law ORS at 475.005(22) defines a person who lawfully possesses MARIJUANA for his own use as the ULTIMATE USER and clearly reads:

“475.005 Definitions . . . (22) “Ultimate user” means a person who lawfully possesses a controlled substance for the use of the person or for the use of a member of the h ouse hold of the person or for administering to an animal owned by the person or by a member of the household of the person.”

Furthermore, it is NOT illegal to “possess” or “USE” “drug paraphernalia” unless you are using it with intent to deliver or manufacture with intent to deliver as stated at ORS 475.525 which reads:
475.525 Sale of drug paraphernalia prohibited; definition of drug paraphernalia; excep tions. (1) It is unlawful for any person to sell or deliver, possess with intent to sell or deliver or manufacture with intent to sell or deliver drug paraph ernalia, kno wing that it will be u sed to

unlawfu lly plant, prop agate, cultivate, gro w, harvest, manufacture, compoun d, convert, produce, process, prep are, test, an alyze , pack , repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherw ise introd uce into the huma n bo dy a controlled substance as defined by O RS 475 .005 . ... . . . (5) The provisions of ORS 47 5.525 to 475.565 do not apply to persons registered under the provisions of ORS 47 5.125 or to persons specified as exempt from registration under the provisions of that statute. (Subsection (2)(5) says that an ULTIMA TE USER as defined is EX EM PT from registration. . . .”

Oregon Law clearly provides that: “(1) IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON TO SELL OR DELIVER OR MANUFACTURE WITH INTENT TO SELL OR DELIVER DRUG PARAPHERNALIA.” Therefore, the mere “use” and “possession” of the “drug paraphernalia” by itself is not illegal if you are the ORS 475.125(3)(c) “ultimate user” as defined by ORS 475.005(22) unless they charge you with and prove that you used the drug paraphernalia with the intent to sell or deliver, or manufacture with intent to sell or deliver as stated in subsection (1) & (2) of ORS 475.525 supra.
“THE STATUTE IS VIOLATED ONLY IF POSSESSION IS ACCOMPANIED BOTH BY KN OW LEDG E of the nature of the act AND ALSO BY THE INTENT “TO MANU FACTURE, DIS TR IBU TE, OR DIS PE NS E.” United States v. Clark, 475 F.2d 240, 248-49 (2d Cir. 1973).” UNITED STATES v. JEWELL, 532 F.2d 697 (9 th Cir. F ebruar y 27 , 197 6.) (It is crystal clear that 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) is worded in the conjunctive “and.”)

United States v. Jewell, supra, makes it clear that you cannot be charged with the “lessor but included offense” of “possession” unless they also charge you with “manufacturing with intent to distribute.”

– POSSESSION BY ITSELF IS NOT ILLEGAL!!!

Furthermore, you cannot be charged with any violation of the PHARMACEUTICAL CODE unless you have or possess a PHARMACEUTICAL LICENSE on the following authority:
"privilege" . . . is synon ym ous w ith licen se . . . . The possession of a . . . license is a prerequ isite to violation o f this statute. . . . On appeal the Superior court dismissed the charges against Cole on the ground that since he had no . . . license, he had no privilege . . . [2] the statute refers to those whose "p rivilege” . . . is suspende d. Co le nev er had any typ e of p rivilege .......Licen se is synonymous with privilege, since Co le did n ot ha ve a license, and that state did not grant Co le a license, THE STATE CANN OT SUSPEND W HAT HE D OES NOT HA VE." Aberdeen v. Co le, 13 Wn. App. 617, 537 P.2d 1073 (June 10, 1975). (See also United States v. Jin Fuey Moy, 241 U.S. 394 (June 5, 1916 .)

CALL Luis Anthony Ewing (253) 226-3741 or Kurt Ranald Riggin (303) 822-8921 for help with Drug Possession, D.U.I.’S, Driving While License Suspended Violations. WE DRIVE WITH NO DRIVER’S LICENSE’S & SMOKE POT AND SO CAN YOU! Write to Luis at: <rcwcodebuster@comcast.net> or to hear Luis & Kurt speak, go to: <www.TruthRadio.com> or <www.RBNLive.com> or <www.VeritasRadio.com>