I'm not willing to concede your point for several reasons.
1) This Indiana convict violated parole (as far as I know, based solely the MINOR details given by you) so he's back behind bars for just that, violating parole. His sentence reverts back to what the court decided on the first conviction - not the second.
2) 'Using a controlled substance' could mean anything. Was the goober sent back to the clink because of a failed mandatory golden flow test? That ain't "smokin' pot."
3) You failed to mention why this convict is behind bars in the first place. Was he sent to the hoosegow for running a drug cartel - or running too many red lights? Was it murder - or poppin' a cap in the neighbor's pooch? What? This would be important because of the nature of the parole violation.
4) You went out of your way to post HUGE hypothetical situations in an effort to prove your point yet went stoopid and clammed up on any details about convict mentioned above - a real sentenced criminal. You'll need to cough up MUCH more info to come close to being credible.
Oh, and we may have to discuss the quality of people you hang around on some later date...
I would appreciate it if you could lay off the personal attacks. You don't know me, you don't know the person I am talking about.
The fact is, this person is now in prison because he was found to be smoking marijuana while on parole. The title of this thread is Has ANYONE ever been imprisoned for smoking pot, and I have answered that. Are you going to argue that "because of" and "for" are significantly different? Actually, please do, your semantic contortions are quite amusing.