What does the ConCourt ruling mean for people with existing convictions?

[Lodestar]

So today the concourt decided that it is no longer a criminal offense to use dagga, so long as you are not doing it in a public space and you are an adult.

 

The burning question for me, is, how does that affect my existing conviction if I was charged with possession? I'm sure many others are wondering but I have not heard anyone talking about it. A few years ago, I was playing Pokémon Go in the car. It was when the whole Pokémon Go craze happened. I was on my way to college, and decided to catch a few Pokémon on the way. Innocent enough, until the fuzz decided this was suspicious behavior and asked to search my vehicle. I didn't want to be late to college, and I was under the impression that I had nothing on me, so I obliged and let them do their thing. It was a nasty surprise when they found a section of skunk that I had thought I had lost, I was detained for most of the day and strongarmed into signing AOG because they had convinced me that was the only way I was getting out of the cell. (I did not know my rights quite so well back then)

 

Another time, I was procuring some fine Swazi from a local dealer, who just so happens to be quite well known to the local police. Usually, it's not a big deal to buy there, but as misfortune would have it  I crossed their path one day and they stopped me, and upon questioning me as to why I was in the area all I managed was a flimsy "Oh I was visiting a friend.." they then managed to twist my arm into revealing my stash, threatening to call the Metros with their dogs and like a dumbass I didn't call their bluff.(I know, bad stoner. may I shouldn't be smoking after all)

 

In any case, while the how doesn't really matter, I just wanted to perhaps entertain those who decide to read with my stories in hopes that someone will share their story.

 

It would make life a helluva lot easier if these convictions were simply erased, but I can't help but feel that it might not be so simple and I'll still be stuck with them for a while, the next few years atleast until all the details are ironed out. But really, if the ConCourt has ruled that it is legal for personal use, these possession charges should fall away? I was not in public space, and even if I was, ganja on my person can be considered to be within my private domain?

 

My only problem now is that I still can't use it due to company policy :/ I wonder how that will be affected as well, since my company conducts urine testing with a zero tolerance policy. Obviously any positive result has to be lab tested, but seriously, since MJ stays in your urine for up to 90 days then it can't really be constitutional if you get fired for a spliff you smoked 2 weeks ago while you were on leave, or even if you use it recreationally over the weekend? I haven't smoked in nearly a year, and won't do so due to my bad luck, I'll probably get tested the day after I smoke it up. It's been good for me to stop but some days I'd really like a puff or 2.

[Guest]

No the ruling stated it does not affect previous convictions so that sounds like another court case needing to happen

[Lodestar]

No the ruling stated it does not affect previous convictions so that sounds like another court case needing to happen

That's a shame. It seems a little unfair that I'm going to still have to walk around with the burden of a conviction for something that is now considered legal (even though it's going to take a little time to work it's way into the constitution)

 

Surely there will be recourse in the future? I have no doubt that many others have the same problem as I do. It makes life very difficult, applying for jobs and visas.

[Guest]

Yeah saw on twitter a lawyer asking about the previous convictions and sounds like something should be able to be done, just dont know what. You might need to go chat with a lawyer yourself. Maybe it will get addressed during legislation process. Another question was about minors getting caught with dagga and how the law would apply there.  Early days it seems

[Justin Hemp]

No the ruling stated it does not affect previous convictions so that sounds like another court case needing to happen

That's a shame. It seems a little unfair that I'm going to still have to walk around with the burden of a conviction for something that is now considered legal (even though it's going to take a little time to work it's way into the constitution)

 

Surely there will be recourse in the future? I have no doubt that many others have the same problem as I do. It makes life very difficult, applying for jobs and visas.

I'm sure it will come with time, it makes no sense not to

 

Sent from my ALE-L02 using Tapatalk

 

 

[SkunkPharm]

I heard the dagga couple is bringing a class action suite against the state. They are apparently compiling a database of people that qualifies. I think they are the people to contact. I hope this helps. I personally think all previous convictions needs to be overturned.

 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Guest]

mmm...thing is if a bunch of people join the class action lawsuit and their previous conviction was dealing how will that affect it? Or did they specify that it was for cases of possession? Also the state can argue that until proper legislation is made they cannot say what was possession and what was intent to deal.

[SkunkPharm]

I think it was for possession only.

 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Clouds]

My understanding is that they will stand.

You could apply to have the record expunged and the ConCourt ruling would be a very good reason for getting it expunged.

[spykerhond]

South Africa can be the pioneer of anti-verkramptheid policies . The cannabis culture in Amsterdam was was spawned from Capetown hundreds of years ago, and look the dutch can be hippy in the open now. Even their rightwing is a pushover because of our wonderful herb.