# Statu\[t\]e of limitations on smoking weed?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [September 17, 2008, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057 "2008-09-17T22:10:30Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@ChrisBooth12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChrisBooth12)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/1 "2008-09-17T22:10:30Z")
In CA if it matters. If i walk up to a cop and say hey I smoked a fat bowl yesterday can i get in trouble? Assuming I have no weed on me? I would like the realistic, and legal answers to this question
---
### Author:  [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/2 "2008-09-17T22:30:08Z")
> [@ChrisBooth12](#):
>
> In CA if it matters. If i walk up to a cop and say hey I smoked a fat bowl yesterday can i get in trouble? Assuming I have no weed on me? I would like the realistic, and legal answers to this question
Realistically I’m sure the cop could find something to bust you for (maybe you seemed impaired and smelt of marujana ? Who’s to say you didn’t ? its your word against a cop)
Legally speaking couldn’t he actually have you arrested for DUI or DWI ? (assuming you drove a car before/after your admission). You would still definitely test positive in a urine test after that amount of time.
Not that its directly related… but there was a Wired article about a guy who completed a modern day “cannonball run” across the US. He had to wait a few weeks/months (can’t remember which) before publicising it, to ensure the statute (hastily edits 🙂 ) of limitations on traffic offenses had run out.
---
### Author:  [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/3 "2008-09-17T22:33:15Z")
To aid future searches, it’s “statu **t** e of limitations”
---
### Author:  [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/4 "2008-09-17T23:20:15Z")
What would a Statue of Limitations look like?
Should we send one to France to show our gratitude for the Statue of Liberty?
---
### Author:  [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/5 "2008-09-17T23:21:05Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#):
>
> What would a Statue of Limitations look like?
For smoking weed? Probably like Cheech and Chong.
---
### Author:  [@ChrisBooth12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChrisBooth12)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/6 "2008-09-17T23:28:35Z")
Whats the SDMB policy on making a new topic with a fixed spelling error so people wont waste time upping their post counts with pointless irrelevant side chatter.
---
### Author:  [@gotpasswords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gotpasswords)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/7 "2008-09-17T23:32:31Z")
Realistically, the cop might respond with “So what?” as long as you’re not currently impaired.
Most city cops around the Bay Area abide with the people’s desires in passing [Proposition 215](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_215) and the subsequent attempt to clarify a few points with [Senate Bill 420](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Bill_420). Even though it’s still a Federal crime, they’ll generally look the other way so long as you’re not being obnoxious. Do be careful though - they won’t overlook cultivation or dealing.
Also take note of what county you’re in - the Wiki article has a map showing which counties are not accepting Prop 215 as valid, and they’ll happily arrest, try and convict you to the full extent of Federal law.
Twelve years later, it’s all still confusing.
---
### Author:  [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/8 "2008-09-17T23:39:19Z")
> [@gotpasswords](#):
>
> Most city cops around the Bay Area abide with the people’s desires in passing [Proposition 215](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_215) and the subsequent attempt to clarify a few points with [Senate Bill 420](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Bill_420).
That may be the case. But I’m sure they would be pretty unimpressed if you made a point of boasting to their face about your recent dope-smoke exploits. And there are enough laws about such things that they could I’m sure find something to bust you on if they felt like it.
> [@gotpasswords](#):
>
> Even though it’s still a Federal crime,
Legally speaking does this matter ? Is a state/city cop able to bust you for a federal crime ?
---
### Author:  [@PaulParkhead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PaulParkhead)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2008, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/9 "2008-09-17T23:43:30Z")
> [@ChrisBooth12](#):
>
> Whats the SDMB policy on making a new topic with a fixed spelling error so people wont waste time upping their post counts with pointless irrelevant side chatter.
No idea, but I imagine a mod could correct the title typo without the need to start a new thread.
---
### Author:  [@Thalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thalion)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/10 "2008-09-18T04:04:03Z")
More important than the statute of limitations is the _corpus delecti_ (body of the crime) rule. This says that you can’t be convicted of any crime based solely on a confession. The prosecution has to prove that the crime really occurred.
I doubt any cop would care about your unexpected confession. However, you have now put yourself on his radar to watch and try and catch you when you are holding.
---
### Author:  [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/11 "2008-09-18T04:11:35Z")
> [@Thalion](#):
>
> I doubt any cop would care about your unexpected confession. However, you have now put yourself on his radar to watch and try and catch you when you are holding.
In other words, why do you want to tempt fate?
---
### Author:  [@greatshakes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greatshakes)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/12 "2008-09-18T05:39:10Z")
> [@ChrisBooth12](#):
>
> In CA if it matters. If i walk up to a cop and say hey I smoked a fat bowl yesterday can i get in trouble? Assuming I have no weed on me? I would like the realistic, and legal answers to this question
If he didn’t kick the crap out of you for being a top-tier dork, you can probably walk. If it’s a misdemeanor, most localities don’t want their officers to arrest people for misdemeanors unless the officer observed it himself, and he would have to arrest you for something else. Cops don’t care what crime you committed anywhere, anytime. It’s not that they’re powerless, legally speaking, but they DON"T CARE! unless it’s something that involves them in an arrest situation. In this case…THEY DON’T CARE!
DON’T CARE!!!
OTOH, he might ask you where you got the stuff, and where the rest of it is now, and he could find something to hold you with, at least for a while…Conspiracy for who knows what, something ancillary to your having smoked.
greatshakes
---
### Author:  [@Darryl\_Lict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darryl_Lict)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/13 "2008-09-18T05:53:51Z")
> [@gotpasswords](#):
>
> Most city cops around the Bay Area abide with the people’s desires in passing [Proposition 215](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_215) and the subsequent attempt to clarify a few points with [Senate Bill 420](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Bill_420). Even though it’s still a Federal crime, they’ll generally look the other way so long as you’re not being obnoxious. Do be careful though - they won’t overlook cultivation or dealing.
I love the fact that it was Senate Bill 420.
According to [California NORML](http://www.canorml.org/laws/calmjlaws.html) the only time it is illegal to be high, is when you are driving. I haven’t read the full text, but it appears that it’s not even illegal to be high, and definitely not illegal to have been high yesterday.
---
### Author:  [@IAmNotSpartacus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IAmNotSpartacus)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/14 "2008-09-18T07:15:26Z")
> [@Darryl\_Lict](#):
>
> I love the fact that it was Senate Bill 420.
>
> According to [California NORML](http://www.canorml.org/laws/calmjlaws.html) the only time it is illegal to be high, is when you are driving. I haven’t read the full text, but it appears that it’s not even illegal to be high, and definitely not illegal to have been high yesterday.
Judging from PC 647F it would appear it is indeed possible to be charged with public intoxication, since marijuana is a controlled substance.
I guess it depends on how good the buddha is.
> [@](#):
>
> 647 (f) Who is found in any public place under the influence of
> intoxicating liquor, any drug, controlled substance, toluene, or any
> combination of any intoxicating liquor, drug, controlled substance,
> or toluene, in a condition that he or she is unable to exercise care
> for his or her own safety or the safety of others, or by reason of
> his or her being under the influence of intoxicating liquor, any
> drug, controlled substance, toluene, or any combination of any
> intoxicating liquor, drug, or toluene, interferes with or obstructs
> or prevents the free use of any street, sidewalk, or other public
> way.
---
### Author:  [@BrandonR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrandonR)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/15 "2008-09-18T15:17:45Z")
I thought only the \*possession \*of drugs was illegal, not the “being high” part (unless you’re driving). There was a lengthy post here on the Dope recently that went into this in good detail.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/16 "2008-09-18T15:23:31Z")
> [@ChrisBooth12](#):
>
> Whats the SDMB policy on making a new topic with a fixed spelling error so people wont waste time upping their post counts with pointless irrelevant side chatter.
1. The better practice is to ask a moderator to edit your thread title.
2. I’ve edited your thread title.
**Gfactor**
General Questions Moderator
---
### Author:  [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/17 "2008-09-18T15:36:03Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#):
>
> What would a Statue of Limitations look like?
> Should we send one to France to show our gratitude for the Statue of Liberty?
It’s too late now.
---
### Author:  [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/18 "2008-09-18T15:43:51Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Whats the SDMB policy on making a new topic with a fixed spelling error so people wont waste time upping their post counts with pointless irrelevant side chatter.
It wouldn’t stop me.
Besides, I don’t do it to up my post count. I do it for the sheer joy of it.
---
### Author:  [@VunderBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VunderBob)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/19 "2008-09-18T15:47:49Z")
> [@gotpasswords](#):
>
> Do be careful though - they won’t overlook cultivation or dealing.
Don’t you mean, ‘Dooby careful…’?
😃
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2008, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057/20 "2008-09-18T15:58:28Z")
If you smoked a fat bowl yesterday you would not still be stoned today.
It is my understanding that it is not illegal to have _done_ drugs but illegal to _do_ drugs. This is to prevent the government from busting those who go to rehab. No one would go if walking through the door amounted to an admission to having done drugs and the cops are waiting on the other side to bust you.
That said making that admission to a cop might (not sure) give him/her probable cause to search you for possession of a controlled substance and perhaps they could make a claim that you were currently stoned when talking to them or somesuch. In my experience if a cop really wants to bust you they generally can find a pretext to do so and telling them you smoked a fatty yesterday just puts you on their radar which is not a good thing for you.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/statu-t-e-of-limitations-on-smoking-weed/464057.md?page=2)