Controlled Substance Scheduling (Part 3)

by | Dec 14, 2019 | Blog, Criminal Law, Drug Crime, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

Judge Whipple continued in relevant part: And N.J.A.C. 13:45H-10.1(b) notes that “any reference in this chapter to controlled dangerous substance Schedules I, II, III, IV and V shall mean the Federal schedules promulgated at 21 C.F.R. §§ 1308.11 through 1308.15 . . . unless the Director objects . . . in accordance with . . . N.J.S.A. 24:21-3 and N.J.A.C. 13:45H-1.7.” Therefore, alpha-PVP was automatically included in Schedule I because the Director did not object to the federal government’s designation.

Defendant’s reliance on Kadonsky v. Lee, 452 N.J. Super. 198 (App. Div. 2017) does not compel a different conclusion. In that case, an inmate filed a petition with the Director seeking to have marijuana reclassified from Schedule I to Schedule IV in light of the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act. Id. at 200. The Director rejected the petition, claiming he had no authority to reschedule marijuana in a manner inconsistent with federal law. Id. at 200-01. We reversed the Director, explaining that N.J.S.A. 24:21-3 permits the Director to diverge from the federal schedule after weighing the factors in N.J.S.A. 24:21-3(a). Id. at 208-09. Although there appears to be tension between subsection (a), which affords the Director the authority to schedule substances, and subsection (c), requiring the Director to control substances coextensively with federal law, the statute does not prohibit the Director from revisiting a classification and departing from the federal government’s schedule. Id. at 209 (“We conclude that the Director erred in determining he lacked the authority to reclassify marijuana without a change in existing federal law.”). Therefore, while federal regulation provides a CDS scheduling baseline, N.J.S.A. 24:21-3 does not prohibit the Director from either objecting to a federal classification or rescheduling a substance.

Notably, the Kadonsky court did not suggest the Director must republish updated CDS schedules each and every time the federal government revises its own schedules. Rather, the Director need only provide notice when he or she “objects to the federal government’s inclusion, rescheduling, or deletion” of a CDS and to “periodically” “update and republish the schedules.” In this case, the Director was not obligated to provide notice that alpha-PVP was added to Schedule I the moment it became a CDS. And, for that reason, the judge properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment.

The federal government’s refusal to re-classify marijuana consistent with overwhelming evidence that it has at least some medicinal benefits is disgraceful. It is increasingly clear that the federal classification is rooted in lobbying by those who benefit from prohibition as opposed to science.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Affordable, knowledgeable, efficient.
Deb W
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Highly professional The lawyer Frederick is a serious and professional person, he helped me a lot in my case, I recommend him a lot to help you too, he is always in contact with you explaining the process, a very patient and kind person.
Ca
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I recently utilized his exceptional services and would highly recommend them to anyone seeking legal advice.
Mark A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Hired Mr.Sisto to handle a case of mine a couple of months ago and while the service was okay the customer service was awful. When I had inquired about a charge I was unsure of on my bill, Mr. Sisto immediately got defensive and had the unprofessionalism to ask me if I “was high” for asking this question. I wonder if Mr. Sisto asks all of his clients this question or only the ones who have jobs in the cannabis industry? Regardless, I don’t believe this was an appropriate question to ask, regardless of the industry one works in, and therefore Mr. Sisto needs to heavily work on his customer service. Edit: Mr. Sisto had the UNPROFESSIONALISM to reach out to my family and ask them to ask me to take down my review instead of reaching out directly towards me when it was I who was his client, not my family. Clearly speaks to the unprofessionalism surrounding this practice. This has not been the only time Mr.Sisto has gone directly to my family instead of me, his client, for important legal matters and I will not seek out his services again. For those who may not understand Spanish, the email starts with “You should speak to your daughter regarding the review she has just published.” Edit to Response: As an attorney, one should be able to make appropriate questions and comments regardless if a client is “uncooperative” or “disrespectful.” The fact that rather than apologizing for the awful interaction with your firm, and I was not released “within hours” as you claim shows how low value your firm is and how you openly instead chose to harass my family through email for my initial review rather than actually revomy case which I ended up doing and you chareged me for . Regardless of results, your character speaks volumes and anyone who reads this would know better than to give their money to an awful person such as yourself. What a shame
Ximena C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is an excellent attorney. Even though we did not initiate the official pleading process, he deep dived into researching and sorted out my questions without any consultation fee. I highly recommend him!
Qianru Z
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
gives great heads up info--- and helps public get around safely
Sun B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred has helped me on two different occasions with his legal practice and is a top notch attorney. He also gives great advice as a person to go with his legal expertise. Highly recommend anyone looking for an attorney to contact Fred!
Connor W
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Keeps me well informed ! Thank you
Koy T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred has been exceptional as my counsel. Represented me with professionalism and understanding. Fred does communicate with you and gives the best he can. I recommend Fred if you need a good professional understanding straight forward counsel. Thank you Fred!
Mohammed
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great site Fred. keep up the good work at informing the public of these unlawful check points.
Mark H