I always assumed that the expiration date was partly legal, in the way that you only have 1 year within which you can legally have the drug in your system.
I mean, if I am prescribed oxycontin, can I legally have the drug in my system for the rest of my life?
In the United States, you can be prosecuted in some states for drug possession if your prescription has expired and you still have the drugs [1]. This has not been sufficiently tested with the Supreme Court so you could eventually win on appeal but not before spending lots of money and time behind bars.
> This assistant district attorney operates on the theory that if your prescription was expired on the date of the alleged conduct, you no longer “possessed a valid prescription” at that time and therefore cannot avail yourself of the affirmative defense.
Christ. That is insane. What are people supposed to do for medicines that are used only in the case of an emergency? I really wonder what goes through some of these prosecutor's heads sometimes.
Depends on the country. In Sweden it's illegal to have certain drugs in your system. E.g. if THC is found in your blood you can be convicted for a minor drug offense. We're sadly pretty extreme with regards to drugs though.
Is it illegal to have THC in your system or is having THC in your system admissible as rebuttable evidence of possession/use of illegal drugs? Either would support the outcome you describe, but they are meaningfully different.
E.g., with alcohol, the “in the blood is illegal” rule would criminalize auto-brewery syndrome occuring in those legally denied alcohol (e.g., due to age), while the “in the blood is admissible as evidence of use” would not, though those with the syndrome might need to present evidence of it to avoid charges.
It's the latter: (intentional) use of (illegal) drugs is illegal, and having THC in your blood is proof enough to convict you (even if you've consumed it in a different country where it's actually legal; there's precedent). Typically you'd just get a fine though, if you admit guilt and don't go to court. See § 1 here for the exact law: http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19680064.htm
I always assumed that the expiration date was partly legal, in the way that you only have 1 year within which you can legally have the drug in your system.
Are you implying that you still hold this assumption and are looking for someone to convince you otherwise? If so, I can't even conceive of where you got this idea in the first place, let alone argue against it. Let's slap a little Occam's Razor on this: how would you even begin to enforce this?
According to my research, in America it's mostly an unknown (unenforced or depends on the state's sometimes conflicting verdicts) whether having a drug in your system means you are in possession of said drug. There are other laws that relate but I cannot pretend to understand the intricacies of which laws might apply to this situation.
But yes, I am interested in a definitive answer.
Laws around prescription pills are sometimes unexpected, like every prescription pill in your Mon-Tues-Wed-etc pill box (outside their prescription container) being a felony. So my grandma has numerous unexpected felonies in her purse.
I thought it it was illegal to have certain controlled substances past the prescription. So if you were prescribed a month's supply of oxycontin and got pulled over with it on your passenger seat a year later, you were breaking the law.
I hope not because my doctor prescribes me with a "30 day" supply, as wrote on the prescription, which he tells me to use over 3 months. Either way, the unknowns about potential felonies scares me...
I mean, if I am prescribed oxycontin, can I legally have the drug in my system for the rest of my life?