Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/03/2010 in Blog Entries

  1. 8 points
    Komorn Law PLLC is happy to report that the broken criminal justice system shined a light on us today. The battle in Isabella, the State v Team Fisher concluded today with a 14-page opinion that was a joy to read. The Court held that the accused had not only presented proof of the requisite elements of the section 8 defenses, but that no question of fact existed, and therefore all charges are dismissed. To call my client and his family courageous would be an understatement. My client, a registered patient and a caregiver for his wife, also a registered patient, was raided after an alleged anonymous tip and a trash pull. These minimal facts resulted in a search warrant for both his house and shop. According to the Drug Task Force, the raid of these locations resulted in the confiscation of 29 pounds of marihuana and 1 pound of wax. The complaint charged the following crimes: I. Intent to deliver Marijuana MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(ii). A felony punishable by 7 years and imposition of license sanctions. II. Intent to deliver Marijuana plants. MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(ii). A felony punishable by 7 years and imposition of license sanctions. III. Manufacture Marijuana MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(iii). A felony punishable by 4 years and imposition of license sanctions. IV. Possession of a Firearm in the Commission of A Felony contrary to MCL 750.227b A Felony punishable by 2 years, mandatory prison sentence to run consecutively with and preceding any term of imprisonment imposed for the felony or attempted felony. To Wit Count 3 (as the underlying Felony) V. Maintaining a drug house. MCL 333.7405. 2 year and imposition of license sanctions. VI. Maintaining a drug house. MCL 333.7405. 2 year and imposition of license sanctions. Additionally, the drug task force seized every piece or property in the vicinity they could get their hand on, pursuant to the forfeiture law. (no, the amendments have not done a single thing to slow down the DTF’s appetite for forfeiture and the glory of its proceeds). Also, an important part of this story is that my client owned a few guns, and they were in his house at the time of the raid. As is often not reported, but all too often used, the combination of owning a gun and being outside of section 4 escalates what would normally be allegations of illegal marihuana activity to felony firearm charges. If convicted of the felony firearm charges, the crime requires a mandatory 2-year sentence to prison, to run consecutive to any other sentence. That while felony firearm requires possession of the firearm while committing an underlying felony, akin to a person selling drugs on the street with a pistol on their waistband, all too often prosecutors have extended this allegation to include patients and caregivers who are lawful gun owners. And while the law on its face suggests the possession of the weapon and the illegal marihuana behavior be contemporaneous, the law actually permits persons to be charged with felony firearm even when they are not physically possessing the firearm or even at the location where the firearm and the marihuana is located. My client’s garden was contained within the detached garage which was locked and enclosed and not accessible to anyone, and the firearms were contained within the residence, where less than the amount of marihuana allowed pursuant to section 4 was kept. As many attorneys will say, the conversation with your client is much different when the state is charging felony firearm. So with allegation of 29 pounds of marihuana, a pound of wax and felony firearm charges, me and my client and his family put our gloves on and fought back. The preliminary exam, which originally included my client's wife (represented by David Rudoi) and a codefendant (represented by Jessie Williams) took place over three full days, resulting in each of the accused being bound over on all charges. Shortly after getting to Circuit Court, the codefendent was offered and agreed to plead guilty to an innocuous misdemeanor. My client's wife was offered a misdemeanor, but refused to admit that she did anything wrong. As previously mentioned, David Rudoi successfully argued to the Circuit Court judge that there was not enough evidence presented at the preliminary exam to substantiate the charges, or that the state had failed to present even probable cause of a crime, and all charges against my client’s wife were dismissed. At this point in the proceeding, with my client the only remaining defendant in the case, we began to litigate the case. We filed literally 16 motions and litigated each of them, which included hours and hours of evidentiary hearings, and testimony from all of the witnesses involved. It is important to note that the Judge presiding over the case allowed us to litigate the case (didn't fight obstruct or interfere with taking testimony) and was more than prepared for each of the hearings. It was obvious to us that he was conscientious of the issues and did take great efforts to analyze the facts and law for each of the motions we filed. Even though I disagreed with every one of his rulings except one, it was a pleasure to have a Court show more interest in the issues in the case, and my client's due process rights, than the age of the case. For each of the motions filed he issued a written opinion. The list of motions and the court’s rulings are listed below. 1. Motion for a Walker Hearing - Denied 2. Motion to Dismiss based upon an illegal arrest (Ferretti Motion) - Denied 3. Motion to Quash the Information and Bindover of the Felony Firearm Charges Based Upon Constitutional Grounds - Denied 4. Motion to Quash the Affidavit and Search Warrant on Constitutional Grounds - Denied 5. Motion to Reconsider Search Warrant Motion - Denied 6. Motion to Quash Bindover and Dismiss - Denied 7. Emergency Motion to Adjourn - Denied 8. Motion to Quash Search Warrant - Denied 9. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Daubert or in the Alternative Set for and (Evidentiary) Daubert Hearing and Memorandum of Law in Support of Dismissal or Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Daubert; (challenge to the advisability of the lab reporting based upon the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division's Crime Lab Scandal #Crimefactory) -Denied 10. Motion in Limine to Exclude Forensic Evidence or Alternatively for a Daubert Hearing - Denied 11. Supplemental Memo in Support of Daubert - Denied 12. Motion to Preclude Evidence Based Upon Judicial Estoppel - Denied 13. Motion to Preclude Evidence Based Upon Relevancy - Denied 14. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to MMMA Section 4(g), or Preclude Evidence of Paraphernalia and Request for Evidentiary Hearing - Denied 15. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Section 4 of the MMMA and the Amendments (That Were Signed into Law September 22, 2016 are Curative and Retroactive) - Denied 16. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Section 8 of the MMMA. Granted and all charges (including the felony firearm) dismissed Another interesting issue in the case, and I mention this mostly for instructive purposes, was that the State alleged that my client made an inculpatory statement or confession. According to the police (despite no audio or video recording, or written statement acknowledge by my client of what he actually said) my client purportedly uttered some sentences, which included the following words: "Dispensary, Overages, Sell". Of course my client never spoke these words as the investigators alleged. But he did talk to the police (as often times persons who don't believe they have committed a crime would do) however as it goes when people talk to the police, whatever you say WILL be used against you. (DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE-EVER). As reflected within the 14 page opinion (what a great read) dismissing all charges based upon the MMMA affirmative defense pursuant to section 8, the court took some time addressing the impact of the so called "statement". While the courts final ruling was based upon our arguments minimizing the value of the statement for purposes of the affirmative defense, it was more than obvious to us that this opinion could have gone either way based upon the Court’s interpretation of the law and the impact of the alleged "statement." Let me say it again, DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE. It is important to note, and this is not legal advice, but at times throughout the case, the State made the following plea offers: Prior to litigating the motions in Circuit Court the State offered my client a resolution that if he Plead to Counts 1) 7 year felony and 5) 2 year high court misdemeanor, they would dismiss the remaining charges, with no sentence agreement. Then after we conducted the Daubert hearing and prior to getting that unfortunate ruling (the motion to reconsider was not necessary) they offered that if my client plead to counts 5 and 6 (2) 2 year high court misdemeanors they would dismiss all the other counts with no sentence agreement. Then of course after we lost the Daubert motion the State withdrew the previous offer, and offered that if my client plead to a 4-year felony and a 2-year high court misdemeanor they would dismiss the rest of the counts with no sentence agreement. Looking back on this case there was a a lot of the blood sweat and tears shed from the backs and brow of Chad, Josh, Steve, Jeff, Dewey, Pam, Deb, David Rudoi, Jesse Williams, Fred Stig-Neilson, Eric VanDussen. Including the all-nighter I pulled Sunday putting together the motion to reconsider regarding the Court’s rulings on Daubert motions (the lab issues), and the preparation for the trial that was to commence Monday - this was a battle that will never be forgotten. Additionally rewarding is the fact that my client’s case and the abusive forfeiture they and many from our community have had to endure, was highlighted in (what is clearly the greatest show ever created) "Weediquette" episode 6 of season 2. Stay tuned, the next series of motions we intend to file will be to compel the return of all of the property that was seized pursuant to the forfeiture (as well as seek other remedies for my client and his wife). I want to congratulate my client and his family for having the will and strength to stand up for what they believed and take on the State on a lopsided playing field in the broken system often called the American judicial system. #TeamFisher #StopTheRaids #KomornLawMI The story continues after the prosecutor appealed our dismissal. http://www.themorningsun.com/general-news/20180326/shepherd-drug-case-reinstated-to-consider-officer-testimony
  2. 6 points
    What Happened? On Tuesday September 22, 2016 Governor Rick Snyder signed into law several new bills allowing a state wide regulated licensing scheme for the Medical Marihuana Industry (House Bill 4209 – The Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act). Unlike The Michigan Medical Marihuana Licensing Act, which created a new law, House Bill 4210 amended the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. The MMMA was specifically amended by changing the title and sections 3, 4, 6, and 7 (MCL 333.26423, 333.26424, 333.26426, and 333.26427), sections 3 and 4 as amended by 2012 PA 512 and section 6 as amended by 2012 PA 514, and by adding sections 4a and 4b. When House Bill 4210 was signed into law, the most significant and important aspect of the new legislation was the amendatory language included within the amendments. Specifically, the amendments included the following language: "This amendatory act clarifies ambiguities in the law in accordance with the original intent of the people, as expressed in section 2(b) of the Michigan medical marihuana act, 2008 IL 1, MCL 333.26422: This amendatory act is curative and applies retroactively as to the following: clarifying the quantities and forms of marihuana for which a person is protected from arrest, precluding an interpretation of “weight” as aggregate weight, and excluding an added inactive substrate component of a preparation in determining the amount of marihuana, medical marihuana, or usable marihuana that constitutes an offense. Retroactive application of this amendatory act does not create a cause of action against a law enforcement officer or any other state or local governmental officer, employee, department, or agency that enforced this act under a good-faith interpretation of its provisions at the time of enforcement." Do the New Amendments to the MMMA Help or Hurt Patients and Caregivers? Enacting section 1. This amendatory act takes effect 90 days after the date it is enacted into law. Enacting section 2. This amendatory act clarifies ambiguities in the law in accordance with the original intent of the people, as expressed in section 2(b) of the Michigan medical marihuana act, 2008 IL 1, MCL 333.26422: “(b) Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports and the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics show that approximately 99 out of every 100 marihuana arrests in the United States are made under state law, rather than under federal law. Consequently, changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana.”. [Emphasis added.] In November of 2008, 63% of Michigan voters overwhelmingly passed the Voter Initiative Proposition 1, acknowledging that cannabis is medicine, and that physicians, patients, and their caregivers would be protected from arrest prosecution and penalty of any kind. In the history of Michigan elections, the 3.3 million votes cast approving Michigan’s Medical Marihuana Voter Initiative was the most votes in the history of Michigan elections. An often overlooked and never quoted or cited, in any Michigan Court of Appeal or Michigan Supreme Court cases, are the following passage from the MMMA The people of the State of Michigan find and declare that: 1. Cannabis is, in fact, Medicine. (a) Modern medical research, including as found by the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine in a March 1999 report, has discovered beneficial uses for marihuana in treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a variety of debilitating medical conditions. 333.26422(a) Similar to Michigan, at least 24 other states1 and Washington, DC have passed medical marihuana laws, however pursuant to federal law it remains illegal, a schedule 1 drug, making it challenging for research within the United States. Despite its federal classification there has been an enormous amount of medical research regarding medical cannabis. 2. Persons engaging in the Medical Use of Marihuana, specifically those defined as Patients and Caregivers, should be protected from criminal prosecutions. (b) Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports and the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics show that approximately 99 out of every 100 marihuana arrests in the United States are made under state law, rather than under federal law. Consequently, changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana. 333.26422(b) 3. The intent of the MMMA was explicitly for the health and welfare of Michigan Citizens and not for police and government profit. © Although federal law currently prohibits any use of marihuana except under very limited circumstances, states are not required to enforce federal law or prosecute people for engaging in activities prohibited by federal law. The laws of Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Washington do not penalize the medical use and cultivation of marihuana. Michigan joins in this effort for the health and welfare of its citizens. 333.26422© The above reference language in the MMMA is found in the Findings and Declarations section MCL 333.26242 (a-c). This declared that the intent of the MMMA was explicitly for the health, benefit, and welfare of Michigan citizens and not for police and government profit! ​In addition to the 2008 Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, Michigan voters have approved proposals for the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana in 21 Michigan cities since 2011. (Initiatives to decriminalize marijuana have been approved in 15 communities: Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Flint, Kalamazoo, Saginaw, Port Huron, East Lansing, Mount Pleasant, Ypsilanti, Berkeley, Hazel Park, Huntington Woods, Oak Park, and Pleasant Ridge. Since 2009, only a handful of ballot proposals were voted down in six communities: Frankfort, Clare, Harrison, Lapeer, Onaway, and Montrose.) Since the MMMA was enacted continued overwhelming support for the legalizing or decriminalizing of marihuana has continued throughout the state, particularly at the local level. Why Did the Legislature Amend the MMMA? Why am I talking about the Findings and Declarations Section of the MMMA MCL 333.26242 (a-c)? These facts are important when trying to understand the most recent Michigan State Police Data that indicates arrests for marijuana possession or use are increasing — even as arrests for other crimes are going down, according to data collected by the Michigan State Police. Between 2008 and 2014, arrests for marijuana possession or use went up 17 percent statewide, that data shows, while arrests for all crimes dropped by 15 percent. Despite these facts arrests for marijuana possession or use went up 17% between 2008 and 2014, according to data from the Michigan State Police. Since 2008, marihuana arrest in Michigan have risen 17%. The Michigan State Police have reported consistently since 2012 forfeiture proceeds in the amount of 24-26 million dollars per year. (See 2015 Michigan State Police Asset Forfeiture Report) The former director of the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division – Gregoire Michaud has stated publicly that the forensic lab spends 40 percent of its resources testing marihuana, and that is the reason that they have been unable to catch up on the backlog of evidence rape kits. Additional disturbing trends from the Michigan State Police’s Data as reflected in a recent article from station 9 & 10's where Blayke Roznowski and photojournalist Noah Jurik talked to prosecutors and the states representative who authored the Bills and asked specifically how local law enforcement are reacting to the changes and how they'll handle medical marijuana now. How Will Police And Prosecutors Handle It Going Forward? This is what they said: "Hopefully, there are some clarifications there," Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina said. Police and courts are determining how they go forward after years of confusion over the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was," Vizina said. "They didn't, the prosecutors didn't, law enforcement didn't. It's been a mess in a way." Michigan State Police say they are working with the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and prosecutors to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly. It's something the sponsor of one of the bills, state representative Mike Callton, says will make enforcement easier. "Let's say policeman pulls a person over and they have a medicine container in their car. Well, it's got a bar code or scantron on it and police can determine from that scantron, where it's been grown, who transported it, where it was tested, where it was refined, if it was refined and where they bought it and that this is, indeed, the medicine for this patient," Callton said. Prosecutors like Daryl Vizina in Cheboygan County hope the laws will be more clear to people in the medical marijuana community. "It's just kind of been a learning process where charges get charged, maybe somebody gets prosecuted, maybe later down the line a higher court overturns the conviction," Vizina said. Really??? Also but directly relevant to this rant, the journalist also captured the following quotes. In the long run, lawmakers think the new laws will eliminate doubt, and increase safety when it comes to medical marijuana. "We needed a way for patients to get this kind of medicine without having to buy it from somebody named Rick in the back alley," Callton said. "There had to be a legitimate way for people to buy this." Law Enforcement React to New Medical Marijuana Laws It is unequivocal that in 2008, Michigan voters declared that marihuana is medicine, persons engaging in the medical use of marihuana should be protected from criminal prosecutions, and the intent of the MMMA was explicitly for the benefit of the health and welfare of Michigan citizens and not for police and government profit. It is often hard to understand how a law that received more than 50% vote in all 83 counties in Michigan could have been so poorly misinterpreted and implemented. To the extent that one believes that the intention of the MMMA was to provide a shield for patients and caregivers, it is hard to reconcile the overwhelming evidence (from the Michigan State Police data). Very little of the voters’ intention was honored. Instead, the Law Enforcement Community has utilized the MMMA as a sword, resulting in a string of 8 years of success defined by the increase of marihuana arrests and consistent profits from forfeiture proceeds. The bills signed into law by the Governor create a state-wide regulated licensing scheme for the Medical Marihuana Industry, and also include amendments to the MMMA. However, listening to how the Law Enforcement Community reacted to this news gives some insight into how the Law Enforcement Community has been able to get away with its treatment of patients and caregivers for the last 8 years. As so articulated by Michigan State Police and the Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina, (who claims to be speaking on behalf of all prosecutors and all law enforcement), ignorance of the law shall be their excuse. Michigan State Police say they are working with the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and prosecutors to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly. "Hopefully, there are some clarifications there." “Police and courts are determining how they go forward after years of confusion over the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.” "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was," Vizina said. "They didn't, the prosecutors didn't, law enforcement didn't. It's been a mess in a way." Prosecutors like Daryl Vizina in Cheboygan County hope the laws will be more clear to people in the medical marijuana community. "It's just kind of been a learning process where charges get charged, maybe somebody gets prosecuted, maybe later down the line a higher court overturns the conviction," Vizina said. The above quotes from those within the law enforcement community should bring shame to them personally, but most importantly their profession. For starters, never has the Michigan State Police previously made a public statement that they are trying to learn about the MMMA, the medical use of marihuana or even how they as law enforcement officer shall enforce issues surrounding “usable marihuana.” To see them quoted 8 years after the enactment of the MMMA, that they are NOW going to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly, sounds more like an apology for not previously understanding the law and previously properly enforcing it. But the quotes by the Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina, (who claims to be speaking on behalf of all prosecutors and all law enforcement), is truly amazing. As a lawyer, I interpret his quotes as a confession to crimes he and others in the law enforcement community committed against the Medical Marihuana Community. In my opinion you cannot do these things without saying that you have violated your duty as a prosecutor. As a lawyer, I would have advised him to take the fifth. But let’s look at and think about what he is actually saying. His statement that "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was." "They didn't, the prosecutors didn't, law enforcement didn't. It's been a mess in a way." To state he personally didn’t know the law but prosecuted others for violating the same law is the definition of a “due process violation.” His statement, objectively interpreted, means that he expected those he was prosecuting to have a greater grasp and knowledge of the MMMA than himself, the elected County Prosecutor. To publicly state that not knowing or understanding the law has been allowed to be the guiding force for prosecutions is an expression of failure and an admission of ignorance. It reflects a lack of integrity, honesty and the requisite duty of fairness in any prosecution. The duty of a prosecutor is not to win at any cost, or even try to win, if the law is unclear to them and the police. Prosecutors as judicial officers have a duty to the accused as well, and that is to ensure the protection of the accused’s constitutional rights. This is fundamental. This is the obligation of the prosecutor in any case that it chooses to prosecute. Often overlooked and seemingly forgotten in the modern justice system is the State’s moral and ethical obligation to ensure a fair trial for the accused. Failing to do this is the definition of an unequal and uneven playing field. But this is how it has been. If you don't believe me, examine the recent amendments to the MMMA. What do the Amendments Say? I have to say that most persons who read the amendments will see only the words, and not really understand in depth, in the minutia, what they really say. You have to look closely, and I would not rely upon the traditional statutory rules of interpretation, and the plain meaning of the words “rules” of interpretation. You have to abandon that principle of interpretation to see what I see. These amendments by the Legislature have confirmed that the State has erred for the last 8 years. Expungements will be granted due to House Bill 4210. The Legislature’s recent amendments to the MMMA acknowledge for the first time the declarations section of the MMMA. The Legislature acknowledges the intention of the MMMA has always been to change state law to practically effect and protect from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana. In doing so, the Legislature has provided relief for those persons who have been wrongly prosecuted and persecuted by the State for its failure to acknowledge the protections intended for patients and their caregivers. The amendments to the MMMA unequivocally clarify and make legal the possession of non-plant material marihuana. The Carruthers holding is ultimately overruled and no longer applies to Michigan patients and caregivers. The amendments specifically authorize the possession of non-plant material marihuana. The uncertainty associated with the possession of non-plant material marihuana is no longer, and patients, caregivers, and the parents of juvenile patients can rest with the peace of mind that they are no longer at risk. The specific Amendments say: Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall IS not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed A COMBINED TOTAL OF 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana AND USABLE MARIHUANA EQUIVALENTS, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount. The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the qualifying patient presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the qualifying patient.[/i] (b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall IS not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for assisting a qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act. The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the primary caregiver presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the primary caregiver. This subsection applies only if the primary caregiver possesses an amount of marihuana IN FORMS AND AMOUNTS that does DO not exceed ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: (1) 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana for each qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process, ; and A COMBINED TOTAL OF 2.5 OUNCES OF USABLE MARIHUANA AND USABLE MARIHUANA EQUIVALENTS. (2) for each registered qualifying patient who has specified that the primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility, ; and (3) any ANY incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots. © FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING USABLE MARIHUANA EQUIVALENCY, THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE CONSIDERED EQUIVALENT TO 1 OUNCE OF USABLE MARIHUANA. (1) 16 OUNCES OF MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IF IN A SOLID FORM. (2) 7 GRAMS OF MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IF IN A GASEOUS FORM. (3) 36 FLUID OUNCES OF MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IF IN A LIQUID FORM. … (M) A PERSON SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ARREST, PROSECUTION, OR PENALTY IN ANY MANNER OR DENIED ANY RIGHT OR PRIVILEGE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CIVIL PENALTY OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION BY A BUSINESS OR OCCUPATIONAL OR PROFESSIONAL LICENSING BOARD OR BUREAU, FOR MANUFACTURING A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IF THE PERSON IS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: (1) A REGISTERED QUALIFYING PATIENT, MANUFACTURING FOR HIS OR HER OWN PERSONAL USE. (2) A REGISTERED PRIMARY CAREGIVER, MANUFACTURING FOR THE USE OF A PATIENT TO WHOM HE OR SHE IS CONNECTED THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT'S REGISTRATION PROCESS. (N) A QUALIFYING PATIENT SHALL NOT TRANSFER A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT OR MARIHUANA TO ANY INDIVIDUAL. (O) A PRIMARY CAREGIVER SHALL NOT TRANSFER A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT TO ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO IS NOT A QUALIFYING PATIENT TO WHOM HE OR SHE IS CONNECTED THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT'S REGISTRATION PROCESS. SEC. 4A. (1) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY UNLESS THE MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES LICENSING ACT IS ENACTED. (2) A REGISTERED QUALIFYING PATIENT OR REGISTERED PRIMARY CAREGIVER SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ARREST, PROSECUTION, OR PENALTY IN ANY MANNER, OR DENIED ANY RIGHT OR PRIVILEGE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CIVIL PENALTY OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION BY A BUSINESS OR OCCUPATIONAL OR PROFESSIONAL LICENSING BOARD OR BUREAU, FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: (A) TRANSFERRING OR PURCHASING MARIHUANA IN AN AMOUNT AUTHORIZED BY THIS ACT FROM A PROVISIONING CENTER LICENSED UNDER THE MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES LICENSING ACT. (B) TRANSFERRING OR SELLING MARIHUANA SEEDS OR SEEDLINGS TO A GROWER LICENSED UNDER THE MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES LICENSING ACT. © TRANSFERRING MARIHUANA FOR TESTING TO AND FROM A SAFETY COMPLIANCE FACILITY LICENSED UNDER THE MEDICAL MARIHUANA FACILITIES LICENSING ACT. SEC. 4B. (1) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTIONS (2) TO (4), A QUALIFYING PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER SHALL NOT TRANSPORT OR POSSESS A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE. (2) THIS SECTION DOES NOT PROHIBIT A QUALIFYING PATIENT FROM TRANSPORTING OR POSSESSING A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE IF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IS IN A SEALED AND LABELED PACKAGE THAT IS CARRIED IN THE TRUNK OF THE VEHICLE OR, IF THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE A TRUNK, IS CARRIED SO AS NOT TO BE READILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THE LABEL MUST STATE THE WEIGHT OF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OUNCES, NAME OF THE MANUFACTURER, DATE OF MANUFACTURE, NAME OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT WAS RECEIVED, AND DATE OF RECEIPT. (3) THIS SECTION DOES NOT PROHIBIT A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FROM TRANSPORTING OR POSSESSING A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE IF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IS ACCOMPANIED BY AN ACCURATE MARIHUANA TRANSPORTATION MANIFEST AND ENCLOSED IN A CASE CARRIED IN THE TRUNK OF THE VEHICLE OR, IF THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE A TRUNK, IS ENCLOSED IN A CASE AND CARRIED SO AS NOT TO BE READILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THE MANIFEST FORM MUST STATE THE WEIGHT OF EACH MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OUNCES, NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE MANUFACTURER, DATE OF MANUFACTURE, DESTINATION NAME AND ADDRESS, DATE AND TIME OF DEPARTURE, ESTIMATED DATE AND TIME OF ARRIVAL, AND, IF APPLICABLE, NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE PRODUCT WAS RECEIVED AND DATE OF RECEIPT. (4) THIS SECTION DOES NOT PROHIBIT A PRIMARY CAREGIVER FROM TRANSPORTING OR POSSESSING A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE FOR THE USE OF HIS OR HER CHILD, SPOUSE, OR PARENT WHO IS A QUALIFYING PATIENT IF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IS IN A SEALED AND LABELED PACKAGE THAT IS CARRIED IN THE TRUNK OF THE VEHICLE OR, IF THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE A TRUNK, IS CARRIED SO AS NOT TO BE READILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THE LABEL MUST STATE THE WEIGHT OF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OUNCES, NAME OF THE MANUFACTURER, DATE OF MANUFACTURE, NAME OF THE QUALIFYING PATIENT, AND, IF APPLICABLE, NAME OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT WAS RECEIVED AND DATE OF RECEIPT. (5) FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING COMPLIANCE WITH QUANTITY LIMITATIONS UNDER SECTION 4, THERE IS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION THAT THE WEIGHT OF A MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT LISTED ON ITS PACKAGE LABEL OR ON A MARIHUANA TRANSPORTATION MANIFEST IS ACCURATE. (6) A QUALIFYING PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A CIVIL FINE OF NOT MORE THAN $250.00. WHO DOES IT APPLY TO? The new amendments to the MMMA pursuant to House Bill 4210 apply retroactively and are intended to be curative. The new amendments create an opportunity to bring relief to those persons who have been wrongly accused of possessing non-plant material marihuana. The new amendments create an opportunity to revisit and correct the situation where the probable cause of a crime in any investigation of patients and caregivers was illegally continued or escalated because the subject matter of the investigation was the non-plant material marihuana. It is important to understand the large number of scenarios where an investigation was continued or escalated because the material or substance associated with the investigation was "contraband" or non-plant material marihuana. If this happened to you, you were right to believe that it was wrong. If this happened to you, the police, the prosecutor and the state were wrong. If this happened to you, you very likely have a remedy to right this wrong. These situations may entitle you to relief: · As a patient or caregiver, charges were brought against you for possession of any form of marijuana edible or marijuana concentrate. · As a patient or caregiver, charges were escalated when the investigating agents discovered “contraband” or non-plant material marihuana. · As a patient or caregiver, you have been the victim of a civil forfeiture that was based on the investigating agents discovering “contraband” or non-plant material marihuana. The new amendments are more than clear in what mistakes it intends to fix and to which individuals may benefit from this correction. The state admits and acknowledges that the MMMA contained ambiguities that needed clarifying, because the current state of the interpretation of the law had failed to express the original intent of the MMMA. "Changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana.” The amendatory language of the MMMA provides an opportunity to set aside a prior conviction or revisit a prior case that is over, and reopen the case to litigate the states admitted errors. Legislatively enacted laws or amendments usually never apply retroactively unless the amended language contains an explicit reference to a retroactive application, as the amendments contained in House Bill 4210 do. This is a very unique opportunity that does not happen often, and persons who have been affected by the State’s admitted errors now have a potential path to right the wrong. HOW DO I SEEK RELIEF? As a general rule, the ability to set aside a conviction has limitations, and Courts are in the business of closing cases, not opening them. Expungement, albeit expanded by law in 2015, and Motions to Set Aside Convictions MCR 6.500, based upon constitutional or statutory ground are generally denied, however the amendments to the MMMA via House Bill 4210 create an entirely new statutory method to seek relief from conviction, and penalty. If you or a loved one meets the criteria described above, and if you believe you have been a victim of the States admitted errors, or your case or conviction resulted from the irrational interpretation that non-plant material marihuana is not usable marihuana, Call Komorn Law, 1-800-656-3557. We are currently offering Legal Services evaluating your case, and advising clients of potential remedies and or legal strategies to clearing your record from marihuana related conviction. Even if you have not had this happen to you, listen and enjoy while I present evidence that what I am saying is true. Today I got a call from fellow brother counsel, Bernie Jocuns, who had a medible candy case, which he had litigated to the point of being granted a Daubert hearing to challenge the scientific method of reporting the non-plant material candies. After the amendments, we discussed the impact of the amendments to his case, and a letter was drafted sent to the Prosecutor highlighting the significance of the curative and retroactive language, and sure enough Bernie Jocuns and his client immediately received a nolle pros. And for those of you that don’t speak Latin, that means a dismissal. And for anyone who wants to fight back, I have a file drawer of paper to start undoing the State’s error and making things right for the medical marihuana community. 1. Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington
  3. 6 points
    SirLongSmoke

    Verdict......

    The verdict has been made as I sit at the councils table. She struggles to open the sealed envelope and starts the verbiage used to describe it. NOT GUILTY, Dan pats me on the back as I look to his side. I was poised and never overly excited,just content in the moment. The peace that was given beforehand, was enough to handle whatever the verdict would have been, but this is what I wanted. Now it's uplifted and removed, nice to say that I won't have to deal with it anymore. From Dan's expertise knowledge capability, this is only the third section 8 case to ever make it to trail, let alone win. Thanks for all the support, I plan on writing a book that will have the whole story; until then, always look up and be guided from the spirit within!
  4. 6 points
    Man won't face jail for technical violation of medical marijuana law Unfortunately all too often we are seeing these types of cases reported in the media regarding the MMMA. I take issue with these conclusions. The law allows each patient 2.5 ounces of usable marijuana and to cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any registered caregiver can have up to that amount for each patient registered to them (with a maximum of six), including the grower, if each person has an MMMA card. In his wife’s plot were an additional 40 plants, but the agents said Delucenay was the one actually cultivating the crop, not his wife. "You can’t do two grow operations in excess of what the law allows," Kimble said. I patently disagree with this interpretation and firmly believe that the interpretation being used from the People v Bylsma Michigan Supreme Court is wrong. Section 4(d) of the MMMA clearly states that: (d) There shall be a presumption that a qualifying patient or primary caregiver is engaged in the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act if the qualifying patient or primary caregiver: (1) is in possession of a registry identification card; and (2) is in possession of an amount of marihuana that does not exceed the amount allowed under this act. The presumption may be rebutted by evidence that conduct related to marihuana was not for the purpose of alleviating the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition, in accordance with this act. The facts presented in this case seem to be unequivocal that the accused and his wife possessed a cards, and were in possession of an amount of marihuana that does not exceed the amount allowed under this act. There were no assertions in this article to suggest the existence of evidence that conduct related to marihuana was not for the purpose of alleviating the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition, in accordance with this act. The State claimed it was a technical violation, so why is it a “good” or “fair” deal to plead to anything other than a technical violation? Why is the only offer available to the accused to plead to a violation of the controlled substance act, when the accused is allowed to possess and engage in the medical use of marihuana? Michigan’s Medical Marijuana Act (MMMA) "is highly complicated, especially for caregivers," Branch County Circuit Court Judge Bill O’Grady told Kevin Delucenay while the latter faced sentencing. While I disagree with this statement, and suggest complicated is a code word for good for the caregiver and bad for the Police, Prosecutor, and the costs associated with a plea to a controlled substance violation. The question that remains is if it is so complicated, why is the accused guilty of anything, other than being confused like everyone else? Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but confusion of the law is something very different. Too many patients and caregivers who have relied upon the MMMA to protect them have been ensnared in the criminal justice system because of judicial and prosecutorial confusion. I would suggest that before someone is guilty of any crime, the Judge, Prosecutor and the Police must not be confused about the law. Read more: http://www.thedailyreporter.com/article/20141029/News/141028892#ixzz3HZFkElDL
  5. 6 points
    Recently in Chicago, a young man was charged and tried for felony possession with intent to deliver marijuana. During a suppression hearing, it became evident that the five officers had conducted an illegal search of the defendant's vehicle. All five officers systematically lied on the witness stand, claiming the defendant consented to the search. A video proved otherwise. The judge, a former prosecutor, admonished the officers and threw out the evidence against the defendant. The prosecutor dropped all charges against the defendant. Let's face it -- as humans, we are imperfect. Some of us lie and cheat to make our personal or professional lives easier. Like anyone else, some police officers may also lie and cheat for similar reasons. The difference between a police officer and the rest of us is that we must answer to them while the police have authoritative power to act with impunity, under the color of the law. When we discover that a police officer has lied, it raises serious questions and concerns. For every falsehood uncovered, how often does one go unnoticed? How often do a police officer's lies end up becoming damning evidence against a defendant? When the police lie, the integrity of our entire system of government comes into question. I read about the case out of Chicago, and wondered what the reaction of an average person might be. Shock? Anger? Eye-rolling annoyance? In my work as a criminal defense attorney, I leave nearly every courtroom experience feeling that the police have lied or at least exaggerated the facts. My experience is not unique. This happens every single day in every single courtroom throughout the country. To make a case against a defendant, some police officers feel the need to stretch the truth to fit within the confines of the charging crime. The war on drugs, families and our constitution is compromised when police officers lie. Lawyers challenge the integrity or truth of police officer testimony, as it relates to searches of persons and homes, before the judge and not the jury. The issue of illegal searches is a legal issue and not a factual issue. This means that at no time on behalf of my client can I argue in a jury trial that the police violated my client's constitutional right to be free from illegal searches, and therefore you should find him or her not guilty. That argument is going to be in front of a judge, if at all. Despite the solemn judicial duty to be the final arbiters of constitutional protections, it could be political suicide to appear to be soft on crime or make rulings that the police officers lied or violated the defendant's constitutional rights. Almost every case that arises from an executed search warrant will ultimately be challenged in court, yet very few result in the finding of any violation or the exclusion or suppression of illegally or unconstitutionally obtained evidence. This brings us to the case in Chicago. Five officers testified on the witness stand and lied under oath, concocting a story to avoid a finding that they had in fact violated the defendant's constitutional rights. But for a sole dash cam video these officers were unaware of, this would have been an average day in the criminal justice system. The defendant's story would have been the typical story told in the war on drugs: The bad guy doper wants the judge to believe the police are lying. The doper must be the obvious liar because he was the one caught with drugs. He's found guilty of his felony charges. Had it not been for the dash cam the officers meant to disable, the lies fabricated by all five police officers would have been accepted as the truth, and the defendant would likely be a felon, and another victim of the war on drugs, added to the growing and senseless list of American citizens. Some readers may think: the defendant had the marijuana, so even if the officers lied about how they got it, he is still guilty of a crime. Those readers are missing a very important point. We entrust our police officers with great power and a shield of governmental immunity. While they have the power to search, seize, detain, arrest and use deadly force if necessary, they must do so under the strictest of guidelines. With that in mind, consider the following: can a police officer pull you over and arrest you simply based on a hunch? No, not unless the officer observed a traffic violation or has reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime is being committed. What if an officer decided they didn't care about the law, pulled you over anyhow, handcuffed you, and then discovered you had a small bag of marijuana hidden in your right shoe? If the officer lied and said they effected the search and arrest within the confines of the law, you may very well end up with a criminal charge and conviction. When the police abuse their authority by lying, it can lead to innocent people being charged with crimes they did not commit, or simply people being illegally searched and seized, resulting in charges they would not otherwise have. For years the war on drugs has been waged based upon the truth, veracity and integrity of the law enforcement community. If a police officer doesn't have probable cause to search, they must obtain a search warrant. In order to get a search warrant, an affidavit must be presented to a neutral and detached magistrate. The magistrate is supposed to examine and read the affidavit, and determine if probable cause exists that a crime is occurring at that moment in time. If such a finding is made, the magistrate will sign the search warrant authorizing the government to execute a search warrant. This finding of probable cause and the authorization to execute the search warrant is the tool used by the government to vitiate and circumvent the protections set forth in the Constitution of both the State of Michigan and the United States. When officers lie, as in the Chicago case, the problems with the system of justice and the war on drugs is exponentially highlighted. How many times had the officers done this before? In order to have such a coordinated, if dishonest, performance, presumably this had not been the first time. How many other defendants, who also claimed the violation of their constitutional rights, challenged the officers' version of events before a judge but without a video, and were denied the relief they requested? Without the video, how can one person prove that five seasoned and experienced officers of the law were lying? What judge would ever hear the testimony of five police officers repeating the same story five times over again, yet make a finding that the defendant with drugs in his car was more honest or credible than the officers? Without hard evidence to the contrary, like the miraculous dash cam in the Chicago case, it simply does not happen, ever. What about the officers who do in fact get caught lying? One would think that for the integrity of the system, each jurisdiction would maintain a list of officers who behaved as such so that these constitutional atrocities cannot ever happen again. Yet no such list exists. In the rare situations when an officer is found to have violated a defendant's constitutional rights, similar findings often seem to appear on the same day. It's not uncommon to learn later in the day of a similar ruling, with the same officer with an affidavit for a search warrant before the same magistrate who issued the previous search warrant erroneously. Notably missing is any note of the previous transgressions, leaving a fundamental lack of accountability. The officers in the Chicago case were sent to desk duty. As far as we can tell, there has been no review of the officers' past cases. After some time passes, business will likely continue as usual. Like many other people, some police officers lie on the job. The difference is that their lies have a resounding ripple effect with devastating consequences. When an individual's reputation, years of their life or life itself hang in the balance and their entire case comes down to their word against that of a lying police officer, the odds are most assuredly not in their favor. Unfortunately, without hard evidence like a video to document your story, an officer's testimony will be very difficult to overcome. Something like a dash cam video, like the lifesaving evidence from the Chicago case, can be the difference between prison and having your charges dropped. Unfortunately, this evidence can only be collected and provided by the very people who have violated your rights -- the police. We entrust our police officers with our personal safety, protection and upholding the law. They are burdened with great responsibilities under the law to follow protocol, policies and procedures because they have tremendous power. There cannot be any blurred lines between their duties and authority as law enforcement officers, heavily limited and regulated by state law and various policies and procedures, and their powers of enforcement.
  6. 5 points
    After the legalization of marijuana in Michigan, some patients are thinking they could stop paying the state $100 for the special mmp card , and just use the recreational marijuana law to grow their medicine. A patient with a registered card can use the ultimate defense and immunity to avoid a driving under the influence charge. Only adults 21 or over are protected by the new legalization law, but no one yet knows how the new law will affect driving privileges. Is the zero tolerance of THC in your blood law still in effect for adult use marijuana ? The new law is similarly worded to the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. Whereas the MMMA says While the meaning of "under the influence" was not decided within the MMMA until 2012, with People v Koon, that was 4 years of police arresting patients for driving with marijuana in their blood. The court in People v Koon came to the conclusion: Ignoring that for a minute, the Michigan State Police have been tasked with sampling saliva during road side stops for a task force on marijuana driving. The task force was created in order to find a nanogram limit for THC in blood, even though 50 years of scientific research on the subject has consistently said marijuana does not affect driving. http://komornlaw.com/35-years-research-reports-driving-cannabis-marijuana/ http://komornlaw.com/mmma-court-case-library/ So my advice is, if you are a patient, keep the patient card active until the courts either give up on all marijuana issues, or at least this driving issue , or it is decided by the Michigan Supreme Court. Basically, until non-patients get a similar "People v Koon" ruling from the Michigan Supreme Court, it is advised that any patients keep their cards to protect them fully under the MMMA. "Don't be the first person to test this in court."
  7. 5 points
    Recent national articles have embarrassed the state of Michigan. It does not take much reading or news watching to discover that Michigan's national spotlight is not anything to brag about. The Governor is facing controversy over his leadership in the Flint water crisis. Some are calling the situation a human rights violation, and enough voices have been heard to draw a federal investigation (1). Also according to the Center for Public Integrity and Global Integrity, Michigan ranks last in laws on ethics and transparency. (2) Quietly, without a spotlight and without any public attention, the Michigan State Bar(3) and the Great State of Michigan convened for the first time ever in United States history, a State Bar Association-sponsored Marihuana Section. In light of the horrible news associated with Michigan as of late, it was nice to that Michigan had taken some positive steps in the area of marihuana contemplation. Better yet it was even inspiring that my fellow sisters and brothers of the bar were the ones who organized the nation’s first marihuana section of a state-sanctioned bar association. The group of lawyers who are participating in this section were from all over the state, some who I knew and have fought in the trenches with, and many others from throughout the state, who likewise had devoted much of their practice in recent years to counseling and advising patients, caregiver, doctors and business owners related to their interest in Michigan’s Medical Marihuana Program. Additionally, much discussion was given to the reality that the view on marihuana both nationally and within the state is changing drastically. The consensus amongst the group was that lawyers knowledgable in the area of marihuana are currently in high demand and will continue to be needed as Michigan transforms from prohibition in the years to come. The skill set of the lawyers involved was unparalleled, and it was nice to hear so many other lawyers in different areas of specialty offering their commentary and ideas as to the interplay of the current marihuana prohibitions, the MMMA and the future of legalization in Michigan. There were even a few familiar faces belonging to prosecutors that I have battled over medical marihuana cases who were in attendance. With little faith in the current government’s rationale or policies regarding medical marihuana and responsible adult marihuana use, I am optimistic that this group can have some impact on what has truly been a failed effort by the state to deal with these very important issues. A huge thanks must be extended to Bernard Jocuns, Mary Chartier and Dan Grow, three superb attorneys who worked tirelessly to make sure this new section was in fact realized. I believe all the members of this section are grateful for their efforts, and shared the same sense of optimism and desire to help shape a more reasonable marihuana policy for the state of Michigan. I look forward to being involved with this organization, sharing, learning, and working with fellow lawyers on this very important issue, to which I have devoted so much of my practice. In closing, it is nice to know that many other professionals seem to share similar ideology and beliefs about marihuana policy, and even better that our organization is sponsored by, supported by and part of the State Bar of Michigan. Most importantly, it was nice to be surrounded by the talent of the fellow lawyers of this organization who are truly participating in a historic event that can only be categorized as “good news” coming out of Michigan. http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/health/flint-michigan-water-investigation/ http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2015/11/09/michigan-ranks-last-laws-ethics-transparency/75288210/ The State Bar of Michigan is the governing body for lawyers in the State of Michigan. Membership is mandatory for attorneys who practice law in Michigan. The organization's mission is to aid in promoting improvements in the administration of justice and advancements in jurisprudence, improving relations between the legal profession and the public, and promoting the interests of the legal profession in Michigan.
  8. 5 points
    Earlier this week I attended a fund raiser for Michigan Attorney General Candidate Mark Totten. When he addressed the supporters at this function, it was more than refreshing to hear the honesty and integrity with which he spoke. Of course the supporters present were those from our Michigan medical marihuana community, and they were all there to hear and see what our great state would be like with Mark Totten as our Law Enforcement Leader. Mark Totten was up front that the Medical Marihuana issue was not one that was entirely in his wheelhouse, he did however emphatically state that the current policies have failed miserably and needed to be changed. The most compelling words he stated were that he wanted to be a problem solver and not a problem creator. Everyone in the room new what he meant, and as he engaged with the community throughout the night, listening, talking, taking in the various complaints, grievances and suggestion, it was encouraging to say the least. While he may not yet be an expert on the MMMA, he was more than an expert, in fact great orator would better describe him, in breaking down the opponent, Bill Schuette's policies and obstruction of the MMMA. His final remarks were spot on, and clearly reflected many if not all of the inconsistent, irrational policies, and waste of tax payer dollars I feel I have been talking about since 2010. The wasting of valuable resources, ignoring the law, the constitutional initiative, and crafting arguments to defend these policies that no lawyer or any citizen should take seriously, needs to end. In 2008 3.3 Million Michiganders voted for the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act 2008. Never before in Michigan History have more votes been cast for any issue, ever. This monumental event expressed, amongst other things, the will of the citizens of Michigan to recognize cannabis as a medicine. “Modern medical research, including as found by the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine in a March 1999 report, has discovered beneficial uses for marihuana in treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a variety of debilitating medical conditions.” MCL 333.26422 The ballot initiative in Michigan is a constitutional right, and allows citizens to change the law through the ballot box. In addition to this process being a constitutionally guaranteed protection for Michigan Citizens, it also requires a super majority vote by the legislature to amend, giving it superior precedent to all other legislatively created laws. The biggest and most outspoken opponent to the Ballot Initiative prior to and after it became law has been Bill Schuette. Bill Schuette is a career politician who has fed from the public trough his entire professional career. In 2010 he became the Attorney General of the State of Michigan. Despite the continued overwhelming citizen support for medical cannabis, Bill Schuette the leading law enforcement agent in the state has been the biggest obstructionist to its implementation. At a time when Michigan most needed leadership, in how to effectively transition the 80 years of reefer madness taught as a religion to the law enforcement community on their first day at the academy, instead he has failed us. The Attorney General by his own propaganda machine has declared the MMMA full of more holes than Swiss cheese. His disdain for the MMMA, from his position of leadership, has set in motion a free ticket to turn a blind eye and encourage willful ignorance as the standard in the Michigan Law Enforcement Community. Prosecutors and Judges freely espouse that the MMMA is poorly written and is a bad law, begging the question of since when does or why should it matter what the elected officials of this Great State, sworn to enforce the law, and interpret the law respectively think about any given law, let alone a law that is supported by 70 percent of Michigan voters. Instead of embracing his constituents, the voters of Michigan, he has ignored their voice and used his position of authority and power to create fear, and misinformation. Instead of being accountable and responsible to the a People of the State of Michigan, he has instead cast doubt on its legitimacy, seemingly encouraging the Law Enforcement Community to ignore the protections of the Act. Instead of declaring reasonable interpretations of the MMMA that are necessary for the Act to be workable, he has either acted intentionally in failing to clarify its ambiguities or encourage officers to find the ambiguities that ultimately ensnarl what would be otherwise law abiding citizens into technical violators and alleged felons. Instead of using his office to help the citizens of Michigan implement the MMMA, he has instead done the opposite taking advantage of every opportunity to circumvent the law and ignore the will of the voters. Medical Cannabis and Cannabis reform in the United States is and will remain a topic in the national and state headlines. With over 70 and 50 percent respectively supporting reform, this issue is not going anywhere. The Michigan Legislature has attempted to address and pass a state law intended to address concerns of the MMMA and move towards a regulated system for retail sales. As the provisioning center bill remains tabled until the lame duck session, delays to its passing can be directly linked back to the state police and their leader Bill Schuette. November 4, 2014 is an important day for the medical cannabis, and cannabis reform community but more importantly for all voters in the state of Michigan. The choices are more than clear: will Michigan pave the way, and serve as an example of medical cannabis and cannabis reform pursuant to the will of the citizens of Michigan, or will a single individual espousing arcane policies, ignoring logic, and overriding popular support maintain his position of power. Does Michigan want an Attorney General who creates problems for the medical cannabis community or a person whose goal is to solve problems? Do we want an Attorney General who refuses to be educated as to the benefits of medical cannabis? Do we want an Attorney General who has toured the state, at tax payer expense, as Bill Schuette did on his “Clearing the Air” tour where he spewed fear, misinformation, and reefer madness. Do we want an Attorney General who claims to be a supporter of states’ rights who has ignored the desire of the State of Michigan to implement a medical marihuana program because, as he says, it is against federal law. Or would Michigan be better off with a leader with a more modern and realistic view of cannabis in Michigan? One who is willing to listen, learn, and become educated so he can be a problem solver instead of a problem maker. The State of Michigan will be at a crossroads on November 4, and at that time it will be decided whether the next 4 years of cannabis reform in Michigan will be implemented or obstructed. The choice should be simple vote for problem solving, and vote Mark Totten for Attorney General.
  9. 5 points
    The other day my son asked me why I decided to grow medicinal marijuana instead of just buying it, and at the time I didn’t have a good answer for him. He worries about my health; there are days when I can barely get out of bed and days when I can’t even keep my hands from shaking. So I can understand why he is concerned, but after having some time to think about why I chose to grow medicinal marijuana, I thought I would share. I have been gardening my whole life. When I was a child, my mother grew all kinds of vegetables in our backyard. She taught me everything I know about gardening. When buying my first home, the only thing I told the realtor is that there must be room for a garden. That was many years ago and I have been gardening ever since. You can imagine how difficult it was when my illness progressed and I could no longer put in the time and energy needed to maintain my tomato garden. It seemed as though I had exchanged my identity as a gardener for multiple sclerosis patient. And who wants that? When my doctor mentioned growing medicinal marijuana, I was in shock, it felt as though I got part of myself back. I would have never guessed that all my gardening experience would play such a pivotal role in my medical treatment. Then, I learned tomato plants have a similar root system to cannabis plants! Not only did I have PRO-MIX HP (which, as luck would have it, is a wonderful medium for growing cannabis) left over from gardening, but I now had the confidence to begin growing cannabis indoors. Home-grown foods have always been very important to me, I am a firm believer in the old saying “You are what you eat”. I love home-grown foods for the same reason I love home-grown medicinal marijuana: you know exactly what you’re going to get. From germination to curing, you can control your growing medium, plant’s diet, supplemental nutrients, etc. Not only does growing your own cannabis give you quality control, growing yourself gives you control over the strain as well as quantity. Once you find the strain that works best for your medicinal needs, there is comfort in knowing you may grow the strain you like, and may grow as many (as many as your state allows) as you need. While it may be easier to buy the finished product at a dispensary, I find the growing process to be very therapeutic. Growing my own medicinal marijuana has been a very liberating experience; it has allowed me to actively participate in my treatment and given me a sense of control, which is priceless when battling a disease that is centered around the uncontrollable.
  10. 4 points
    Our clients in Wayne and Garden City were charged with four counts of controlled substance felonies, as well as the police seizing retirement bank accounts, vehicles and other unrelated property. Count 1: Controlled Substances – Delivery / Manufacture of marijuana 5-45 kilograms Count 2: Controlled Substances – Delivery / Manufacture of marijuana 5-45 kilograms At the time of the charged offense, the clients were valid registered patients and caregivers with the Michigan Medical Marihuana Program, and were in possession of their cards, and identification at all times during the incident. At the time of the execution of the search warrant, officers were aware the accused were medical marihuana patients and caregivers. In the criminal case in Garden City we had to file many motions to maintain and preserve our client’s rights. · Motion for immunity from prosecution, Section 4 MMMA defense. · Motion for immunity from arrest, Section 4 MMMA Defense. · Motion in Limine to preclude the Search Warrant as defective. · Motion to dismiss charges, Section 4 paraphernalia MMMA defense. · Motion in Limine to preclude evidence from an unconstitutional warrantless cell phone search. · Motion to return untainted property based on lack of a probable cause. Simultaneously, the county seizes assets via civil asset forfeiture laws at the same time as the criminal charges. If you do not challenge the civil asset forfeiture, the county or state will just take the property. Police and prosecutors are only required to give you a piece of paper when the police take the property, called a "Notice of intent to forfeit". For our clients to get their bank accounts back and other property, we had to file motions to compel the court to uphold our client’s constitutional rights to their property. After putting in an appearance on the forfeiture case, the prosecutor failed to notice us of any actions. When we showed up to court, the forfeiture case was dismissed due to “Failure to Serve” in 2015. Wayne County Prosecutors then refiled the forfeiture case TWO years later. We fought again with a series of motions. · Motion to dismiss due to statute of limitations, failure to refile case “promptly”. · Motion to quash discovery. · Motion to dismiss, Section 4 MMMA defense to any penalty (forfeiture). · Motion / Memo to demand a show cause hearing for reason why property was not returned. The clients were charged by the police who thought they were committing serious crimes. The police officers thought, based on their training and experience, our clients were manufacturing marijuana. In cross-examinations of the police officers involved in the raids, we asked a few standard questions. Mr. Komorn : Have you read the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act? Sgt. Police officer: The whole thing? How are the enforcers of the law supposed to carry out the law, if they don’t know the law? How are the police officers supposed to decide who is in compliance with the law and who is not in compliance with the law? There are also 2,000 pages of case law on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, detailing out various immunities and procedures that are not being followed by the police. The police were overzealous and caused ridiculous violations of our client’s constitutional rights. Our clients were charged with the following crimes in Garden City, due to the police using false and incompetent search warrants. Controlled substance--- Manufacture of Marijuana, contrary to MCL; 333.7401(2)(d)(ii), a 7 year felony Controlled substance--- Possession with Intent to Deliver Marijuana, contrary to MCL; 333.7401(2)(d)(ii), a 7 year felony The criminal case against our client was dismissed in Garden City after filing two motions. · Motion to suppress evidence due to lack of probable cause. · Motion to return untainted property. The judge in the case read the original search warrants and said it was ridiculously deficient! https://www.wxyz.com/news/rep-lucido-says-bill-would-prevent-police-from-seizing-innocent-peoples-stuff
  11. 4 points
    Well, since I stumbled upon my naturally decarbed concentrated cannabis oil, I wanted to try some buds that should be naturally decarbed. I had some that had been stored for about 4 months or a bit longer. I had been meaning to do it, but got a bit lazy about it since I enjoy the oil so much. With the naturally decarbed oil it makes it even more difficult. I discuss the naturally decarbed oil in my concentrates blog http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/blog/532/entry-1098-rso-qwiso-qwet-and-naturally-decarbed-sap-tincture-concentrates-by-grow-goddess/#commentsStart Anyway, the reason why it is so difficult for me to do the bud test is that since I have been taking the naturally decarbed oil, for me to clean up, will take at least 3 days. With RSO, it only takes a day or two. Even though the oils are similar in potency, for some reason the naturally decarbed oil seems to last twice as long as the RSO. So, I cleaned up now for a good three days. It has been painful to say the least, but, I need to know. My first day eating the decarbed buds, I only ate a joints worth. I rolled a good size joint of strawberry cough, cut it into four pieces, and swallowed each piece after forming it into a pill size, with a gulp of water. Nothing really happened right away. About 4 or so hours later, I felt a buzz creeping up then hit me kind of hard. It faded and I went to bed not sure if it was still effects from the oil or from ingesting the buds. I told myself I would know the next day for sure. The next day: I ate about the same size joint in the same manner, same strain, SC. I was surprised I think I had a little buzz in the morning when I woke up. I believe it was lingering effects from the joint I ate the day before. Not 100% positive though. So, after eating my joint in the morning, again, I felt a stronger buzz come up and hit me three hours later. It was certainly from the buds. That is just eating a joint. It is now 7:30 pm, I ate the joint at about 7:00 am, and I am still feeling the buzz. This SC that I rolled my joints with is some of my top shelf buds. It is four months old. I am guessing I will still feel the effects in the morning like I did from the joint the day before. I am kind of surprised, but it does make sense. A maintenance dose of the ND Sap oil lasts about 24 hours, sometimes longer, and that would be about a joint's worth of bud. So It would make sense that a joint worth of bud would offer the same quality of buzz that the oil does, or at least around the same potency. First impression: I prefer the ND Sap. I am not sure if I prefer the RSO or decarbed bud yet. It will take another day or two of sampling. If the bud does last 24 hours, one joint worth, I would have to say it is more medicinal than RSO in my opinion. The buds should contain all of the medicinal properties. Unlike most oils, the bud will contain the red oil which is water soluble. Who knows what medicinal properties are in the red oil. Here are a couple of pictures of the red oil. This red oil is not in RSO or ND Sap, but it is in the bud that I have been eating. Shot glass with frozen red oil Red oil after water evaporated out Now I am not saying to try to manage cancer with buds instead of RSO. I have no idea if decarbed buds would be as effective. What I am saying is ingesting decarbed buds looks promising. Whether it is for preventative maintenance or simply pain relief, also, legal reasons (MI COA ruling deeming concentrates and medibles illegal (in my opinion it is not legal for them to say that, not going to discuss why, but just what I believe)). Either way, I think the naturally decarbed buds is a great alternative to concentrates, or just to simply get an idea of what ingesting concentrates would be like. A couple of things I can point out that I have noticed. A couple of my strains are better smoked or eaten after they have naturally decarbed (4 months stored, nice and dry, sealed in a jar for 120 days). The strains seem to have more flavor, better tasting when it comes to smoking or just smelling the aroma from the open jar. Another thing I have noticed over the last couple of days from eating the bud is it seems to have sped up my metabolism. My first impression, could just be that it is something new. Not sure yet. This will probably be a short blog, but seemed worthy. If anything changes or I encounter anything new I will add to this. So far seems to be a great alternative and a great way to sample concentrates. Give it a few days of ingesting the decarbed buds before making a full or partial assessment of its worth. I for one have learned that the hard way. Patience pays off in most cases. This should be a 100% legal way to use cannabis as an edible medication in MI. If not, I don't see anything other than a 100% deliberate entrapment. Think of all of the possibilities of how one could use the naturally decarbed buds. Put some in a grinder and sprinkle it over pizza. Sprinkle some on a brownie and cover the ground bud with frosting. The possibilities are endless. In my opinion, any heat, such as oven, dehydrate, microwave, sunlight, etc. accelerates the loss of the medicinal properties of the buds. Some strains may require more quantity than others to feel the effects. Remember, it can take up to 4 hours to feel the effects.
  12. 4 points
    In the house of the wise are stores of choice food and oil, but a foolish man devours all he has. Proverbs 21:20 Well there are a gazillion conspiracy theories out there. I must admit, I am a Christian and also believe in the Shmeta, a 7 year cycle. This Shmeta year is extraordinarily biblical, 4 blood moons, star of Bethlehem, the biblical aspects of this year goes on and on, with many events to happen in September and soon after. This is not a blog to fear monger, just informational. I have done a lot of research over the years on this, but am just getting started on the prepping, better late than never. Start off small and when you buy groceries, get a little extra to put away. Don't put all of your eggs in one basket. You may want to consider stocking up on items for bartering. The thing I keep hearing of the most to invest in is gold and silver. Well, I don't have the cash flow for that and don't know of many that do. I am more concerned with survival over any financial investments. For those who can afford to invest in precious medals, turn that focus to food and water. A quick word of warning when it comes to prepping. You need to keep it to yourself for 2 reasons. 1: you don't want everyone kicking in your door if the SHTF (bunny muffin hits the fan) and taking all of your resources. You can't predict the actions of a desperate and hungry person. 2: our government will put you on a list as a potential terrorist if you have a food and water supply of 7 days or more. That was from a speech given by Rand Paul and I have to believe him. Let's get the "tough guy" things out of the way. With most preppers, the first thing that comes to mind is guns and ammo. That is on the bottom of my list, not to say it is not an important thing to have. It could be one of the most valuable. Here is my best advice. Have a 12 gauge shotgun. I would recommend a Mossberg 590 Military Special with a bayonet lug. That is around $350 and considered the most reliable firearm in the world. Here is a link to the model bayonet I have, the M7 bayonet with the M10 sheath. http://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/us-spec-military-style-m7-bayonet-with-m10-style-sheath?a=1884227 I would recommend two different types of handguns. I would only choose a handgun that is concealable so you can blend in. A 357 revolver would be a good choice because it can accept 38 special and 38+P bullets along with the 357 mags. They are all common bullets and that is why I consider the 357 an all around good revolver. A decent 357 revolver cost around $500. For a high capacity handgun, a pistol, I would have to recommend a 9mm baby Glock (G-26). It is the smallest 9mm Glock makes and accepts all 9mm clips Glock makes, including the 33 round clip. The G-26 is around $500. I like the gen 3 model the best. A downside with the Glock, you cannot use reloads. Of course extra ammo is a must, how much, well, I do not know. If I had to choose an inexpensive assault rifle, but of quality, I would choose an AK-47. However, it can't be the cheap stamped steel version; it would have to be a higher quality with all milled parts. The price range for the AK-47 starts at about $350 and can go up to $1,000. You can easily get full metal jacket bullets rather inexpensively. If you want an American, quality, low cost assault rifle, I would recommend a Reuger mini 14. This firearm takes the .223 bullets. The cost is around $500 and up depending on the options. The last recommendation for a firearm, if you are looking for an elite assault rifle type of weapon, I would have to recommend this website: http://hdfirearms.com/ When it comes to firearms, it is not about how cool it looks or how expensive it is. It is how comfortable and confident you are with handling it. I have seen people at the firing range with the original Russian SKS, from the 1940s, with open sights and hitting the bull's eye without failure. It must be the authentic Russian model, not the Chinese knock off. When it comes to the AK-47 or Russian SKS, I do not recommend using American bullets. Use Russian or foreign military light armor piercing bullets, preferably Russian. Enough with the guns, not what this blog is about, just had to get that out of the way. PREPPERS - PREPPING SKILLS These are skills everyone should have, not because of "dooms day", but for self reliance. It is common sense to be prepared for any type of disaster. There are hundreds of different disasters that could occur from tornadoes and snowstorms to earthquakes and volcanoes. How well you are prepared can be the difference of life or death or whether or not you and your family will be made to suffer and for how long. Prepping used to be a standard lifestyle. We have become so dependent on government, big businesses, technology, and the power companies. In the past, 90% of the populous lived in rural areas. Now it is the opposite. I can't imagine what it would be like in the city if the power were to go out for 2 weeks, especially in the northern states during the winter. If everybody had some form of investment in preparing, it would not be much of a problem. The way society is today, we need to ask; What will you do for clean water or food? We have seen the government fail; remember the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? It would be impossible for the government to aid and protect us all if there were a big disaster. Such as, what if the New Madrid fault line were to become active like it did many years ago? I believe that was the worse documented earthquake in the US. It went off for days. The epicenter was in the part of the US where Tennessee, Kentucky, and Arkansas meet, and the effects were felt all the way to New York. The quake caused church bells to ring. It was so intense, and went on for so many days that people began to fall to their knees believing it was the wrath of God and began to repent. Do some research on the Madrid fault line, you will be shocked. For those in the west, what if the Yellowstone super volcano erupts? That could potentially take out 1/3 of the US. It is not a matter of if; it is a matter of when a disaster happens. Currently, we are overdue for an EMP from the sun. This event has been documented as occurring every 100 to 150 years. The last time it happened, it destroyed every electronic device on earth. Even items that were not connected started smoking and burned up (telegraph equipment, etc.) If that were to occur today in America, it is estimated that up to 90% of the populous would die within 2 weeks. Our power grids are very fragile. It could take 5 to 15 years to replace depending on the amount of damage. The main elements of the power grids are very complex, made in China, and takes years to have just one made. Our power grids are not adequately protected in this country. This will give you an idea as to how fragile the power grids are. Our entire country is extremely fragile in many ways. We have our lowest food reserves and lowest water reserves. Clean, safe drinking water is becoming more difficult to access. not to mention a full economic collapse, we are not immune to that. We could be in the same predicament as Greece not long from now since the global currency is in the process of being changed. Surely there will be some type of financial crises. If you ask me, the economy looks worse than ever, just being masked by the petro dollar and that can only last so long. Prepping will have different requirements for each individual or family. I will be focusing on my plan. I live in a rural area. Many people discuss "bugging out". I plan to hold down the fort. I feel that bugging out during a crisis can be dangerous for many reasons. This is not to say that for others, it may be the best choice. WATER: That is the most difficult essential item for most to prepar for. There are many that take it to the extreme in storing water for a crisis. The average person requires 1 to 2 gallons of water per day minimum. This is only for eating and drinking. I am fortunate when it comes to the issue of water. I have a newly installed 5" hand pump deep well that has been approved by the health department as potable (safe for drinking). My water storage is safely underground. We are already in the beginning of a major water crisis across the entire country. At least referring to the cities and water treatment plants, not to mention the intense droughts in the west. Also, Flint, Detroit, and cities in Ohio, the water that they are receiving is not considered safe to drink and does not comply to federal laws. In other words, it is potentially poisonous dirty water. The problem is only going to get worse. Within the next 5 years it is expected that water prices will double across the nation. Here is a worthy article to read over. This article will give an idea of how serious and expensive this problem is for our nation. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/drinking-water-systems-imperiled-by-failing-infrastructure/ar-AAeNjqY?li=AA54ur#image=1 Here is a disturbing article concerning the water supply for Flint, MI. They have been poisoning people and manipulating the test results. Expect this to be carried out across the country. Greed has taken over! http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/10/08/lax-water-system-oversight-manipulated-data-lead-to-public-health-crisis-in-flint-researcher-says/ Here is a video where it is taken to the extreme when it comes to water storage. Not saying that you should go to this extreme, but everyone should have an adequate supply of clean water stored. He provides many good tips. nutnfancy has a wide range of videos from firearms to food when it comes to survival. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcE5x3X6TQ4&feature=youtu.be&t=1m35s FOOD: Food storage is not difficult, or expensive, even for someone living in an apartment. It can get expensive if you choose to purchase freeze dried goods, which can last 20 to 30 years and no refrigeration is necessary, until opened for some items. Even meat is available freeze dried. If you are fortunate enough to have the money to invest, you can get everything you need in freeze dried form here: http://shop.honeyville.com/ I for one do not have the finances to invest in freeze dried foods. I fall into the category of the mid to low expense investment. I have decided to start preparing my own dried food supply. I have invested in 2 essential tools to begin my journey. The first item is the Excalibur food dehydrator. I have the Excalibur 3920TB Food Dehydrator which is a 9 try unit with a built in timer. It has good customer reviews and was reasonably priced (through Amazon.com). Excalibur makes smaller units with just as good of ratings. The next item I have invested in is the FoodSaver V3240 Vacuum Sealing System and also the FoodSaver Kit wide-mouth jar sealer, regular sealer, and accessory hose. The FoodSaver investment cost under $150 with the jar sealing accessory kit. I highly recommend the FoodSaver equipment for all marijuana growers. From now on I will be vacuum sealing all of my jarred buds for optimum freshness and longevity. The opportunities are endless for long term storage of food which are affordable and efficient. To start, buy dry goods in bulk, like at Sam's Club or Costco. A 50 pound bag of rice can be purchased for under $20. Check out this video where the guy stores 50 pounds of rice in canning jars. Another example of storing dry rice for long term using mylar bags: This is part 3, and it shows how oxygen absorbers are used. There are other methods, like mylar bags, food grade buckets, etc. I like the glass jars because rodents cannot get into them. However, as the saying says, "don't put all your eggs in one basket", it may be wise to use all methods. What if the jars get broken, from an earthquake for example? Oxygen absorbers are also good to have on hand when preparing foods for long term storage. With certain methods, you may wish to use oxygen absorbers in addition to vacuum sealing. There are many videos on YouTube that show many different techniques of long term storage of foods. As I learn more, I will add it to my discussion. The food dehydrator is great for long term storage of foods as well as making simple, healthy snacks for anytime. Dried fruit are transformed into simple, healthy snacks that last a long time, do not require refrigeration, and taste like candy! Along with the food dehydrator I also purchased The Ultimate Dehydrator Cookbook by Tammy Gangloff, Steven Gangloff & September Ferguson. I plan to invest in other books for a more diverse viewpoint on dehydrating and storing food. There are some awesome recipes for "instant, just add water meals" that can be prepared utilizing dried meats and vegetables. Just imagine the space you can save, not only for long term food storage, but even for daily use! It is time for a lifestyle change. Buy organic fruits and vegetables, no more pre-canned preservative ridden food from the grocery store. Yes, canned goods are not all bad to have around and good to stock up on by means of prepping. Most canned goods can go beyond the printed use by dates as well. Either way, I plan to change my ways to a more healthy way of life and it begins with food. In the end the equipment will have paid for itself. Buying in bulk, preparing food for long term and short term use provides less waste and can save a family well over $1,000 a year in food purchases alone. Here are a couple of videos showcasing the use of freeze dried and dehydrated food and long term food storage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gothlufqKA4&feature=youtu.be Christy Jordan has a lot of great videos on dehydrating foods. This video is about dehydratig ground beef. You must be careful with storing any meat, it must be fat free. The fat will cause the meat to go rancid no matter how dry the meat is. Dehydrated ground beef can potentially store for 2 years or longer without refrigeration. FUEL: I am only planning to store 10 gallons of treated gasoline. I probably should store more, but space is a concern. I don't want to put all of my reliance on gasoline or electronically operated equipment. Heat for the colder climates. I haven't done too much research on this. Currently I burn wood for heat. I purchase a season supply of wood every spring. The wood burning stoves do not require electricity and that is a plus. More to come as I get more involved...
  13. 4 points
    In the Federal Eastern District Court yesterday, Komorn Law and the MMMA filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all medical marijuana patients and their caregivers who depend on the medical use of cannabis oil or products infused with marijuana, such as edible preparations. The lawsuit seeks to enjoin the Michigan State Police and Oakland County Sheriff’s Forensic Laboratories from creating reports falsely stating that medical marijuana preparations are a synthetic schedule 1 drug, with no medical use. The lawsuit also asks the Court to appoint a crime lab monitor to ensure that a scientific standard is applied at the labs for marijuana and its preparations. The class is represented by four plaintiffs, each one a previous defendant to criminal charges and asset forfeiture for possession of medical marijuana preparations. The named defendants of the lawsuit are Col. Kriste Kibbey Etue, Director of the Michigan State Police, Inspector Scott Marier, Interim Director of the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division, Capt. Joe Quisenberry, Commanding Officer of the Forensic Services Laboratory for Oakland County, and Michael Bouchard, Sheriff of Oakland County, Michigan. Read the lawsuit and see the exhibits here: http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/uploads/Lorincz%20Federal%20Complaint%20and%20Exhibits.pdf FOX17 Coverage w/video: http://fox17online.com/2016/06/22/attorneys-file-federal-class-action-lawsuit-against-msp-crime-labs-over-marijuana-reporting-policy/
  14. 4 points
    "Hope is the thing with feathers That perches in the soul And sings the tune without the words And never stops at all." ― Emily Dickinson "You cannot swim for new horizons until you have courage to lose sight of the shore." ― William Faulkner "We dream to give ourselves hope. To stop dreaming - well, that's like saying you can never change your fate." ― Amy Tan, The Hundred Secret Senses Hope keeps us going; hope is important. It is remaining in the game, believing that things will be OK, and not giving up. It is getting to the end of the road, having nowhere to go, and instead of quitting, continuing to fight to figure it out, to stay present and mindful, and not give up. Hope is important. Without hope people have nothing. A new, thoroughly researched petition to add autism to the list of conditions which can be treated with medical marijuana will be heard by the Michigan Medical Marihuana Review Panel on July 20, 2015 at 9:30 am at 611 W. Ottawa in Lansing. LARA originally refused to hear the new petition, citing the denial of two previously submitted petitions for autism. The previously submitted petitions provided limited science and research in support, and resulted in a "no" vote. This new petition was accompanied by over 75 peer review articles and over 800 pages of research on the issue of cannabis as a viable option for the treatment of autism. Despite what can only be described as overwhelming evidence, LARA, the agency tasked with addressing petitions for new conditions, refused to hold a hearing or even consider the petition. This "dead-end" and unjust position seemingly demanded that myself and Attorney Tim Knowlton, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, and Cannabis Patients United sue LARA in the Ingham County Court. It was only after nearly a year of litigation and foot dragging that LARA ceded its position. Attorney General Bill Schuette's office "defended" LARA's position by delaying for months, only yielding after the petitioner filed her brief with the court, days before oral arguments. Unfortunately it seems the lives of children and parents hang in the balance of a possibly disinterested and dysfunctional process controlled by LARA. But now that we are here, and now that there is a debate, the science is overwhelming. Let's not get caught up or distracted from the real issue: autism is a terrible disease with no cure and no proven safe treatments and this is a problem. We could lie to ourselves and say that no evidence exists documenting the effects of cannabis as medicine, but we know this is not true. Testimony was given by parents and physicians, and 75 scientific studies documenting cannabis safety and efficacy in treating autism have now been provided to the panel for their consideration in this decision. We also learned that telling a parent that there is no hope for their child does not work. The most compelling testimony during the May 27 public hearing was that, independent of how the new condition panels decides, parents dealing with this affliction will continue to do what they think is best for their child. This begs the question: shouldn't these parents not have to worry about being arrested considering everything else they have to deal with? For pediatric and juvenile patients under the age of 18, two doctors would have to approve. The growing rate of autism has just recently being identified as a significant public health issue, due to statistic provided by the Center for Disease Control's Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, a nationwide federal program to identify, estimate, and track and compare autism rates around the country. Their estimates show an alarming trend: autism rates have risen in every report since tracking began in 2002, from 1 in 150 in 2002 to 1 in 68 in 2010. In years past, I said people who opposed the medical use of cannabis have never experienced a friend, family member, or person who was suffering from a medical condition. But to oppose the treatment of autism for patients afflicted with the disease is inhumane. To let the status quo remain and subject parents and the physicians who treat these children with exposure to arrest and criminal charges is a deplorable policy for the benefit and welfare of the public health for the citizens of Michigan. There is overwhelming scientific and medical evidence supporting the approval of the petition. There is probably more research supporting the use of cannabis as a treatment for autism than all of the research to support the other ten conditions currently on the registry. It is important to be mindful of an often overlooked aspect of the MMMA: that its purpose is to protect the serious ill persons who have been recommended to use cannabis with a doctor's (in this case two doctors) recommendation and a bona fide relationship, from arrest and prosecution. There should be no debate that those afflicted with autism are seriously ill, and the purpose of our law, and the compassion shown by Michigan voters in approval, was to protect parents, patients, and physicians. For the panel to not recommend that autism be approved as a condition of the program is to ignore their duty and responsibility. Additionally they should be mindful that the standard by which they are held, to a recommend or not recommend as outlined by LARA's own administrative rules, already requires that the condition in question be a debilitating condition: All too often the issues regarding medical marihuana and marihuana in general are politicized. Even at times using the propagandist's favorite imagery of protecting the children. Well this issue is really about the children, and the only thing that should be considered is that there is overwhelming evidence that cannabis can provide a safe alternative to the traditional medications and treatments currently used for those afflicted with cannabis, and parents and doctors live in fear of criminal liability. But more importantly, think about any parent that is at the end of the road with traditional treatments, when the physician has no alternative and there is absolutely no likelihood of anything changing for their child, wouldn't we want that parent to have these choices, and who are we to say otherwise? What would a parent do for their child? is really the question. It the answer is anything, as the testimony presented to the panel indicates, then it is clear parents will continue to treat their children; they will not stop. If it works for their children, the question is, do we want the parents arrested? It is called hope and every red blooded American is entitled to have it. Hope is needed here. Protect the children, do not let them or their parents get arrested for treating autism with cannabis. http://www.medicaljane.com/ailment/autism/ http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/46054-seeking-help-to-include-autism-as-qualifying-condition/?hl=autism
  15. 4 points
    Perhaps the most painful and profitable aspect of many police raids is the civil forfeiture process. Unlike criminal forfeiture, in civil forfeiture people do not need to be convicted or even charged with a crime to lose their cash, cars and property. Patients and caregivers in Michigan are all too familiar with this abusive police practice. My clients have had everything from cars, tv's, cash, computers, wedding rings, power tools and even priceless family heirlooms stolen from them by police during raids on their homes. Anything that the police find of value, they are sure to take. The typical raid goes something like this: 1) The police enter the family home at night with ski-masks, vests, and guns drawn. They look more like paramilitary units than police. 2) They force family members, including elder grandparents and young children face first onto the ground, sometimes separating them from critical devices such as oxygen tanks or other medical necessities. 3) They destroy the home, ripping apart bedrooms and mattresses, breaking or prying doors open, putting holes in the walls, slashing furniture. Sometimes my clients have not been present during the raid, and come home to find what looks like a burglary, only to find out it was the cops who stole their things and left a trail of destruction in their wake. 4) Perplexingly, no charges are filed. At least not at that moment. Medical Marijuana Patients and Caregivers are left in limbo for months, sometimes years before they are charged with a crime. 5) My clients are given 21 days to claim their items, and must pay top dollar to reacquire them from the police who stole them. How are you supposed to get to work without your car? People who have not been charged with a crime are forced to pay a ransom just to get their much needed work cars, trucks, or computers back. So what happens to that property? More often than not, it is auctioned off never to be seen again, or sold back to the owner for a considerable profit. The police get to keep every penny and with it, buy more powerful guns, flashy motorcycles and military-style vehicles, or form their own SWAT teams, to name a few examples. Each department puts more money into their armories rather than into education and classes for their officers. Related: THE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM-GOOD INTENTIONS GONE AWRY The police in Michigan have not been taught about the MMMA. I know this because when I get them on the stand, you wouldn't believe the things they say when asked simple questions about it. This could be because the only training many Michigan police have came when they were made to attend private seminars (which I was barred from attending) which dealt specifically with the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, hosted by Attorney General Bill Schuette. Schuette called these seminars, "Clearing the Air," and in them told police that if they returned the marijuana they seized from legal, card holding caregivers and patients, they would be violating federal law and could be charged with delivery of a controlled substance. The content of these seminars has since been posted online and can be viewed here: http://annarborchronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Schuette-Seminar.pdf The people of Michigan didn't pass the MMMA in 2008 to make it easier for police to catch people who use marijuana, or to create criminals out of police, for that matter. With the highest legal authority in the state telling police that they are committing a crime if they follow state law, we have a clear conflict of interest. As we see more states enacting not only medical marijuana legalization, but legalization for recreational use, the practice of civil forfeiture becomes threatened, and police will do anything to protect their cash cow. In the 42 states that allow police departments to profit from forfeiture, that cash flow has funded both the militarization of police and allowed law enforcement to make ridiculous purchases, including a margarita machine, a Hawaiian vacation, and a Dodge Viper. Nationwide, the Wall Street Journal reported the federal government acquired $1 billion in forfeiture from marijuana cases over the past decade. With legalization now in place in Colorado and Washington, with other states sure to follow, forfeiture revenue for the police departments that have relied on it is threatened. According to one report, legal cannabis and the subsequent drop in forfeiture have already caused one drug task force in Washington to cut its budget by 15 percent. That’s great news for due process and property rights. But the police have a trick up their sleeve which allows the to usurp the state legalization efforts and enforce federal law instead. It's called “equitable sharing." Local and State enforcement teams can still profit from civil forfeiture by collaborating with Federal Law Enforcement. Equitable sharing is a two-way street: For the federal government to “adopt” a forfeiture case, cops can approach the feds and vice-versa. The U.S. Department of Justice has applications online for agencies to apply for adoption and to transfer federally forfeited property. Crucially, criminal charges do not have to accompany a civil forfeiture case. The proceeds from federal forfeitures are deposited into the DOJ’s Asset Forfeiture Fund. After the DOJ determines the size of the cut for the feds, equitable sharing allows the local police to take up to 80 percent of what the property is worth. In fiscal year 2012, the federal government paid out almost $700 million in equitable sharing proceeds to local and state law enforcement agencies. Equitable sharing tempts cops to become bounty hunters, even in states with legal marijuana. Tony Jalali is living proof of this travesty. Jalali almost lost his businessover four grams of marijuana. After immigrating to the United States from Iran in 1978, Jalali became a successful small business owner. Jalali owns an office building in Anaheim, Calif.—worth around $1.5 million—that he rents out to fund his retirement. Among the more staid tenants—a dentist’s office, an insurance company—was ReLeaf Health & Wellness, a medical marijuana dispensary. Posing as a patient with a legitimate doctor’s recommendation, an undercover Anaheim police officer bought $37 worth of cannabis from that dispensary. Keep in mind that medical marijuana sales were—and are—legal in California under state law, and this Anaheim cop worked for local law enforcement, not the feds. Jalali never bought or sold marijuana. Jalali was not charged with any crime nor was he warned that renting to a dispensary could lead to civil forfeiture. “I had no idea I was doing anything wrong," Jalali said. Yet for the DEA, which collaborated with Anaheim police in pursing the forfeiture, that $37 pot sale was enough evidence that Jalali should lose his property. This should not have happened under California law. Not only did California voters legalize medical marijuana in 1996, state law bans forfeiting real property (like a home or a business) unless the owner has been convicted of a crime related to the property. In fact, Anaheim authorities even requested aid from California prosecutors to take action against Jalali’s property. State officials refused. But the state’s protections don’t exist on the federal level. By participating in equitable sharing, Anaheim police could directly benefit from a federal forfeiture, bypassing California law to cash in on Jalali’s property. The equitable sharing loophole still exists. The federal government can continue to prosecute criminal cases and litigate civil forfeiture actions related to cannabis. Citing the risk of federal forfeiture, Wells Fargo, one of Colorado’s largest banks, has refused to finance properties in that state’s marijuana industry. The incentives behind equitable sharing are primed for abuse. Property owners’ protection from forfeiture currently depends on prosecutorial discretion. That is no substitute for meaningful legal reform.
  16. 3 points
    I thought I would add some information to my blog about how I built my flower room. I started off sacrificing my bedroom and had to sleep in my living room for almost 9 months! I have a new bedroom now though . The bedroom measured approximately 11' x 12' with an 8' ceiling and a crawlspace underneath. I chose (2) 1000 watt switchable ballast lights to go with 50 Watts per square foot. I am running 7,500 lumen of light per square foot. The closet comes out to be 40 square feet in size, which measures approximately 4.5' x 9'. There was a window in the closet which I removed and boarded up with insulation and wood and used that to install the ports for exhausting my fans. I went with (2) outdoor pre-hung triple insulated doors for full lightproof and convenience of accessing the plants. To the left of the closet you can see a door, that is there to access the furnace pipe mostly, it was a tiny closet for the bedroom, it was pretty much unusable space for the flower room, so I painted the door white. In this next picture, you can see I added 3 vents on the outside of the closet at the top. The vents go through the wall cavity and they work like light traps. There are 3 vents on the inside of the closet at the bottom near the floor. This is so the closet can intake air and be able to breathe while the lights are on or off. In this picture you can see I added (2) 6" high output can fans 440 cfm each for a total of 880 cfm exhaust out the vents where the window was. Here is a picture of the outside window vents each 6" with dampers. In this picture you can see the lighting system is done and there is also in the center a 16" osculating wall mount fan. For the custom cooling, I took the lenses out of the light hoods so that I can exhaust air from both ends of the light hoods, so there is suction from each end of the light for maximum cooling efficiency. Each fan is hooked up to each hood so that I can have the option to run only one fan but still run both lights. Like in the winter when it is cold, I only need to run one fan. It also serves a safety purpose. If one fan fails, the other fan will still be cooling both lights. I did the same with the electrical, each fan is plugged in on a separate breaker/fuse. The room needed an air conditioner for the hot humid summers, minimum required 12,000 BTU. This had to be custom installed too, my windows slide open sideways. Well, after building it all like above, the system worked, but I wasn't fully satisfied with the cooling and the efficiency of it. So I added an 8" high output can fan at the ceiling, I call this an air exchange fan. It only takes air from the grow closet and back into the main room. It helps keep the air temps balanced between the closet and main room. This solved a lot of problems. Like in the winter, the main room was too cold which made it unusable, even though the flower room temps were just fine. If I restricted fresh air from outside to prevent the room from getting too cold, then I was exhausting heat out of my house just as fast as it was going in. Now with the air exchange fan, that is not a problem, in the winter, I am only exhausting about 100 cfm out of the flower closet. The air exchange fan at 740 cfm putting warm air back into the main room now lets the room be usable, there is only about a 5 to 10 degree temperature difference between the main room and flower closet. The air exchange fan also helps with the closet getting too cold in the winter during lights off. Also, during humid times of the year, it helps prevent mold/fungus issues in the flower room. The air exchange fan is set up to be light proof. I can leave it running at night and keep the temps right where I want them. One other benefit of installing the air exchange fan, I was able to make use of that dead space where the furnace pipe is. All three fans are equipped with a speedster speed controller so I can adjust the cooling system to meet any temperature I desire by dialing up or down the fan cfm. Now, after all of this, the lights and cooling system are all working in harmony. Here is a picture of the electrical (it is not complete in this picture). The ballasts and the electrical is mounted in the crawlspace. I choose a 220 breaker that goes to a throwbox which converts it to (2) 110 outlets with slow blow fuses. Here is a picture of my first test run with the closet, there are 12 plants in this picture, I typically only have 8 bigger ones flowering. Me and my babies in the closet. Some more pics from this closet.
  17. 3 points
    My journey with pen vaporizers began with quitting smoking cigarettes. 30 years of smoking cigarettes, it was well time to quit. Since the software update on this website, many of the images in this blog entry have been lost. You can view the complete content of this blog and more here: http://cchub.org/Blogs/blogs.html I started off with purchasing a Dream Vapor Electronic Cigarette kit for $25.99. It took me about a week before I could fully stop the cigarettes and only use the e-cigarette. The first couple of weeks I noticed that my lungs were clearing up and I could breathe better. That is when I realized that I just had to make concentrated cannabis oil work in one of these refillable tank style e-cigarettes. WARNING: The information and links I have posted throughout this blog were as I was learning. My opinion in some of the things has changed. Like the $37 SVD, it is low quality and not the real deal. I recommend the $89 kit through High Desert Vapes. The Dream Vapor, I no longer recommend that product. The C4 Clearomizer, I do not recommend that for cannabis oil, but it is acceptable for e-cigarette oils. For e-cigarettes, or any pen battery use, I recommend the eGo C Twist variable voltage batteries only, preferably the 650mAh. As you get to the end of the blog, you will see that I have gained more experience. I have tried the concentrate straight, e-cannabis oil, and I have found preferred products. In other words, read the blog to the end before making a product decision. After some failures in testing different mixtures, I found what seems to work best. It seems that Propylene Glycol USP, which is a component used in many of the e-cigarette oils, works best. It is important to be sure to get Propylene Glycol USP. The PG USP is used in medicines and some food and beverage processing. It is also great for using in topical solutions. PG USP helps medicine penetrate skin and tissue which enables the medicine to enter the bloodstream more quickly and easily. PG USP also helps chemicals bond together. The PG USP reduces the temperature required to vaporize the RSO (Concentrated Cannabis), which makes it possible to evenly vaporize the RSO with the e-cigarettes. I have compared vaporizing straight RSO vs. RSO with PG USP added. For portable electronic vaporizers, RSO with PG USP seems better to me, I prefer it. It is not only the vaporizing with an e-cigarette, there are other benefits. Such as, being able to hold 1/2 ounce worth of bud, transformed into oil in the vaporizer tank. One fill can keep a patient medicated for weeks. You just cannot beat the convenience. Also, it seems to have a different effect when inhaling. It is almost like taking a draw from a medicine inhaler. It is easy to mix the PG USP with the RSO. All you need to do is gently warm the RSO in a large spoon or small bowl just until it begins to "melt". Remove from the heat and mix in the PG USP. I have found that a 70% RSO to 30% PG USP works best. However it can vary any where from 10 - 50% PG USP, also personal preference fits into the equation. After the RSO and PG USP are mixed well, suck it up into a syringe. You now have E-Cannabis oil ready to fill an e-cigarette tank and start vaporizing your oil! Since I have started doing this, I have not even desired to smoke a joint. I think in the last 3-4 weeks I have smoked maybe one. Keep checking back for more information.
  18. 3 points
    Komorn Law PLLC is proud to report another complete dismissal of all charges for our client. These past few months we have attained a high rate of dismissals of our client’s cases. In this case our client was charged with allegations of felonious marihuana conduct; the case involved the definition of a medical marijuana plant in the law. More specifically, whether or not the plant was producing food from photosynthesis and was “living”. Of course, the prosecutor wanted to fight about the definition of “usable marihuana” too. With a splash of Manual and Mansour mixed into the fray. Much to my surprise the Court was very familiar with the conflicts of law that currently exist within the MMMA and the court, and the issues that were created by the Mansour opinion. The court was prepared to grant a stay in the proceedings until that mess of an opinion gets worked out. Today the Court heard arguments from the parties regarding the warrantless search of my clients home and whether the government could constitutionally validate the warrantless search. In Michigan, we have found that the courts go to great lengths to destroy the 4th amendment protections, going so far as to have a “good faith” exemption to unconstitutional search warrants. As is often the case in warrantless searches regarding drug task forces investigating marijuana tips this case dealt with a “knock and talk". The knock and talk is a tool used by law enforcement agencies which allows them to traverse on to a citizen’s property, to question and even investigate a person or citizen. The knock and talk however is not absolute and there are specific limitations. The best way to describe is that the police would be allowed to come into a person's property in the same manner or method that a Girl Scout would or some other person soliciting something. Knock and talks are generally legal assuming that the police limit their interactions to the areas of the property that a citizen would not have an expectation of privacy. Examples of this limited to walking up the driveway to the front door. Nothing more nothing less. There is some significant case law recent years in Michigan that lays out specific details of some of those limitations and also when an officers’ knock and talk goes too far. People v Frederick and Van Doorne is a case involving Kent County Sheriff's officers that baked marijuana butter. The case went to the Michigan Supreme Court, which describes those limitations and the proper analysis for when and how officers can conduct knocks and talks. The court did not take issue with the police detectives/investigators in this case, ignoring the fact that they were not in police uniform when they did their knock and talk. The court ruled that it didn’t matter if the police were undercover, because that fact did not violate the knock and talk rules. Even though I disagreed with the court in this tiny issue, this was not the ultimate legal issue that was dispositive in this case. The legal issue that was dispositive in this case was that once the police officers, who were conducting a lawful knock and talk, and who were lawfully on the porch of my client's house, and were lawfully ringing the doorbell to interact with my client, with the intent of trying to establish probable cause to search possibly get a search warrant, it is what happened in that situation that was the ultimate dispositive issue to which the court ruled in our favor. As we have been finding more and more, police agencies in Michigan have an additional tool to trick patients and caregivers from the immunities from arrest, prosecution, and penalty of any kind. Police make offers to do a “compliance check”. Police will ask very politely if the homeowner will show them around their medical marijuana garden to ensure compliance with the MMMA. This was the ultimate issue in this case. As I mentioned this case involving search and seizure of evidence without a search warrant. The U.S. Constitution and the Michigan Constitution expressly prohibits the searching and seizures without a warrant. That in fact warrantless searches and seizures are per se invalid. The government must make an allegation to justify the warrantless search in order for the search warrant to be constitutionally valid. In this particular case, the government's theory of why the search and seizure was constitutionally valid, was because according to them my client consented to the search of his house. Today the government in this matter argued my client consented to a search of his house, offering the testimony of the officers who said my client consented to search and therefore the government did need a search warrant. While this theory may be true in other circumstances, a warrantless search and seizure is justified if the homeowner consents to a search and seizure. However this was not the testimony that supported the charges, this is not the way in which testimony came out at the prelim exam during cross-examination. Had the testimony in the preliminary examination been that they requested consent of the homeowner/my client to search his house and asked if they could come into search the house for illegal contraband or whatever arguably that would've made for a constitutionally valid search and seizure. As I argued today and in contrast to the states position I relied on the testimony at the prelim exam where I had locked the officers into admitting that they did not follow proper procedure, but upon encountering my client at the front door during the “lawful knock and talk”, that they indicated the reason to which they were there. That reason according to the officers was that there was a tip that they had received that there was an illegal marijuana grow that occurred was occurring at that location. As I got the officer to admit that when you explain to my client the reason why you were there when you're doing your knock and talk that he responded by telling you that he was a medical marijuana patient and that there was no illegal substances within the house. The officer answered yes. I said then what did you say next that ultimately resulted in you gaining access to the house the officer said “well I told him that he needed to check whether or not he was in compliance with the Michigan medical marijuana act”. During this colloquy I said to the officer please explain to me, please direct me, please show me what is your legal authority for doing a compliance check of any individual regarding their medical marijuana behavior? It is here at this juncture that the state’s case against my client fell apart. There is no legal authority for any drug task force team to do a medical marijuana compliance check. The specific section of the MMMA that prohibits this is section 333.26424G, possession of, or application for, a registry identification card shall not constitute probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor shall it be used to support the search of a person or property of the person possessing or applying for the registered indication card, or otherwise subject the person or property of the person to inspection by local county or state government agencies. At the hearing today it was this compliance check issue that was flushed out and ultimately the constitutional violation the resulted in the court holding that the consent to search was not valid. Because of that issue, the court found that the police did not constitutionally validate the warrantless search. The issue of consent to search has an abundance of jurisprudence both in Michigan and the federal court system. The concept of consent has been written about often, and raises various issues, charges, defenses etc. regarding police officers interactions with citizens. The States intrusions of citizens rights, or what would be described as unconstitutional, is of no consequence if the citizen, suspect or accused consents to that government behavior. However, consent must be unequivocal. It can’t be wishy washy and it can’t be based upon false or misleading information. Consent must be unequivocal and it must be given knowingly, voluntarily without threat or coercion. The capitulation to the government’s request can’t be based upon trickery or a lie. The circumstances of my client’s case today were about the consent, or shall i say consent that was not unequivocal or constitutionally valid. I read from the transcripts from the preliminary exam ( quoting from the testimony of the officers) where the officers had testified that the last statement made to my client before entering his house was that they the investigator/ detectives needed to do a medical marihuana compliance check. These same officers admitted they were not part of the MMFLA task force or investigators ( and were not even sure that they were even aware of the existence of that agency). I pointed out to the judge that there exists no legal authority by these officers to do a compliance check. A compliance check is not the same as consent to search. By asking, suggesting even implying that they had this legal authority is obtaining consent by trick, by misrepresentation or whatever you may want to call it, it was not “ knowing, voluntary and or without duress” consent. It was this behavior by the government actors the Court found to be the constitutional violation. The court found that my client’s consent, which was allegedly obtained, was invalid, and the warrantless search of the residence and the seizing of the property and “evidence” was unconstitutional. Thus the evidence seized was done so illegally and the court suppressed the evidence and all the charges were dismissed. The lesson learned here, and the take away is simple. 1. Don’t be fooled into believing that there exists a legal authority for police officers or drug task force officers to check or determine you compliance with the MMMA 2. Never, Ever, Ever consent to a search. The often forgotten 4th amendment got some love today, and my joy is that this Court today had the courage and wisdom to make the correct ruling.
  19. 3 points
    As the president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, I testified before the Michigan Medical Marihuana Review Panel earlier today in support of the 21 petitions submitted by our patient and caregiver educational non-profit organization as well as other researchers, patients and caregivers, physicians and parents who combined resources to work on the petitions. There is another meeting for the panel to vote on these conditions NEXT WEEK Friday, May 4th ,2018 at the same location. I do not think there will be additional comments, but by being present you may sway the panel members. http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/04/michigan_considers_authorizing.html
  20. 3 points
    Prohibitionists would use the predicted _possible_ harmful societal effects of marijuana as an excuse to continue the racist war on drugs that put hundreds of thousands of people in jail in the USA each year. Eventually, people realized that if you cried WOLF enough, and no WOLF ever showed up, that you were probably just a professional WOLF troll and that your predictions were false. As is the case here in reality. https://hightimes.com/news/legalization/five-years-marijuana-legalization-what-didnt-happen/
  21. 3 points
    Checks and Balances are put in place to protect the human rights of every citizen of the United States of America. One of those rights is the right to due process, meaning that you have the right to be secure in your home and with your property unless a court says otherwise. And you have the right to have your day in court before a jury of your peers. Asset Forfeiture has been tainted by police, prosecutors and courts where police just steal your stuff, leave, then go auction it off later. In some cases, not even a single criminal charge is filed. In other cases, prosecutors bring criminal charges, lose the criminal case, but continue with the forfeiture case. Other taint comes when police take all of the cash from you, but the amount they took is less than what it would cost to hire a lawyer to get it back. Why would anyone hire a $3000 lawyer to fight over a seized $2000 car ? We need more civil asset forfeiture and this bill would help a little bit. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2018/05/10/civil-asset-forfeiture/34783509/
  22. 3 points
    Parents and caregivers of children and persons with Autistic Spectrum Disorder have been fighting to try medical marijuana as an option after exhausting all other treatment options available. This fight has been going on for at least 5 years, when LARA denied the petition for autism in 2013. In 2013, the review panel voted 2 yes and 7 no votes. The 2013 petition lacked any research or studies, so parents Dwight Z. and Dr Christian Bogner submitted a new autism petition with studies and help from researcher Joe Stone in 2014. 10/4/13 Final Determination of Department - Autism 8/27/15 Final Determination of Department - Autism LARA rejected the 2014 petition because they had made a "final decision" on autism in 2013. Michael Komorn, president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, filed a lawsuit against LARA to get them to hear the 2014 petition. After months of stalling from LARA they finally decided to hear the petition, and in May 2015, the review panel heard the petition and testimony. LARA tried a dirty trick by not sending the research and studies to the panel. This was brought to the attention of the panel that research was submitted, so the board came back a week later to give time to the panelists to review the research. The panel then voted 4 yes and 2 no votes to approve Autism as a qualifying condition. In August 2015, the Director of LARA, Mike Zimmer, then rejected adding autism as a qualifying condition to the Medical Marihuana program against the wishes of the panel. In his rejection, Mr. Zimmer gave the reason that edibles may be illegal due to a confusing ruling from the Court of Appeals among other objections. Parents and caregivers of people diagnosed with autism continued to fight, and worked together to submit another autism petition. Adding 20 new peer-reviewed research studies from the past 4 years. The new autism petition was submitted in February and was sent by LARA and heard by the review panel on 4-27-2018. Wonderful and brave parents Amie Carter and Jamie Cooper testified before the panel, laying their hearts and family stories out there for the world to gawk at. At the following review panel meeting on 5-4-2018, the review panel approved of 10 conditions including Autism in a 6 yes and 1 no vote. Voting no on a condition is voting to subject the rejected-condition patient to arrest for the medical use or possession of marihuana. A suggestion was made by a panel member that the marijuana legalization ballot initiative would save any concerns for the denied patient conditions. This is not true. There are several differences between legalization and the medical marijuana program that would negatively affect a patient. First, the recreational marijuana initiative will apply a large tax and other costs that would not apply to patients if they were part of the MMM program. Second, patients are treated in the law differently regarding several issues. · Driving · Housing · CPS / Parenting / Custody issues · Employment · Immunities and Affirmative Defense Patients should not be punished for their use of cannabis when it is medical and not for adult recreation. Medical use and recreational use have significant distinctions, that were played out in the discussion of the panel and specifically the experience shared by Dr. Crocker who sees a variety patients with various diseases that are treated by cannabis. It makes no sense to deny the petition for these conditions when the evidence supports the therapeutic and palliative relief. 1. The panel are ignoring the reality of what a “no vote” is and means to patients. 2. The excuses used to deny or vote no have been: · Not enough research · Not enough clinical trials Panel members have lamented on this topic for years, but this argument makes no sense. Why would they approve of some conditions but not others, as they have given this reason for rejecting conditions? No condition has been thoroughly researched to use with marijuana. Absolutely zero clinical trials for any condition have been performed with crude marijuana flowers. Even though marijuana smoking has been shown to absolutely stop epileptic seizures, reduce eye pressure in glaucoma patients, open up airways in asthma patients, return appetite to AIDS patients, prevent nausea, reduce anxiety/stress and control pain signals. There are few, small, less than 100 people research studies on a few small conditions. Those studies are conducted only with Marinol, Sativex or other pharmaceutical formulations, not crude marihuana flowers and extracts. The FDA refuses to study crude marijuana extracts and flowers, and prefers a mono chemical therapy. One plant chemical, THC. Recently the FDA has been testing CBD. Two plant chemicals total from over 400 known cannabinoids (plant chemicals) within the cannabis plant. At this rate, the FDA will have tested each of the 400 cannabinoids separately within 16,000 years. Counting 40 years for THC-only studies, 40 years x 400 cannabinoids = 16,000 years. Which is why, the American people have bypassed the FDA and have approved marijuana as a medicine on a state by state basis. Sick people cannot wait for the FDA to continue to hamper research and deny that marijuana is a medicine. All because the FDA refuses and prefers a single chemical standardized consistent drug. These are terrible reasons because research on marijuana has been hampered. We mentioned this in our petition https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html · Dr. Crocker and other physicians have conflated marijuana smoke and tobacco smoke and then offered and relied upon this unproven fact that the two smokes are the same and have the same health effects. Marijuana smoke is different than Tobacco smoke and has different effects on humans and animals. See The large studies on lung function by Dr Tashkin and all of the other studies that show the only difference between a non-smoker and a marijuana-only smoker is that the marijuana-only smoker has a larger forced air lung capacity. Effects of smoked marijuana in experimentally induced asthma. Effects of cannabis on lung function: a population-based cohort study · Legalization, if the review panel does not approve a condition, the sick patient can possess by adult recreational means. The review panelist who made this comment is a physician and in her reason for denial of the petition is saying that a person should self-medicate! Unheard of advice from a physician. · The panel mentioned several times that they wanted “severe” conditions, severe brain injury vs brain injury or severe autism vs autism. Aren't people with less severe conditions allowed treatment? Are we equal or are severe conditions more important? Nothing about this reason makes any sense to deny a condition from this non-toxic safe medication. The review panel is supposed to look at each individual petition, and only those petitions, to determine if the condition should be added to the MMMA. Frequently, the panel members have made comments or asked questions about other conditions while debating petitions. "Why are we voting on "chronic pain" when "severe and chronic pain" is a qualifying condition?" "Why are there petitions for Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis?" "Brain Injury is too vague, but Traumatic Brain Injury is a condition that may be more appropriate" "Colitis is too broad, colitis can be infectious or non-infectious" Panelist Dr Lewandowski said there was only one "good" study that showed "clinical improvement with dronabinol in this submission" of obsessive compulsive disorder and "this meet the expectation in support of peer-reviewed information". All of the research we submitted in our petitions was peer-reviewed except for one paper on Autism, all of the studies showed palliative or therapeutic benefit and efficacy. The requirements by LARA are the following: Provide a summary of the evidence that the use of marihuana will provide palliative or therapeutic benefit for that medical condition or a treatment of that medical condition. Rule 33(1)(a). Include articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals reporting the results of research on the effects of marihuana on the medical condition or treatment of the medical condition and supporting why the medical condition or treatment should be added to the list of debilitating medical conditions under section 3(b) of the MMMA, MCL 333.26423(b). Rule 33(1)(b). Note that Lewandowski's remarks about clinical improvement is not a requirement within the MMMA, the LARA Administrative rules, nor the Petitions themselves. The whole point about medical marijuana programs is that we cannot get marijuana into clinical studies. Cannabis's schedule 1 status, FDA monotherapy rules, NIDA grant bias for harms not benefits, DEA hoop jumping, propaganda and political football including bribery, corruption and market forces (from private prison unions, alcohol, tobacco and Big Pharma industry not wanting competition) makes it incredibly difficult and near impossible to study marijuana for medical benefits. Tabled conditions: · Non chronic non severe pain · Colitis · Organ Transplant
  23. 3 points
    Published on Apr 30, 2018 Michigan Mom Amie Carter details the physical and emotional abuse of her Autistic child. After trying all available therapies and prescription medications to no avail, her boy was transformed from a rampaging frightened punch-throwing self-injuring mess into a loving boy with medical marijuana.
  24. 3 points
    Michigan Attorney Michael Komorn discusses some of the gray areas in The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act
  25. 3 points
    We are proud to announce our support for Dana Nessel as Michigan’s next Attorney General. I have known Dana for many years , both while working for the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office (handling complex criminal prosecution) and in private practice. She is recognized within the attorney community to be an exceptionally skilled attorney. Most importantly she stands behind Michigan’s ballot initiative to treat marihuana like alcohol, and the voters initiative of 2008, the MMMA. It is time that the leading law enforcement agent in the state of Michigan support the People's will and desire to develop reasonable policies regarding marihuana reform in Michigan. We encourage anyone interested in making Michigan Green to show up at a future campaign event and hear it for themselves. In case there was any questions as to the carnage caused by the current Attorney General, here is the evidence it is time for a change. Dana Nessel for Attorney General 2018. Opinion #7259 - coops.pdf Opinion #7261 - smoking ban.pdf Opinion #7262 - return seizures.pdf Opinion #7271 - child protection.pdf
  26. 3 points
    As this news hit in the last throes of 2017, it seems appropriate to take a step back and understand why exactly marijuana was banned all of those years ago. Please continue reading to find the answers on this long and weird journey through time. Elderly Couple Stopped In Nebraska With 60 Pounds Of Weed ‘For Christmas Presents’ With the help of the county’s canine unit, deputies searched the Toyota Tacoma. When they looked under the pickup topper, deputies found 60 pounds of marijuana, as well as multiple containers of concentrated THC. “They said the marijuana was for Christmas presents,” Lt. Paul Vrbka told the York News-Times. The department estimated the street value of the pot at over $300,000. The Jirons now face felony charges of possession of marijuana with the intent to deliver and no drug tax stamp. (Nebraska law requires marijuana dealers to purchase drug tax stamp from its Department of Revenue as evidence that the state’s drug tax has been paid.) For the friends and family in New England who expected a bag of weed in their stocking this year, it looks like it won’t be a green Christmas, after all. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/22/572844666/elderly-couple-stopped-in-nebraska-with-60-pounds-of-weed-for-christmas-presents Marijuana (also known as cannabis sativa or cannabis indica or hemp) has been a medicine for thousands of years. Marijuana is found in all recorded history, on every continent as a medicinal crop. Egypt to China to India to Assyria (Iraq) and Arabia. From the Greeks and Romans to present day. In the early USA, hemp was an integral part of life. George Washington grew hemp and many colonists grew hemp for cordage and canvas, including ropes and sails for ships. Newspapers in 1841 went into great detail on how to cultivate hemp, including separating the male plants from the female plants. Many papers also reported stories about having a laugh while smoking hemp, as is the case with this 1850 report from a Paris correspondent for the Medical Times. (click for a larger view) There are many examples in American newspapers including poems, insults, references and propaganda on the subject of hasheesh (the old timey spelling of hashish), marijuana, cannabis and hemp. Just look at this article from 1908, they found marihuana in this man’s pocket! 1906 – The Pure Food and Drugs Act Requires Labeling of ingredients of Medicine, Including Cannabis. Previous to the Pure Food and Drugs Act, many medicines were treated the way Coca-Cola is today. “A secret formula” or “A proprietary blend” of spices and medicines and even poisons including arsenic and strychnine. Writing cannabis on a label did not ban cannabis related medications. Many major pharmaceutical companies which are still around today, used to sell cannabis based medicines. Pharmacists used to make cannabis based compounds and elixirs and extracts and pills as well. Newspapers had been printing a lot of yellow journalism on the subject of marijuana over a number of years. Articles were passed around from newspaper to newspaper, with editors changing and inserting local opinion into the reprinted stories. Sample Articles from Chronicling America: These are only a handful of articles, more comprehensive research must be done. “Senseless Brutality. A Mexican Priest Flogs the Corpse of a Dead Wizard.,” The Memphis Appeal(Memphis, TN) , April 18, 1887, Page 1, Image 1, col. 6. “Victims of a Mexican Drug. From the Mexican Herald.,” The Sun (New York, NY), August 12, 1897, Page 6, Image 6, col. 5. The New York Sun relays a report from the Mexican Herald that “Marihuana, our local hasheesh, continues to impel people of the lower orders to wild and desperate deeds.” “Stronger Than Opium. Attempt to Smuggle Mariguana into Yuma Prison.,” Tombstone Prospector(Tombstone, AZ), September 15, 1897, Page 4, Image 4, col. 4. “Across the border. Mexican Herald.,” The Oasis (Arizola, AZ), July 15, 1899, Page 6, Image 6, col. 1. A report from the Mexican Herald of a scene in a civil registry office: “A marihuana fiend suddenly appeared in the office brandishing a knife, declared that he was Herod and his mission was the extermination of new-born infants.” “Across the border. Two Republics.,” The Oasis (Arizola, AZ), December 30, 1899, Page 10, Image 10, col. 1. “Dangerous Mexican Weed to Smoke,” Phipllipsburg Herald (Phillipsburg, KS), August 18, 1904, Page 8, Image 8, col. 3. “Teacher Starr of Chicago Man of Sensations,” San Francisco Call (San Francisco, CA), August 25, 1905, Page 8, Image 8, col. 2. “Stops Sale of Maddening Drug,” New-York Tribune (New York, NY), December 24, 1905, Page 3, Image 3, col. 4. “War on Marihuana Smoking. Mexican Government Wants to Exterminate a Weed That Crazes,” The Sun(NewYork, NY), May 26, 1907, Page 17, Image 17, col. 4. “Use for Deadly Weed. Mexican Marihuana Plant to be Grown in Texas for Drug Purposes.,” Florida Star(Titusville, FL), October 16, 1908, Page 3, Image 3, col. 4. The Florida Star reports that James Love, who operates an agricultural experimental station in Texas, has received permission from the state agricultural department to plant in Texas ten pounds of marihuana seed he has imported from Mexico. The article states Mr. Love’s belief is that the plant “can be put to good commercial use as a drug.” “Goats that Feed on Dope,” New-York Tribune (New York, NY), April 11, 1909, Page 55, Image 55, col. 5. A fanciful tale of an alleged Mexican goat-herder whose goats have become addicted to marihuana. “Yerbas Medicinales [Marihuana advertised for sale],” La Revista de Taos (Taos, NM), February 7, 1913, Page 4, Image 4, col. 7. “On Account of His Oriental Nature the Mexican’s Mind is a Puzzle to the Foreigner,” The Sun (New York, NY), May 17, 1914, Page 37, Image 37, col. 1. “Marihuana Sale Now Prohibited. Council Passes Emergency Ordinance to Stop Sale of Mexican Drug.,” El Paso Herald (El Paso, TX), June 3, 1915, Page 6, Image 6, col. 3. “New Anti-marijuana Ordinance Very Stringent,” El Paso Herald (El Paso, TX), June 7, 1915, Page 9, Image 9, col. 3. The El Paso Herald reports concern from local physicians and pharmacists over El Paso’s prospective anti-marihuana law. The Herald’s article states that “It is put up by the foremost drug manufacturers in the country and is frequently prescribed, as it is a sedative of value.” “Is the Mexican Nation ‘Locoed’ by a Peculiar Weed?,” The Ogden Standard (Ogden City, UT), September 25, 1915, Page 13, Image 13, col. 1. Mexican “bandits” are being emboldened to take on Uncle Sam by the intoxicating effects of marihuana. “Marihuana Smokers Shut Off from their ‘Makins’,” El Paso Herald (El Paso, TX), September 13, 1917, Page 6, Image 6, col. 3. “The One Wicked Drug the Lawmakers Forgot,” The Ogden Standard-Examiner (Ogden, UT), December 24, 1922, Page 24, Image 24, col. 1. The Mexican Revolution in 1910 caused many Mexicans to move to the USA. Racism and xenophobia increased in the bordering states. Residents and leaders wanted any and all excuses to jail and deport Mexicans. According to various timelines of the history of marijuana, the first anti-marijuana laws started in individual southern states bordering Mexico. Racism was used against marijuana during international treaties and drug control laws as well. Historians cannot find the reason why Canada banned cannabis in the 1920s, except for racism against the Chinese. Cannabis prohibition was based on and helped by alcohol prohibition. Alcohol prohibition, largely thought of as targeting alcohol itself, was chiefly about prohibiting saloons. The Saloons of the 1800s and 1900s also hosted gambling, dancing with women, vaudeville, musical shows and frequently employed saloon girls to entice and encourage alcohol consumption. “The Saloon Must Go” was the Anti Saloon League’s motto. “That prohibition of the sale of liquor would reduce the prevalence of commercialized prostitution is evident from the efforts which have been made to separate the sale of liquor from the prostitution in certain cities which tolerated vice or segregated districts.” says George J Kneeland (Social Hygiene ,Jan 1916.) Music, dancing, girls and musicians? Sounds very similar to the REEFER MADNESS propaganda against Jazz Clubs in the 1930s. From the Senate Hearing on Juvenile Delinquency and Marijuana Decriminalization, including 4 years of research during 1971-1975, no clues were found to explain why marijuana was banned. Why was marijuana banned? Racism against blacks, Mexicans and “undesirables” Harry J Anslinger was a racist and a liar. Marijuana continues to be banned because: Selective police action enforces racism Competition from pharmaceutical companies Nixon hated protesting hippies. Competition from the Alcohol industry Police and Prison guard unions want marijuana prisoners Uninformed do-gooders like MADD, who have not seen the statistics of lower alcohol driving deaths in states that have legalized marijuana. Evangelical Christians, Catholics and other religious groups. Jeff Sessions and Chris Christie.
  27. 3 points
    Komorn Law, PLLC and Attorney Allen Peisner are proud to report the well-deserved dismissal of all marihuana charges for a young man and his family. We are proud about this one for many reasons. It is well understood that this jurisdiction (Clarkston - in the heart of Oakland County) is not known to be friendly to medical marijuana patients. In fact, in this venue at the arraignment, this particular Judge as a matter of practice tells the presumptively innocent patient that they must decide if they want to use their medicine or drive. They can’t do both. Of course, this defies most if not all principles of Michigan jurisprudence. Nevertheless, when he was forced to choose, my client chose his medicine. Of course, to get to work without a driver’s license my client has to ride his bike, which requires him to ingest medicine more frequently than before the Court had imposed the no driving condition. My client was a medical marihuana patient and had received his recommendation from his physician in December 2016, but had not yet sent his application to the State. In other words he didn’t have his registry card at the time of the incident. The backdrop here involved a traffic stop in early 2017. The officer claimed he smelled marihuana; later when searching the vehicle he found two ounces in the locked glove box. The client made a few utterances (always best to not say anything at all) at the roadside, all consistent with his assertion that he was a patient and was intending to use it medical, and ingest it at some other time. After a few pretrials, adjournments, and some administrative hurdles the matter got set for our evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 8 (See People v King/Kolanek). As it should be, the explanation of the three prongs was required to be established at the hearing (in short: 1. Bona fide Physician/Patient Relationship, 2. The amount of marihuana was reasonable and necessary. 3. The marihuana was for the patient’s medical use) was presented with confidence and detail. As I often suggest to patients prior to testifying, the topic of inquiry is something that no one knows better than you, the patient. No one other than you really knows or understands your medical condition better. The medical efficacy of cannabis to treat that condition likewise is information unique to each patient. With that being said, my client’s testimony was more than compelling. In 2008, over 3 million Michigan voters, enacted the MMMA, and amongst other declarations, they stated cannabis is medicine. As often overlooked, it was intended to be just that - a medicine that amongst other things is intended to treat a long list of serious medical conditions, one of which is chronic pain. My client’s story begins with walking onto the MSU track team and competing at a Big Ten collegiate level for his first three years, before being cut from the team in the last part of his junior year because of a muscle tear in his hip. All things bad happen to runners when this muscle tears, including limited range of motion and severe pain. Prior to his leaving the team, he was given access to the very best of medical treatments from all this Big Ten school’s trainers and doctors could offer. This included daily rehabilitation, and muscle relaxers and pain medications. His other option was to have surgery, which according to his physician was not recommended because of his age. While he did get some relief from the daily rehab during the summer, this became an impossible treatment when he returned for his senior year, and had a full load of classes. With his collegiate athletic career behind him, he had resolved to direct all of his energies into his senior year with his eyes on graduate school. Despite additional free time from no track practice, travel to meets etc., the pain from his hip was not going away. For these reasons, he explained “I wanted to explore medical cannabis to treat my hip problem, because nothing else was working. The simple task of walking to class had now become a painstaking task that was challenging on a day to day basis.” There is little that can be said about his testimony other than it was real. Of course, on cross exam, he had to put up with silly challenges and questions with no substance but an intention to try to confuse or take advantage of the novelty of testifying in court for the first time. The only disappointing aspect of the case was that I had to restrain my anger in responding to the Assistant Prosecutor’s argument that the physician didn’t testify, and it is only through that testimony can a patient establish what is an amount reasonably necessary. Neither of these arguments are true, as outlined in the most recent Michigan Supreme Court case People v Hartwick/Tuttle. I saved the argument, “Judge I want to remind the Court that my client is currently on bond, and has been authorized by this Court to use medical cannabis as one of his conditions of bond, I would argue in conjunction with the testimony, you should dismiss the charges, or at a minimum let us argue the affirmative defense to the jury.“ In short order, and shall I say surprisingly, the Court quickly shut down the APA’s misplaced arguments about the law regarding section 8. Despite what I thought was more than enough evidence to dismiss the Court found that the evidence established that we could present the affirmative defense to the jury. A brief bench conference ensued and talks of permission from supervisors in the APA’s office, and we were given a pretrial return date – to set a trial date. Today at that pretrial the APA informed us that they would dismiss the case with prejudice. To say it is was a waste of resources – to be required to go this far to establish the evidence that we did – would be an understatement. With the opioid epidemic that plagues Michigan and the County, how can this endeavor be justified? To even the most anti-cannabis crusader, wouldn’t the dollars needed to keep this case going be better spent testing the untested rape kits that remain in the thousands all of over Michigan? Does it still make sense to anyone that the State of Michigan utilizes 40% its Forensic Science Division’s budget testing marihuana? That the same 40% or greater of marihuana cases make up the docket in Courtrooms all over the State of Michigan. Could it ever make sense to anyone that this scenario would somehow justify my client being denied admission to post graduate education or acquiring the professional license that he had spent most of his adult life committed to? Attorney Peisner’s involvement was stellar as expected, and his performance in keeping the fight going was pivotal. Thank you, Allen It was an honor to represent my client, and his family. Today was a good day, the broken system produced an excellent result, the MMMA worked and for a few moments, albeit fleeting, justice was served.
  28. 3 points
    SirLongSmoke

    Section 8 Defense

    I heard the news earlier today about section 8 defense and with no surprise,the end result being denied section 8 defense. We will appeal this decision, thanks to Dan he will bear the burden of the costs involved. He has been doing this throughout the trail, taking on the weight of the costs and ensuring my ability for the best possible outcome. Every appeal=more money, if I had to pay out of hand I would have failed miserably. My family is completely broke in the monetary department and have no funds to spare. Were scraping to get by and thanks to Dan, we can keep fighting the good fight. So I don't know where this leads or where I'm going but I know I don't walk by sight, but by faith.
  29. 3 points
    S_Caldwell

    My Journey To High Yield

    Last year was a big year for me – I graduated from college and shortly after my mom was diagnosed with lymphoma (advanced). They started her on chemo treatments right away. Despite the nausea medicine, she has little to no appetite, throws up a lot and is really tired. I have been talking with her doctors and doing some research online and from what I can understand, people who are undergoing chemo seem to benefit from smoking marijuana. My mom is “old school” and is afraid of trying it, but I have finally convinced her it’s okay and won’t hurt her and may actually help! I thought maybe I could grow it for her so she can have a constant supply and we know what she’ll be consuming because I’m growing it. She agreed. So I’ve made it my mission to learn as much about growing marijuana as I can so I can grow for her at our house. I’ve been researching every day for about a month. At the beginning I knew nothing about growing medicinal marijuana or even gardening. The first time I sat down to research I seriously typed “how to grow marijuana” into the search bar. To say I was overwhelmed with the amount of information would be an understatement. But, I am finally sorting through the weeds, so to speak, and I wanted to share with you guys what I have learned. Maybe this info will help other newbies. First things first: Where you live greatly determines what you can grow. Stop! Before you go buy your seeds and clear out some space in your backyard – first you must educate yourself on medical marijuana legislation in your area. Medical marijuana is currently legal in 20 states, but rules vary from state-to-state and even from city-to-city. In Michigan where I live, caregivers can only grow 12 plants per patient. But luckily we are allowed to grow both indoors and outdoors. Next, set a good foundation. Begin with the end result in mind. Every decision you make will greatly impact the overall production of your plant. So why not start from the beginning, using the best products and creating the most optimal growing environment. Marijuana cultivation is fairly easy but it takes dedication, time and energy to grow a quality plant. Your root system is the beginning stage of marijuana cultivation and the most important. If your plant gets off to a bad start, then it’s only downhill from there. To create a good root system remember the three S’: seeds, soil and setup. I know what you’re thinking. “Good soil? Can’t you just get dirt from your backyard?” Not even close! What you grow your plant in is called a growing medium and there’s an insane amount of them on the market that all serve different purposes. To find a product that is good for you, think about where you are growing and what you are looking for in a medium. It took me months of research, but I finally decided on PRO-MIX HP because it has Mychorrhizae, which stimulates root growth and helps the plant absorb more nutrients. Since I’m growing indoors I went with a soil-less mix. I found PRO-MIX HP at the Home Depot close to my house. This product also has 4-5x more perlite than other mediums, which helps with plant drainage – especially important for me as I tend to over water all plants! So you can recognize it easily, there’s a tomato plant photo on the package. But just because a product worked for someone else, doesn’t mean it will work for you. There are tons of different methods to growing marijuana. Look through grow journals on forums and you’ll see there are many recipes for how to grow a healthy plant with high yield. With recent medical marijuana legislation, the marijuana community has grown into a large sub-culture. There are websites, forums and groups dedicated to the discussion of medical marijuana growing, use and legislation. Community members even have their own language, like nutes means nutrients and myco for Mycorrhizae. I found this great glossary of terms I reference whenever I come across a word I’ve never seen before. A group of forum members compiled the list of most used terms. Check it out:Vocabulary of Growing Terms + Slang - Indoor Medical Marijuana Growing But even with the growing acceptance of medical marijuana use, people are still afraid to talk openly about it and most of the nurseries or retailers carrying products don’t fully understand the cultivation process. If you go to your local nursery or home improvement store you won’t see a “marijuana growing” section, but after a little research I learned growing tomato plants and marijuana are very similar. Both plants are water-sensitive, flourish in warm temperatures and need similar levels of fertilizer. As I said earlier, when looking on packaging, products with tomatoes (primarily green) can also be beneficial if you are growing marijuana. One of my mom’s hesitations about using marijuana is the common notion smoking marijuana is bad for you and people will think badly of you if they know you have smoked it. For my mom and I, we have found the online communities a great place to be able to talk openly and a great resource for finding out what works and what doesn’t. There are discussion topics on just about anything. Whatever problem you are having with your plant, there is someone who has gone through it, found a solution, and is willing to help you out. Alright, that’s what I’ve learned so far. I hope this post has taught you something. Stay tuned to hear more about my journey.
  30. 2 points
    Soon after I became a registered Michigan Medical Marijuana Caregiver, I was invited to a caregiver event held at the Green Trees building in Detroit. Upon arriving at the event every person that was invited became entered into a raffle for different items. The items for raffle were clones from different strains of plants, t-shirts, nutrients, and other miscellaneous items. When I got my ticket stub, I had thought to myself, if my ticket is drawn, I will turn down the prize. Well, my ticket was the first drawn! Seemed like it was meant to be. My prize was a Strawberry Cough clone said to be the Kushman cut. Around that time I had heard rumors that the official Kyle Kushman Strawberry Cough was available in the Detroit area. How could I feasibly turn that down, right? After getting the clone home and growing it and trying it, well, I was very impressed with the strain. The smell and taste are very strong, a very fruity strawberry smell and taste. An all around good buzz, good quality, and very tasty. The plant produces very dense nuggets, it is a very thick sturdy plant, which provides a medium yield. It is a medium height plant that grows fast with a 7-8 week flower time, which is a characteristic of an indica strain. The plant is very consistent of the quality of the harvest, it comes out good every time under 400W, 600W, or 1000W HPS lighting. I cannot say that with all of my other strains. Some of them are very picky of which lighting system they will flower best with. I have viewed many threads, blogs, and posts about Strawberry Cough. This lead me to investigate whether or not the plant I have is indeed the Kyle Kushman cut or the Dutch Passion version. With the Dutch Passion strain, you can purchase feminized seeds, the Kyle Kushman is a clone only strain. The strain I have is most definitely indica dominant. The sucker leaves are fat and wide. It has been very difficult if not impossible to determine for sure which strain mine really is. I have seen many, many pictures of the Dutch Passion strain, at least 100 of them. Only one looked similar to my plant. The similarity was only in the appearance of the sucker leaves. Throughout my investigation, and reviewing the many different phenotypes of the Dutch Passion version of Strawberry Cough, it became more difficult to truly determine if my Strawberry Cough is in fact the Kyle Kushman cut. However, with the Dutch Passion strain pictures I have seen, they all had a sativa look rather than indica, with the exception of the one. The Dutch Passion version is a sativa dominant strain with a flower time of 9-10 weeks. While turning my research to the Kyle Kushman Strawberry Cough, there were not many pictures to view. Of the pictures that I did come across, well they really had no similarities, other than they all had a sativa appearance. From what I understand, the Kyle Kushman Strawberry Cough is an indica strain. A lot of the Kyle Kushman cut pictures I found, were taken at too far of a distance to fully determine if it was indica or sativa looking. I have sampled, through my patients, many different dispensaries Dutch Passion Strawberry Cough. Oddly enough, they were all very similar to each other in taste, appearance, and buzz. The potency did vary between each sample, up to about 30%, which I credit to the different styles of growing. I will say though that not any of the Dutch Passion samples compared to my Strawberry Cough, especially when comparing taste, smell, and appearance of the buds. Throughout the research, and coming across so may controversies of "Who's got the real Kyle Kushman Strawberry Cough" there were so many contradictory statements of whether or not the Kushman cut was indica or sativa. Many stating that their "reliable" source obtained a clone from a guy who knows a guy, that got it from Kyle himself, or that this guy grew with Kyle and was gifted a cutting and so on. There were so many stories going around, it just made it impossible to know who's story to believe. The only thing that was constant in the stories was that the plant is a clone only and was initially grown in a strawberry field for many years. I had come to the conclusion that the only way I can be confident, still not 100% positive, but confident nonetheless, was to contact Kyle Kushman and ask him. Fortunately, I found him on FaceBook. Luckily, he was more than happy to give me his opinion. Kyle said he would be more than happy to look over some pictures of my plant and offer his opinion of whether or not he thought it was indeed his clone only strain. Kyle has other strains that he bread himself, some with the clone only Strawberry Cough. I believe that is where a lot of the confusion and controversies stem from (no pun intended ). I provided Kyle with some pictures of my Strawberry Cough. He said that he was pretty sure it was his strain. That was good enough for me. Here are the pictures that I sent him. I sure do love the strain. Thank you Kyle Kushman for keeping this plant alive, and for making it possible to make its way to Michigan. I love the strain, and will continue to grow it for many years to come. Here are a few more pics of it.
  31. 2 points
    I wanted to share this on my blogs. These are older pictures from when I used to run a live nature cam. Over 140 countries had viewed my nature cam. Sadly, the live broadcast came to an end due to inadequate internet service. I am still currently without adequate internet service to allow me to broadcast live. I used a top of the line camera, AXIS 213 PTZ, an IP camera meant for broadcasting, with a heated outdoor enclosure. The camera was fully robotic, and was programmable to pan, tilt, and zoom to 20 different locations. I had thousands invested into the broadcasting and it broke my heart when it came to an end. I just wanted to show the world the abundant and incredible nature Michigan has to offer. In some of the images you will see my custom built bird feeding stations. The forest animals helped me design them. From the squirrels, to the raccoons, to the bears. I had to redesign them many times. The feeding stations are super heavy duty mostly due to the bears. Currently I am only using one bird feeding station and a custom box for the squirrels. I suppose you could say I downsized. After the Marijuana Law went into effect in Michigan, I gained a new hobby. All of the animals are still visiting and I keep the feeders full. Due to Michigan law changes regarding feeding for nature viewing I had to make some changes with my platform feeder. I had to raise it higher than 5 feet. My nature feeding and viewing complies to Michigan Law. I give all the credit to the animal proof bird feeders. There are usually only one or two families of deer around until winter sets in. That is when they herd up and visit the bird feeders daily. Most people don't realize that Michigan has flying squirrels. I have even caught a couple pictures of a black bear, a good 6 feet tall, and at least 300 pounds!! I will be adding some more here soon. What you see in the slideshows is what I see nearly every day depending on the season. I don't get out much aside from working. All the animals here have really become like friends. There are thousands of creatures here and they all know me well. I have thousands of pictures. Just went through some of them quickly to put together the slideshows. The live camera ran for just over 2 years. If I could have kept it running, and had quality internet, it would be one of the world's best nature cams! All the pictures were taken on my sanctuary, and most with my live camera. It has been a few years since they were taken. All of the images in the slideshows can be found in my photo gallery: The animal images are near the end pages of the album. Here are some bird pictures. Here are some forest animal pictures. This image below is a lightened up version of the black bear standing at one of my feeders. New from June 12, 2016 taken with cell phone Here are some pictures of some miscellaneous stuff in my sanctuary. Have a lot of pudding stones around my area. A lot of gravel and boulders. Here are some of the trees and fall colors on my sanctuary. A lot of the trees are a good 100 foot tall. There is no way that I would ever have it logged. I like it all natural. I hope you have enjoyed taking a peek into my nature sanctuary. Here is another video where the pictures were taken on the sanctuary, but indoors. My Qush Test Grow for TGA. Have a great day! God bless.
  32. 2 points
    Patients and Caregivers are discriminated upon in many facets of life, be it employment, housing, education, student loans, banking, travelling, medical care, prescription medical care, parental rights... and in this case, Emergency Medical Care! My client is a Michigan Medical Marijuana patient who was having an emergency. An ambulance picked him up, and against his hospital preference, the ambulance took him to the U of M Ann Arbor Hospital. While at the hospital, the patient, my client, in response to the standard medical care question of "list any other medications you are currently taking", was honest and replied that he uses a topical marijuana oil. He used the oil at the recommendation of his primary care physician to help with his cancer and chronic pain. He had the oil in his belongings when he was brought to the hospital. The Registered Nurse at the hospital then called the Hospital Security Officer, who then confiscated the patients medical marijuana oil and called the police. Why is the Physician - Patient privileged relationship being violated like this? My client told his nurses that he was a MMMA patient, those same nurses told the HSO and police officer he told them he was a MMMA patient as well. So what gives? The police have the discretion to investigate or talk to people instead of making a case out of something. Why waste time on investigating a medical marijuana patient? The police officer sent the topical marijuana oil to the Michigan State Crime Lab for testing, coming back positive for THC. The police officer forwarded the lab report to the Washtenaw County Prosecutors Office for prosecution. The WCPO then filed charges against this MMMA patient. All for .5 oz of topical oil marihuana-infused product that the patient had in his bag. Of course the prosecutors office did not blink an eye, nor did they use prosecutorial discretion. They issued the charges and sent the warrant to me so that I could have my client turn himself in. This is called a pre-arrest investigation at my office. If you ever have a police interaction but are not arrested, it means they are waiting on lab results. After they get the lab results back , they send out the warrant and arrest you wherever they can find you. Be it at your Home, work, school or driving on the road. When they arrest you at Home, they search your house. When they arrest you at work, you may have to explain to your boss what happened. When they arrest you at school you will be embarrassed. When they arrest you on the road, either you have to get someone to pick up your car or they will tow it. They will search your car as well. Then you have to post bond to get out of jail too. So hiring an attorney that will handle all of that, so you can turn yourself in, not speak to the police, and be arraigned and have usually a personal recognizance bond (meaning you don't have to pay anything, just have to show up at your next court date) is helpful in avoiding a bad situation. This is happening in Ann Arbor of all places? The city that decriminalized Marijuana down to a $25 civil infraction fine? U of M is state property, since it gets state funding. My Advice? If you are a Patient or Caregiver (or not a patient/caregiver) , never admit to anyone that you are possessing marijuana. Marijuana is currently still illegal and currently there are still people who WILL CALL THE POLICE ON YOU for having marijuana. In this case the patient did not have his card at the time he was hospitalized, but registered with the state afterwards. We prepared a Section 8 defense to the crime of possession of marijuana and were ready to battle in court. Instead of our Section 8 evidentiary hearing, instead of the prosecutor wanting to cross examine my client's physician, instead of testifying and all of the pain of a Section 8 defense, we went with a quick Section 4 dismissal. The prosecutor was SHOCKED that my client could not be prosecuted due to having his card now. Judge agreed and the case is dismissed. If you were charged with marijuana possession or manufacture, give me a call. I will fight to get the charges dismissed. 18006563557 http://www.komornlaw.com
  33. 2 points
    We have come a long way from 2013, when a parent submitted the first petition to add Autism as a qualifying condition within the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. It was ultimately rejected due to a lack of any research materials and testimony. http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Final_Determination_Autism_436526_7.pdf In 2014, a Parent tried to submit a new Autism petition with some testimony about physicians treating Autism patients who qualify due to also having epilepsy. LARA rejected this petition because it said it had "issued its final decision" on Autism and would not reconsider new evidence. Komorn Law stepped in to protect the rights of the petitioner and her family member with Autism. We filed a lawsuit against LARA to force them to hear the new petition with the new testimony and new scientific research. After stalling for months and months in court, LARA gave up the fight and decided to hear the petition. The Medical Marihuana Review Panel held a public meeting and took public testimony. But the patient advocate panel member noticed that LARA had withheld the scientific research presented with the petition, depriving the review panel from the evidence! The panel postponed the vote on adding Autism until they had a chance to review the information. ARE YOU SERIOUS? LARA HOLDING THE SCIENCE FROM THE PANEL? https://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2015/07/michigan_panel_delays_decision.html Dr. Christian Bogner testified in support of treating Autism with medical marijuana. He described his scientific theory on why Autism has been increasing, restated here on the Dr. Nandi show shortly after he testified in 2015. After hearing all of these parents begging for any option of a remedy to help their families, the review panel voted to recommend adding Autism as a condition in 2015. https://www.michigan.gov/lara/0,4601,7-154-79571_79575_79582-358181--,00.html Mike Zimmer, the Director of LARA, issued a 4 page opinion on why he was rejecting adding Autism as a qualifying condition to the MMMA. In his opinion he stated multiple reasons why he was rejecting the condition. The petition used some language describing symptoms as "severe autism" but the petition was only for "autism" not "severe autism" , thus any person with "autism" could qualify for the medical use of marihuana. A lack of clinical based studies and scientific evidence and research on marijuana and Autism. That the MMMA did not require a physician recommending marihuana to be an expert in Autism or marihuana. That the "petition failed to acknowledge the direct impact on children" Some of the forms of delivery of medical marijuana (oils, extracts and edibles) advocated by those appearing at public hearing would not appear to be authorized under the MMMA. Mr. Zimmer was saying that because of a court opinion, he thought that some forms of medical marijuana were illegal. http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Final_Determination_Medical_Marihuana_Autism_08272015_554191_7.pdf We were completely knocked out by this denial and rejection. LARA Director Mike Zimmer delivered a knock out. We dotted the i's and crossed the t's, we played the court game, we forced LARA to hear a new Autism petition with physicians and parents testifying. Autism was fully rejected in 2015. That did not stop the parents, the families who have to deal and cope and live with Autism every day. This fight for a non-toxic medicine was far from over. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/28/agency-rejects-marijuana-autistic-kids/32486185/ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/07/18/medical-marijuana-cannabis-autism-seizures-cbd-thc-stoned-prohibition/30360041/ Meanwhile, other petitions have been rejected 2013-2016 , including Anxiety, Parkinson's Disease, Asthma, Insomnia, Manic Depression and Retinitis Pigmentosa. Only Post Traumatic Stress Disorder has been approved as a new condition. https://www.michigan.gov/lara/0,4601,7-154-79571_79575_79582-360123--,00.html Some of the petitions were denied due to there only being 6 panel members attending the public meetings. LARA decided that this was too few and would deny the conditions based on this "quorum" rule, that they themselves created. After some back and forth they finally changed this and made the administrative rules right. LARA did not reevaluate its decisions on the petitions that were rejected for a bogus internal reason however. Since almost every petition to add a new condition had been defeated, any morale and fighting spirit to continue petitioning for new conditions had petered out. LARA continued to add more and more hoops for petitioners, requiring that any petition to add a condition now MUST HAVE scientific research attached or it would be instantly rejected. That requirement sound reasonable, we all want our medical decisions to be based in science and peer-reviewed medical journals. However, the absurdity of this research requirement is illustrated by the actions of the National Institute of Health and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which grants funding for research on medicine. Back in 2010, the New York Times asked NIDA what kind of research they fund on marijuana. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html The article goes on to detail multiple researchers who have waited YEARS to research marijuana benefits, not even requesting a grant, but self or privately funded research gets delayed. This delay, roadblock and hoop jumping is typical with research on marijuana, and it continues to this day. Researchers have even been "let go" for trying to research marijuana. http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/weeded-out-how-the-u-of-a-fired-pot-researcher-sue-sisley-after-a-state-senator-complained-6635510 Local Michigan parent and 2015 Autism petitioner Dwight Zahringer, blogging his journey with Autism at the AutismDad website, did not give up on his son. Dwight was ready for another FIGHT, another petition. Something to help his child and all of the other families struggling with the terribly debilitating Autism diagnosis. The fight was on again! After losing so badly in 2015, we wanted to make sure we studied our failures as well as the weaknesses of the process of petitioning. Our new strategy going forwards was to study every single comment and complaint that every LARA director and LARA employee and review panel member made on the petitions over the last 5 years. Dwight was very patient waiting for us as we spent a year working on this project. After we learned each and every concern, complaint and comment , we used that information to build a massive resource of peer-reviewed scientific and medical research on marijuana to present to the review panel. Encouraged by the community and by her own son's transformation from an angry punching autism ball of anxiety into a loving child again, Michigan mom Amie Carter stepped up to be the petitioner on the 2018 petition. We took the original 2015 petition, cleaned it up, added new research from the past 3 years and resubmitted it in January 2018. While there has not been much research for marijuana and autism in the past 3 years, there has been a lot of research on the safety of marijuana and medical marijuana. We submitted many studies on the safety and efficacy of medical marijuana so that the panel could see the difference between the conventional and traditional treatment for autism versus medical marijuana. As all of the research and government reports have shown from years and years of research, marijuana is non-toxic, has no long term physical or mental effects and very few serious side effects. The most common side effects being drowsiness, euphoria, dry mouth and fatigue. This is in vast contrast to the serious, dangerous and sometimes fatal side effects of the prescription drugs that autism patients are routinely prescribed on a daily basis. http://www.health.state.mn.us/topics/cannabis/about/firstyearreport.html We waited for LARA to review our petitions. Three months later LARA scheduled two public meetings for our petitions. The review panel is appointed by the Governor of Michigan and composed of physicians and one non-physician patient advocate. Only one of the physicians on the panel had intimate knowledge and had treated medical marijuana patients. On April 27th 2018, the review panel held a public meeting for public testimony in Lansing. Due to LARA's stonewalling and discouraging of petitions over the years, almost everyone had given up on the petition process. Less than a dozen people testified in support of the conditions at the April 27th 2018 meeting. No one testified in opposition to the conditions. This is in stark contrast to the many families who showed up in 2015 to testify in support, and went to the panel begging for their help to allow them to use a non toxic medicine for Autism. The second meeting on May 4th 2018 was for the review panel to vote on the conditions. The panel at times argued different ideas and points about the law, petitions, the research, the lack of research and their experience in treating patients with the conditions. After the panel approved of 10 conditions, we had to wait again. The director of LARA has 180 days (July) from when the petitions are submitted (January) to decide to add or reject adding a new qualifying condition to the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. Finally the day had come. One day before July 10th 2018, the 180th day limit to decide on the petitions, LARA Director Shelly Edgerton approved the conditions that the medical marijuana review panel had recommended. Five years of fighting for some relief from self injuring behavior. Five years of fighting for chronic irritability, screaming, punching, anxiety, compulsive tics and behavior and other autism symptoms. Medical Marihuana is just now an OPTION, another tool, another medicine, another thing to TRY. Five years of knock outs, bloody knuckles, bruised egos, black eyes, screaming, begging, pleading, rejection, scorn, hatred and crying. Friendships were forged and bridges were burned, physicians who we thought were there for us turned around and withdrew their support at the drop of a hat. Finally parents can breathe a small sigh of relief. A massive team effort of people, families, physicians, researchers, petitioners and organizers came together at random to work on this. As the president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, I am proud to have been part of this process. I hope that the families who benefit, and the families who don't benefit share their experiences in trying medical marijuana for autism, so that we can advance science and knowledge of this condition and the cannabis plant. I also call on the governments of the world to encourage and conduct clinical trials of medical marijuana for diseases. To date, the FDA and National Institute of Health and National Institute of Drug Abuse have refused to fund research into medical marijuana.
  34. 2 points
    The conflict between state medical marijuana laws and the Federal Controlled Substances Act has been playing itself out in courts across the country. In addition, Congress has passed an act to prohibit the Department of Justice from prosecuting patients and caregivers in medical marijuana states. The DEA and DOJ have taken the position that this appropriations act rider means nothing, and have argued as such in court on many occasions in courts nationwide. Funny, they said we should "change the laws" if we wanted marijuana to be legal, so we legalized medical marijuana. Then they said marijuana was still illegal. So we got congress to protect medical marijuana states. Then the Department of Justice said these laws still didn't apply to them. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 Our client hired us because he felt that his medical marijuana card protected him from this marijuana ticket that a park ranger gave him for possessing his medical marijuana in a national forest park in Michigan. Kayaks? Canoes? The Department of Justice is blind. We filed a motion to dismiss based on the the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment to the Appropriations Act (the appropriations act is how the legislature funds the government departments). The Department of Justice prosecutor fought us on all counts of our motion, forcing us to dig our way out of a bunch of different rabbit holes of other medical marijuana cases across the country. Ultimately, after doing the proper research , filing motions, writing briefs and responses to opposition replies, we finally got the victory our client deserved. The magistrate agreed with all of our well thought out arguments and dismissed the ticket. All this over "three marijuana joints". At least our client was lucky! Noted poet, activist and Michigan native John Sinclair was given 10 years for 2 joints of marijuana in Ann Arbor of all places. Such an injustice brought John Lennon and Yoko Onno to Michigan where he made a song for John Sinclair to protest and demand his freedom from unjust marijuana laws. John Sinclair sat in jail for years before his appeal was finally heard by the Michigan Supreme Court which overturned the draconian marijuana laws. Marijuana was legal again, until the Michigan Legislature reinstated the marijuana laws a few months later. Lessons for all patients and caregivers: Never talk to the police (or park rangers)! Never answer questions! Ask if you are free to go, and then go if they say yes! Always ask for an attorney to be present during any questioning. Always call your lawyer before talking with the police! Never consent to a search! Without consent, the police officer would have no cause to search you. Never smoke in public! The park is a public place. Do not take marijuana with you on or in: Any School Grounds or school bus. Any Correctional facility, or any state or federal government buildings Any Federal Park or land, including border areas with Canada. Any Native American Reservation or Tribal Land. If you want the protections of the MMMA, you MUST stay in compliance with the MMMA. Plant limits, weight limits, etc. Being outside the boundaries of the MMMA could land you in jail.
  35. 2 points
    Courts are not about justice or helping, their main focus is solely to collect fees and fines. Call any court at any time and the information provided on the automated phone system is exclusively about how to stream line payments. Any other concern or question of the court requires you to go through an endless and bottomless rabbit hole of phone tree tag. If , by some miracle you do get through to a live voice, it becomes immediately apparent that the person behind the phone is neither user friendly or ready with answers for the reason why you have called. When did this practice become the norm? When did this unhelpful court attitude become acceptable? Who has empowered these civic employees to be rude and dismissive? What happened to the old adage that the customer is always right? Who told these people that they have an allegiance to anyone other than the people who have business with the court? Think they treat lawyers or law firm employees any differently? HAH! I have to use the same phone numbers and go through the same hoops that any person does when interacting with the court. Except I have to use their voice mail systems. Imagine having to contact a court for a client only to get a voice mail and wait for the system to tell you to leave a message after the tone, only to hear “mailbox is full”. This only happens every day to me, in multiple courts with multiple judges, prosecutors, clerks and even police officers! Courts, prosecutors and Judges all take lunch breaks, but so do all of the clerks, all at the same time. Don’t even bother trying to call anyone from 11:30-1pm. Likewise, Court is over at 4pm, everyone including the clerks leave. There is no automated answering service, just voice mail with full mailboxes after 4pm. There is a small window of time when you are able to get a live person at a court. Between 9:00-11:00am and then 1:00pm-3:45pm. The probation and drug testing industrial complex has taken over the courts. I Represented Client/Medical Marihuana patient in a probation violation today in court. I was not her lawyer at the time she plead guilty and was sentenced to probation. The allegations of the probation violation were that my client had continued to test positive for THC, in violation of the court's order. “Your client can't use medical marijuana while on probation. The Certifying physician is not in the probation departments list of approved doctors.” Generally speaking the court is looking to the following main issues when setting bond; is the accused a danger to the community is the accused a flight risk With these legal principles in mind the judge or magistrate where there's an allegation of a domestic violence case, or an alcohol-related driving case, will conclude for purposes of setting bond they have an interest in protecting the community from a person who consuming alcohol. In that scenario despite being presumptively innocent, allegations of assault and battery or something worse, the court in the interest of protecting the community or because of the defendants “danger to the community” would set a bond with the condition of no contact with the alleged victim. Each of these examples draw from allegations, or the facts set forth in the complaint that resulted in the issuance of the charges. Their intent associated with the elements of the crime or certainly socially with alcohol which is a substance that is not medicinal, and is exclusively perceived as being recreational and subject to abuse, within the court system. In other words the use of alcohol is routinely perceived as the roots or reason or identifiable concern by the court, independent of whether it is needed, identified, or even alleged, is something almost every single court prohibits a person on bond from doing even in cases where alcohol may not be involved. These were the facts... Client was put on probation for an alcohol driving offense. Judge sentenced her to 2 years probation, 10 days in jail immediately, followed by 2 years probation. Outpatient treatment, Alcoholics Anonymous, fines and costs. At the time of her sentencing and prior to commencing the 10 days she paid a $2300 fine. The additional terms of probation were: Report to the probation officer. Complete an intensified outpatient treatment program at Dawn Farms, Participate in alcoholics anonymous, Complete two years of probation. It is important to note, that the court at the time of sentencing entered/ ordered the traditional terms of sentencing which include Upon release from the jail after completing 10 days in jail, the client reported to the probation department as directed to by the court. Upon appearing at the probation department and going through the intake process, my client interacted with her probation officer's assistant. At that time she presented to the assistant to her probation officer her medical marijuana card which was copied and entered into the file. Over the next year ( the first year of her 2 year probation) she proceeded to complete the inpatient treatment program. She enrolled in AA and another Secular program similar to AA called SMART. In fact after enrolling in these 2 programs, she habitually attended 2 times a week for the next 2 years. Additional terms of her probation included write in or non-reporting probation, which required her to call or write in to her probation officer monthly. All of these requirements were completed as ordered by the Court. At approximately the one year mark of her probation, my client got a call from her probation officer, directing her to take a drug test. Of course being a medical marihuana patient, she tested positive for THC. To my client, this was not a suprise because she had let the probation department know was in fact a medical marihuana patient. In her initial intake at the probation department she had made it clear of this status. Furthermore, she believed she had a right to engage in the medical ise of marihuana. 333.26424 Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card is not subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including, but not limited to, civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed a combined total of 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana and usable marihuana equivalents, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount. The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the qualifying patient presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the qualifying patient. My client’s probation officer however didn’t see things the same way... Upon learning of the drug test results, the probation officer told my client that she was in violation of the terms of her probation. Your client can’t use medical marijuana while on probation. The certifying physician is not in the probation departments list of approved doctors. This is frankly disgusting. A probation department telling a person which physician they can or cannot go to for treatment? What kind of justice is that? This was all done in the last two weeks of probation for my client. They wanted and waited to violate her right at the end of her probation. Client hired me, I was able to argue the law, got her off the hook for the Violation of Probation VOP and she was able to finish her probation in the mean time, and has been alcohol free for two years and has really changed her whole life around. Although I can’t take credit for that, I am glad happy to see that her right to be a medical marijuana patient was recognized by the court. Victory
  36. 2 points
    Minnesota is the only state that I've seen which actually studies it's patients in it's medical marijuana program. The Minnesota DOH released a report of all of its patients a year ago, and in March, released a report about patients with intractable pain who are enrolled in the medical marijuana program. Minnesota studies and conducts trials and surveys while Michigan conducts criminal trials for patients and caregivers. This is all the fault of Governor Rick Snyder and Attorney General Bill Schuette who continue to allow patients and caregivers to be thrown into courts and jail for being part of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Program. The new 2018 report of Intractable Pain Patients in the Minnesota Medical Cannabis program can be read here: http://www.health.state.mn.us/topics/cannabis/about/ipreport.html The first year report of Minnesota Medical Marijuana patients is here: http://www.health.state.mn.us/topics/cannabis/about/firstyearreport.html
  37. 2 points
    The public hearing for public comments will be heard on April 27, 2018. Read more about it at http://komornlaw.com/petitions After the MMMA was enacted by a vote of 63% of Michigan voters in 2008, the legislature has declined to add any new qualifying conditions to protect patients from arrest. Senator Rick Jones even attempted to remove Glaucoma from the MMMP's list of qualifying conditions. Patients , caregivers and other interested parties wrote in opposition to the bill. A handful of petitions have been submitted over the years. LARA (and the previous MDCH department) have used various reasons and tricks to deny these petitions. Only Post Traumatic Stress Disorder has been added as a qualifying condition to the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. Autism and Parkinson's disorder petitions were approved by the Michigan medical marihuana review board (the board consists mostly of physicians). These petitions were denied by the LARA director. The petitions were not deficient in any way and should have been accepted by LARA. We resubmitted the Autism petition again, with 20 additional research studies. Now, with the help of numerous patients, researchers, Dwight Z. and Dr. Christian Bogner along with the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association and Michael Komorn, we have assembled a massive amount of peer-reviewed medical research and government data to show that these conditions should be approved to protect patients, caregivers and physicians from arrest for the medical use of marijuana to treat their conditions. This project took months of work. Reading, organizing, searching and collecting thousands of pages of research from all over the world. Including the most up to date medical studies, peer-reviewed patient surveys and the national reviews of all medical marijuana studies by the National Academies of Science. The oldest peer-reviewed medical research paper cited within these petitions was from the first volume of The Lancet in 1889. Birch EA. The use of Indian hemp in the treatment of chronic chloral and chronic opium poisoning. The Lancet. 1889;133:625. Cannabis, Indian Hemp, Marijuana, whatever you call it, physicians were using this non-toxic plant in 1889 to treat chronic opium poisoning and opium addiction. As opioid based prescriptions are addicting and killing approximately 142 Americans each day in 2017, medical marijuana is a non-lethal non-toxic way to avoid "America enduring a death toll equal to September 11th every three weeks." The qualifying condition petitions were based primarily on the following: Already approved qualifying conditions in other medical marijuana states. Historical and ancient medical books. Patient self-reports and surveys. US Government Department of Health and Human Services Patent on using marijuana to treat many diseases and injuries, including brain injury on humans. Institute of Medicine 1999 report on medical marijuana. This report was the basis for the MMMA, specifically cited within the Michigan law, MCL 333.26422 (b). National Academies of Science (formerly the Institute of Medicine) 2017 updated report on medical marijuana. Included research not only supports each qualifying condition petition, but also answers questions that the LARA directors, physicians and medical marijuana review panel board members had asked of past petitioners. Reports on dosages, safety profiles of marijuana, statistics from the CDC and Poison Control, and information from NIH, FDA and the DEA are presented in the petitions. This information was included in order to compare the safety, effects and side-effects of medical marijuana with FDA approved prescription medications. All of the patients, caregivers, researchers, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association and it's president Michael Komorn fully agree that marijuana should be removed from the Controlled Substances Act. Marijuana should continue to be studied as a treatment for every human and animal disease. Marijuana also should be submitted to the FDA for approval as a medicine. We fully support all clinical trials related to using marijuana as a treatment for any condition, disease or injury. As all of the scientific peer-reviewed published clinical trials show, marijuana is an effective medicine. The http://www.nih.gov website was heavily utilized throughout this project for locating scientific peer-reviewed published research, reports and information. The petitions are grouped by similar conditions, symptoms or mechanisms of treatment. Included in this post are some choice quotes from a few studies in each group of petitions. 001.-Anxiety.pdf 004.-depression.pdf 007.-Obsessive-compulsive-disorder.pdf 008.-panic-attacks.pdf 011.-Schizophrenia.pdf 012.-Social-Anxiety-Disorder.pdf Marijuana and Medicine Assessing the Science Base 1999 report from the Institute of Medicine https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2014/04/10/anxiety-reduction-exploring-the-role-of-cannabinoid-receptors/ Medical Cannabis in Arizona: Patient Characteristics, Perceptions, and Impressions of Medical Cannabis Legalization. 014.-arthritis.pdf 023.-Rheumatoid-Arthritis.pdf Preliminary assessment of the efficacy, tolerability and safety of a cannabis-based medicine (Sativex) inthe treatment of pain caused by rheumatoid arthritis Transdermal cannabidiol reduces inflammation and pain-related behaviours in a rat model of arthritis 025.-brain-injury.pdf 030.-Treatment-of-spinal-cord-injury.pdf 031.-asthma.pdf Effects of smoked marijuana in experimentally induced asthma. Effects of cannabis on lung function: a population-based cohort study Newspaper ad from 1876 selling marijuana cigarettes for treating asthma. You may laugh at a marijuana cigarette as a real medical treatment, but marijuana is a verified bronchodilator similar in strength to albuterol, the standard asthma medication. The medical efficacy of this specific brand of Asthma cigarettes were specifically exempted within the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as created by the United Nations. This means these marijuana cigarettes were still able to be sold after each country banned marijuana. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_4_page002.html https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1962-01-01_4_page005.html 036.-diabetes.pdf The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research (2017) The Impact of Marijuana Use on Glucose, Insulin, and Insulin Resistance among US Adults 044.-colitis.pdf 050.-gastric-ulcer.pdf 055.-Inflammatory-bowel-disease-IBD.pdf 064.-Ulcerative-colitis.pdf Marijuana Use Patterns Among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program: Patient Experiences from the First Program Year by the MN Department of Health 2016. Cannabinoids and the Urinary Bladder Cannabinoids and gastrointestinal motility: Animal and human studies Medical cannabis – the Canadian perspective Impact of cannabis treatment on the quality of life, weight and clinical disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a pilot prospective study. 106.-organ-transplant.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4541500/ Medical Marijuana and Organ Transplantation: Drug of Abuse, or Medical Necessity? 107.-Non-severe-and-non-chronic-Pain.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3998228/ LARA statistics show the majority of the 250,000+ patients in the MMMA are using cannabis to treat chronic pain. As we know that the medical use of marijuana can treat “severe and chronic pain” already, it can and should be used to treat regular generic pain that is not severe and chronic. The reports and information from the Minnesota Department of Health on its medical marijuana program are very detailed and informative about patients experiences with medical marijuana. Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program: Patient Experiences from the First Program Year by the MN Department of Health 2016. http://www.health.state.mn.us/topics/cannabis/about/appendixa.pdf 108.-Parkinsons.pdf Other states already approve of medical marijuana for Parkinson's Disease. Including: Georgia, Vermont, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Ohio, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and California http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507 111.-Tourette's-Syndromequalifying.pdf Tourette’s Syndrome is an approved medical marijuana qualifying condition in Arkansas, Illinois, Minnesota and Ohio. While the MMMA covers persistant and severe Muscle Spasms, Tourette's Syndrome sufferers may not have the severe symptoms that qualify. The 1999 Institute of Medicine report states that marijuana can be used to treat Tourettes Syndrome. 112.-MMRP-Autism-Petition-2qualifying.pdf Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Program lists Autism as a qualifying condition. There are two clinical trials for Autism and cannabis in 2017: Cannabinoids for Behavioral Problems in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Double Blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial With Crossover. Cannabidivarin (CBDV) vs. Placebo in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) https://nccih.nih.gov/health/autism https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5473390/ Safety and Efficacy of Medical Cannabis Oil for Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia: An-Open Label, Add-On, Pilot Study. An Open Label Study of the Use of Dronabinol (Marinol) in the Management of Treatment-Resistant Self-Injurious Behavior in 10 Retarded Adolescent Patients https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4648553/ DOWNLOAD ALL PETITIONS ONLY (34MB) DOWNLOAD ALL PETITIONS AND SUPPORTING STUDIES HERE (1.7GB)
  38. 2 points
    Published on Mar 1, 2018 Muskegon Mother finds non-toxic and safe Cannabidiol CBD from medical marijuana is a better treatment for epilepsy than liquid Valium. In phase 1 of the study, 3 mg/kg daily of cannabidiol (CBD) was given for 30 days to 8 health human volunteers. Another 8 volunteers received the same number of identical capsules containing glucose as placebo in a double-blind setting. Neurological and physical examinations, blood and urine analysis, ECG and EEG were performed at weekly intervals. In phase 2 of the study, 15 patients suffering from secondary generalized epilepsy with temporal focus were randomly divided into two groups. Each patient received, in a double-blind procedure, 200-300 mg daily of CBD or placebo. The drugs were administered for along as 4 1/2 months. Clinical and laboratory examinations, EEG and ECG were performed at 15- or 30-day intervals. Throughout the experiment the patients continued to take the antiepileptic drugs prescribed before the experiment, although these drugs no longer controlled the signs of the disease. All patients and volunteers tolerated CBD very well and no signs of toxicity or serious side effects were detected on examination. 4 of the 8 CBD subjects remained almost free of convulsive crises throughout the experiment and 3 other patients demonstrated partial improvement in their clinical condition. CBD was ineffective in 1 patient. The clinical condition of 7 placebo patients remained unchanged whereas the condition of 1 patient clearly improved. The potential use of CBD as an antiepileptic drug and its possible potentiating effect on other antiepileptic drugs are discussed.
  39. 2 points
    Komorn Law Firm - Ch 7 News - Client Ron and Jon - Asset Forfeiture Interview
  40. 2 points
    Michael Komorn has worked tirelessly for his clients at Komorn Law PLLC to return property seized and forfeited to the police. The items and property seized often has absolutely no medical marijuana (or any crime at all) connection whatsoever. Just looking at the list of things seized, none of it makes sense. 4 wheeler? Gas generator? 401k retirement account? Cars purchased 20 years ago and restored. Ladders, children's birthday money taken out of their Hallmark birthday cards. iphones, ipads, computers, cash, gold rings, guns. The police will take anything of value that they can in any medical marijuana case. As an expert in civil asset forfeiture, Michael Komorn and Komorn Law PLLC attorney Jeff Frazier educate other lawyers on the steps and pitfalls of forfeiture cases on ICLE. Michael Komorn and Jeff Frazier discuss with Rachael Sedlacek about the procedural requirements in a civil asset forfeiture case. Criminal defense can often involve recovering property seized by the police. Civil asset forfeiture cases require navigation of unique procedural rules and complex negotiations. LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users.When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. Rep. Lucido says bill would prevent police from seizing innocent people's stuff Kim Russell 11:28 PM, Jan 30, 2018 LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users. When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. “It allows law enforcement and benefits everybody, to remove the profit motive from drug dealing,” said Robert Stevenson, the Executive Director of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. Police say they only seize stuff they truly believe is connected to crimes. Often people are never charged with a crime or their belongings are kept after charges are dropped. “I did not get bound over by the judge but they still have my stuff,” said Ginnifer Hency as she testified before state lawmakers in 2015. She said she has multiple sclerosis and is a medical marijuana patient. She said even after a judge cleared her of any crime, the prosecutor fought to keep her valuables. Lawmakers changed the law to raise the burden of proof, but people are still voicing complaints. “I felt robbed, like a highway robbery,” said John Hamann of what happened to him and his dad Ron Hamann. The Hamanns say they believe it is about making money for law enforcement. When medical marijuana became legal, they applied for cards to be caregivers and patients. “I thought everything was legal,” said Ron. “Everything you are supposed to do. I followed all the weights, all the counts and everything like that, but it doesn’t matter. They take everything and say gotcha,” said John. They say almost three years ago police seized all their valuables. They say about two years later, only when they came close to winning their belongings back, were they charged with manufacturing marijuana. To them, it felt like a shakedown. “WCPO’s longstanding office protocol is that any civil forfeiture case and the associated criminal cases are kept separate. In other words WCPO has a fire wall in place..The civil and criminal cases are completely independent from one another,” said Maria Miller of the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office in a statement. The prosecutor’s office says the Hamann's face the charges because it is alleged that they had over 20 pounds of marijuana and 69 marijuana plants. Komorn, their attorney says that doesn’t make sense as a legal allegation. Ron had a patient card and proof he was a caregiver for two patients. He was allowed to possess 36 plants. John had a patient card and was a caregiver for 4 patients. He was allowed to possess 60 plants. As for the weight, Komorn says pictures submitted as evidence show the marijuana weighed was unusable in that it was wet and included stalks thrown in the garbage. Komorn says only usable marijuana is supposed to count in weight limitations. The Hamanns say what was seized has nothing to do with marijuana. They say police seized their 401Ks, which they contributed to through their jobs at a home remodeling company. Police told them they could because the money was from drugs. “I don’t understand it at all. It is on my paystub. It shows where my money comes from. It is all legal,” said John Hamann. “All the money is traceable from his job into his 401k,” said Rep. Peter Lucido (R-36th District). “There is no logic or reason for the police to do what they are doing. But they have the right to do it under state law.” Representative Peter Lucido has introduced House Bill 4158. He says police all too often seize property from the innocent.Taking a look at the numbers. The state’s asset forfeiture report says in 2016 police seized more than 15 million dollars in property. In about ten percent of those cases no one was charged. He wants the law changed, so that police would only be able to keep your stuff if there is a conviction, forcing police to at least charge people in order to keep their belongings. “They have a right to seize it and put it into an evidence locker, but if they don’t charge the person, what did the person do wrong under the law?” asks Lucido. “It does put people in a tough spot. It puts a person in a tough spot if those proceeds are from illegal activity,” said Stevenson. Law enforcement leaders, like Stevenson, say If someone wants to get their stuff back, all they have to do is answer the questions investigators have. It has the potential to be a powerful tool in the fight against crime. “One of the things you have to do in a civil case, which you do not have to do in a criminal case, is you have to answer questions,” said Stevenson. Michael Komorn argues that it hurts justice. He says he takes on clients who can’t afford his services, because their assets are seized. “The idea that the government just takes it, and the idea that by possessing it it becomes theirs, and the burden shifts to the owner of it to prove that the property is not guilty or that they got it legally, goes against the grain of what people expect from our legal system,” said Komorn. John and Ron Hamman says they believe they will be found not guilty - but in the meantime are being punished. Rep. Lucido will have the chance to make his case that this law needs to be changed during a hearing in Lansing on February 6. https://www.wxyz.com/news/rep-lucido-says-bill-would-prevent-police-from-seizing-innocent-peoples-stuff http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman Read more about criminal asset forfeiture and civil asset forfeiture on my blog. http://komornlaw.com/does-freezing-defendants-untainted-assets-violate-right-to-counsel-of-choice/ http://komornlaw.com/how-a-sex-toy-put-spotlight-on-michigan-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws-targeted-for-reform/ http://komornlaw.com/civil-asset-forfeiture-guilty-until-proven-innocent/ http://komornlaw.com/editorial-court-puts-limit-on-police-stealing/ http://komornlaw.com/feds-using-forfeiture-to-their-advantage/ http://komornlaw.com/mich-cops-seized-24m-in-2014-in-drug-cases/ http://komornlaw.com/house-speaker-michigan-must-reform-asset-forfeiture/ http://komornlaw.com/court-pot-as-tip-no-reason-for-police-to-seize-car/ http://komornlaw.com/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman-fox-2/ http://komornlaw.com/police-ransack-charges-dropped/ http://komornlaw.com/2015-michigan-state-police-asset-forfeiture-report-final/ Meet Some Law Enforcement Officers Who Support Forfeiture Reform Michigan Legislature should strengthen property rights By JARRETT SKORUP | Feb. 14, 2018 | Follow Jarrett Skorup on Twitter While many interest groups representing law enforcement employees oppose reforming civil asset forfeiture to require a criminal conviction before the state can take ownership of a person’s property, some law enforcement officers support the changes. In the Traverse City Record-Eagle, reporter Kyle Kaminski gets comments from a variety of law enforcement officials about forfeiture generally and about a bill that would reform how it's used in Michigan. Here are the responses: “It would be easier for us and more fair to those who are having their property forfeited to have a criminal conviction,” said Grand Traverse County Undersheriff Nate Alger. “Our system is based on being innocent until proven guilty.” … Attorney General Bill Schuette this week said conviction before [forfeiture] is a “good principle” to maintain. … County Prosecutor Bob Cooney noted most local forfeiture cases include a criminal conviction but said current laws force them to continue. “I wish the state would better fund narcotics teams and not incentivize them in any way to go after forfeiture dollars,” Cooney said. “At the same time, those laws were set up to take away profits from those selling illegal drugs. That’s the idea.” … “I’m a little concerned that by tying them to a criminal conviction, it’s going to bring me people who try to barter their way out of things,” Kalkaska County Prosecutor Mike Perreault said. “I could also see the argument then that we’re only prosecuting people to take their stuff.” Benzie County Sheriff Ted Schendel said “common sense” dictates police first need to prove someone guilty of a crime. “I know forfeiture is a huge asset, especially for drug enforcement teams. There’s never enough money to fund those things,” Schendel said. “But I like to err on the side of the people and the Constitution.” The law enforcement officials are joined by others in their field who support the conviction requirement. House Bill 4158 would do the following: Require a criminal conviction, or plea agreement, prior to any forfeiture taking place for assets under $50,000. Allow for exemptions for people who die, are deported or abandon their property. This properly balances protecting innocent people’s property rights with enabling law enforcement to forfeit property that was either obtained with proceeds from illegal activity or used for illegal purposes. http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/meet-some-law-enforcement-officers-who-support-forfeiture-reform
  41. 2 points
    Drchopper74

    The Treatment Of Adhd

    Does any one one have any experience, or knowledge of someone who can talk to me about the use of cannabis for the treatment of ADHD in children? I have read a few articles on the subject and it sounds very promising, especially since the treatment that the doctors want to give (Ritalin) is dangerous as HELL!!! Thank you
  42. 2 points
    This article details amendments to the MMMA signed into law on September 21, 2016 which are retroactive. If you were convicted of any crime due to the possession, delivery, or manufacture of cannabis oil or any cannabis-infused product, contact us to see how the new amendments affect you. Over the past 8 years Komorn Law has vigorously represented medical marihuana patients and caregivers accused of violating the law. On July 11, 2013 the Michigan Court of Appeals in the matter of People v Carruthers delivered one of the worst opinions ever issued by any court anywhere. It was the worst opinion ever, not because I simply disagreed with it. It was the worst opinion ever because it was literally hard to read, painful to read, and difficult to comprehend. Difficult to comprehend in this context means that the opinion was not logical and ignored or failed to rely on principles of reason in coming to its conclusions. The principles of logic that were ignored or in error in Carruthers can be summed up in the following list: Section 4, the immunity section of the MMMA that protects patients and caregivers from arrest, includes only plant material marihuana. Section 4 specifically precludes non plant material such as medibles, hash, oils, wax, shatter and dabs. The MMMA Voter Initiative intended for all patients to only ingest cannabis from smoking. Despite a lot of text in the MMMA regarding non-adult medical marihuana patients, those particular patients must smoke marihuana, either by joint, bowl, dab or bong. The ingestion of non-plant material is unusable marihuana because none of the "non- plant material" ingestible cannabis products are named in the usable marihuana definition. Even though smoking is not mentioned in the usable marihuana definition, unlike medibles (or non-plant material), smoking marihuana is considered usable marihuana. The lab report in Carruthers, just like all lab reports produced by either the Michigan State Crime Lab Forensic Science Division or the Oakland County Lab, report "non-plant material marihuana" as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol schedule 1 (a felony). That each of these so called "accredited" institutions have been falsely reporting that the "non-plant" marihuana material or substances that they have been testing is not marihuana. That despite evidence within the laboratory’s own data, overwhelming evidence exists in each of the samples that the non-plant marihuana material is marihuana. The conclusions reached in the Carruthers case, of course, make no sense and reflect unequivocally that patients and caregivers have been wrongly affected by the above mentioned treatment and legal interpretations. Many clients who have hired Komorn law over the past years have witnessed our firm fight back for patients and caregivers who found themselves in the throes of the Carruthers interpretations. During this time our clients experienced and witnessed our strategy in responding to the Carruthers interpretation. For many, the Courts embraced Carruthers and denied motions to dismiss based upon Section 4 immunity. In those situations, we were forced to present our section 8 defense, requiring presenting evidence of debilitating conditions, bona fide physician patient relationship, medical use and why the amount of marihuana at issue was not more than the reasonable amount necessary to treat the patient’s debilitating condition. For many of our clients, we were able to prevail, fight back and establish that the alleged culpable behavior was in fact medical use. Unfortunately, not all patients were given the same advice or counsel. The impact of Carruthers on the medical cannabis community has had a devastating effect. One of the groups of patients specifically identified as a protected class of individuals pursuant to the MMMA that the Carruthers decision impacted the most were the juvenile medical marihuana patients. We cannot forget all the parents of those children who feared that the simple possession of non-plant material would result in losing their immunity pursuant to Section 4. One can only imagine the thoughts and concerns going through the minds of these parents as they were forced to make decision of providing cannabis to their child that they knew worked and stopped seizures or spend the night at the emergency room at the local hospital. The Carruthers decision and its illogical rationale, as applied, impacted the protection afforded to those parents from, arrest, prosecution, and specifically Child Protective Services penalties. As applied, the Carruthers holding had the impact of precluding immunity from arrest, prosecution, or penalty of any kind for these parents. The Carruthers holding was interpreted to mean that only if the patient child or parent caregiver is in unambiguous compliance with section 4, shall immunity apply and the non-plant material marihuana per Carruthers did not fall within that category. Said another way, after 8 years of litigation the patient children and their caregiver parents both lose. Putting aside these horrific stories for a moment, there still remain many other situations where patients and caregivers who were engaging in the medical use of marihuana yet were still arrested, prosecuted, or had their medicine or property seized for the medical use of marihuana. The Carruthers Court of Appeals holding, whether intended or not, paved the way for the Law Enforcement Community to deem non-plant material marihuana as unusable marihuana, and therefore not protected by Section 4. Ultimately the Carruthers interpretation by the Law Enforcement Community resulted in the creation of crimes associated with the medical use of marihuana for the possession of marihuana of non-plant material marihuana, which at the time was deemed unusable marihuana. Many patients and caregivers have fallen victim to this Kafkaesque interpretation of the MMMA. Since the Carruthers holding in 2013, the mere possession of marihuana intended to be ingested by means other than smoking became contraband. Patients and caregivers were arrested, prosecuted and the full force and effect of penalty of any kind was imposed upon them. For many of these situations the accused patient or caregiver was only in possession of non-plant material medical marihuana. Patients and caregivers with and without competent counsel were told they were guilty of crimes for possessing medicine recommended by their physicians, merely because it was their choice to ingest the medicine in a manner other than smoking. The impact of a guilty plea, conviction or a criminal record for a schedule 1 controlled substance, often times abstracted as possession of a dangerous drug, can be devastating and it goes without saying that it impedes opportunities for work, school, housing, to possess firearms, vote and the ability to secure loans. The carnage from the Carruthers case can be felt across the state of Michigan in the homes of patients and caregivers. It has been well documented that Komorn Law intended to right this wrong. (See Komorn Law’s Federal Law Suit). For those that are not aware, Komorn Law has been representing Mr. Carruthers since his case was remanded from the Court of Appeals back to the trial Court. Those proceedings resulted in an evidentiary hearing wherein we were able to establish the necessary evidence to present a medical marihuana affirmative defense. Additionally, we challenged the competency of the laboratory report, which reported that the Carruthers's marihuana brownies were not marihuana but instead delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (not marihuana). The State appealed the trial Court’s finding in our favor, and the Court of Appeals affirmed all the trial Court’s findings in our favor. The Carruthers matter is currently before the Michigan Supreme Court, which is where it has remained since April 7, 2016. In the meantime, on or about September 21, 2016 the Governor of the State of Michigan signed into law Public Act 283 of 2016, formerly House Bill 4210. If you were convicted of any crime due to the possession, delivery, or manufacture of cannabis oil or any cannabis-infused product, contact us to see how the new amendments affect you. The title and purpose of the amendments: Section 3 amendments: Section 4 amendments: Section 6 amendments: Section 7 amendments: The Retroactive effect of 4210:
  43. 2 points
    Marvin Guy is facing capital murder in Killeen, Texas for shooting and killing a SWAT officer that was executing a no-knock, pre-dawn drug raid and Mr. Guy’s home where he was in bed with his wife. No drugs were found and the raid was apparently based on a bogus tip. [http://thefreethoughtproject.com/prosecutor-seeking-death-penalty-officer-killed-knock-raid/] Under Texas law, it is not a defense to resisting arrest that the search or arrest is unlawful. With a no-knock, pre-dawn raid there is no presentation of a warrant, no time to react, no way to determine legality. That’s the point. Resistance is futile. So what should Mr. Guy have done? No-knock raids and preventative detention were part of Nixon’s strategy from the beginning of his war against the counterculture. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that "no-knock" warrants are justified when police officers have a "reasonable suspicion" that knocking and announcing their presence before entering would "be dangerous or futile, or . . . inhibit the effective investigation of the crime." Richards v. Wisconsin (1997) 520 U.S. 385, 394 (1997). Now, there are more than 50,000 SWAT raids per year, most to search for contraband and many executed pre-dawn with no knock or announcement. Magistrates often issue a no-knock warrant upon a showing that the target is a licensed gun owner. The results are tragic. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/raid-of-the-day-anthony-d_n_2696658.html] The 2nd Amendment implications are largely unaddressed. In Michigan, the right to resist unlawful arrests, and other unlawful invasions of private rights, is well established in our state’s common law. In explaining the common-law right to resist an unlawful arrest, the Michigan Supreme Court has stated that “one may use such reasonable force as is necessary to prevent an illegal attachment and to resist an illegal arrest” and that “the basis for such preventive or resistive action is the illegality of an officer’s action, to which [a] defendant immediately reacts.” People v. Moreno, [http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/People-v-Moreno.pdf] While it may be argued that a citizen it is not justified to resist a search or arrest based upon a facially valid warrant, a no-knock entry provides no such opportunity to stand down. In Michigan, a warrant for a no-knock entry is a recipe for a legal firefight, winners and losers to be determined after the fact. The vast majority of SWAT raids are to search for drugs, mostly marijuana. In Michigan, there is the additional fact that medical marijuana is legal. Eliminating no-knock entries to search for marijuana would be good policy and greatly reduce harm. Eliminating SWAT team enforcement of marijuana laws altogether would be the best policy. Indeed, inspections of registered patients and caregivers should not be conducted as raids at all. "A criminal raid executed under the guise of an administrative inspection is constitutionally unreasonable": [http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Berry-v-Leslie.pdf] Should Mr. Guy have moved to Michigan? Probably not quite yet. Might he have a better chance with a Texas jury? In February, just a few months before the fateful raid in Killeen, all charges against another man were dropped in a nearly identical raid when a Texas grand jury refused to indict, based on its believing that he feared for his safety and that killing the officer was a reasonable act of self-defense. Unlike the defendant in that case, Mr. Guy is black. What should Mr. Guy have done? The jury’s still out.
  44. 2 points
    A recent radio show on NPR featured an interview with Michael Komorn a leading medical marijuana attorney in Southfield and the president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association In 2008, Michigan voters said yes to medical marijuana. There are reports that since 2011 it seems as if fewer patients have been signing up for medical marijuana cards. A 2013 Michigan Supreme Court ruling, patients remain protected as consumers even though sellers no longer have a clear-cut legal protection to sell. According to Komorn, there are several reasons this decline has occurred most likely due to the way the medical marijuana law was amended. Patients now register once every two years, where in the past they registered once a year. “So I think inherently the numbers are down because of that change in the law,” Komorn said. Enforcement of the law “varies from community to community, county to county,” said Komorn. “Different law enforcement agencies or even prosecutors have taken a different approach to it. Some are very hands-on and are leading the charge in terms of prosecuting and creating new cases. Others have taken a more hands-off approach, so you have a great disparity throughout the state, which is a problem.” Komorn said those differences in interpretation and enforcement mean confusion for patients and caregivers Would you like to know more? Read More…Fewer Michigan medical marijuana patients signing up Listen to the interview… http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/20150305_SS_Komorn_MedicalMarijuana.mp3
  45. 2 points
    SirLongSmoke

    Meeting Date

    In the face of scrutiny, I wait. Meeting with the school today has me nervous about my future. What will happen? How will they react? Will they understand? As I prepare myself for the worst, I always keep peace within my heart. The Lord guides me and whatever I'm faced with; I know he will be there. Always keep looking up and always keep him near. Thanks for everyone's support through this. I will let you know when I do!
  46. 2 points
    The war on drugs, declared by President Nixon in the 1970s, has played a major role in shaping today's society. According to a report by the Pew charitable trust, more than one in every 100 U.S. adults is behind bars. Many consider the war on drugs to be a devastating failure. This seems like a logical enough conclusion. The "war" was declared on our country's own citizens -- it was always a zero-sum game. Like any zero-sum game, it could only be won by the enemy's losses. But if we are the enemy, who really wins? Our collective losses have been great since the 1970s, and we have all seen them and borne their weight. Overreaching governmental intrusions into our personal privacy, criminalization of minor drug offenses and an extremely overpopulated prison are realities we've all begrudgingly come to accept. But why? Is any of this working? The United States contains five percent of world's population, yet 25 percent of the world's incarcerated population. We have the highest rate of incarceration in theentire world. In 2012, about half of those in federal prison were there for non-violent drug offenses. Of those, marijuana arrests made up 48.3 percent, 87 percent of which were for possession only. Clearly something has to change. Here's what we know: 80 percent of offenders abuse drugs or alcohol and nearly 50 percent of inmates are clinically addicted. The war on crime has been phenomenally successful in arresting and prosecuting individuals. However, it has not made a dent in addiction, the consumer demand for drugs, or the trafficker's ability sell them. According to the CIA, the United States is the "world's largest consumer of cocaine (shipped from Colombia through Mexico and the Caribbean), Colombian heroin and Mexican heroin and marijuana." So what's the answer? It's difficult to say. We need to ask ourselves some tough questions to help figure out our priorities as a country. Are we satisfied with spending more money on incarcerating our citizens, than educating them? Are we ok with our current parole/release system, or do we think the rate of recidivism (67.5 percent) is troubling? Do we agree that the United States has the highest rate of criminality in the world, or is there another explanation for why we have had the highest rate of incarceration since 2002? There have been positive steps in the right direction. On April 23, the Justice Department released new clemency guidelines for non-violent drug offenders. Amongst other requirements, the offenders, must have already served 10 years to be eligible. While this program may be taking an important step in the right direction, many others' rights are being trampled right back over every day under prevailing state and federal law. As a country, we can do better. As people, we can do better. In the 1970s, war was waged unwittingly by the United States on its own citizens. Today its time to call a cease fire.
  47. 2 points
    Ms Chocolate

    You've Asked For It!

    After reading the Senate bill 660, I have to ask: "Isn't this what was asked for?" When the cry went out to tax and regulate marijuana, is this not what was wanted? Keep in mind that we live in a country that is for the people, by the people. A country where businesses and corporations are people. A country where lawmakers perform in ways directed by the people who control their incomes. I doubt that there are no many who will not suggest that our lawmakers are indeed receiving funding from corporate people. For years corporations have spent millions of dollars developing marijuana based medications. I speak not of "government created" fake or fake cannabis, but drugs created with real, growth from the ground cannabis. These drugs have been manufactured and until recently, tested in other countries. Now that GW Pharmacy is being tested in the U.S., you best believe that there was already something in the pipeline to change the federal schedule of drugs and medications. I see SB660 as Michigan's response to the drug manufacturers request. After all, is Michigan not home to a number of them. Isn't this state the only, or just one of a few, who will not allow its citizens to sue said manufactures for fault? If the state is wrong in its giving support to these manufacturers, did its lawmakers just pass law making it harder to sue the state? With the passing of this bill, patients will be able to visit their local licensed store and purchase up to two ounces of Schedule II level, pure, germ-free, clean, environmentally-controlled marijuana. I imagine that the offerings will come in a host of forms. There will be the pre-rolled, the vapeable, food-stuff, and the topicals. All the patient needs is doctor's approval and the soon to be created "enhanced pharmacy- grade" marihuana card. I bet it will be possible to receive Plan D coverage for its purchase. This bill even includes noticed that it will run with our Michigan Medical Marijuana Act of 2008 (MMMA), not against or instead of it. As patients and/or their caregivers we will still be able to grow and use our Schedule I, home grown cannabis. With a paid doctor's approval AND a paid traceable MMMA card; we can still smoke, vaporize, eat, and rub on cannabis to relive our pains and ailments. That is, if we have the money, because Plan D won't help. Since a patient can only have one of the two cards, my guess is that the hope is for those with serious medical issues and no money will choose the "pharmacy-grade card. Knowing that many patients may be willing to make this jump, I see the number of plants allowed per patients reduced to no more than six. This bill is written to benefit corporation type people, no real people; therefor it will happen. What is not clear or certain is what will happen to the real people once the corpora dust has died. Legalized, taxed, and regulated cannabis is what people have been asking for, and darn-it, it's what's the people will get! Oh yeah, G W Pharmaceuticals is expecting FDA approval of Sativex within the next few weeks. NOTE: There are some things in this bill that are not clear What is CANNABIS? This word is defined nowhere in state law. Is the pharmacy-grade card used in place of a script? Does the card record purchases? Will there be a cost/price for the card? Is there a wait period other than for clearance? As this bill moves from the Senate to the House, I hope its Swiss cheese type holes are filled! BTW - find and read the 11/18/13 issue of The Nation
  48. 1 point
    115th Congress (2017-2018) Marijuana and Drug Related Legislative Acts Current as of 4/11/18 H.R. 1823 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1823 Marijuana Revenue and Regulation Act Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3] House - Ways and Means 3/30/2017 Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Introduced 3/30/2017 S. 776 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/776 Marijuana Revenue and Regulation Act Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] Senate - Finance 3/30/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 1841 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1841 Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act Rep. Polis, Jared [D-CO-2] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Natural Resources, Agriculture 4/24/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 3391 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3391 Medical Marijuana Research Act of 2017 Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary 9/6/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. 7/25/2017 S. 780 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/780 Responsibly Addressing the Marijuana Policy Gap Act of 2017 Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] Senate - Finance 3/30/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 1824 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1824 Responsibly Addressing the Marijuana Policy Gap Act of 2017 Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Financial Services, Natural Resources, Education and the Workforce, Veterans' Affairs, Oversight and Government Reform 4/24/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 4815 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4815 Marijuana Justice Act of 2018 Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, Agriculture, Natural Resources, Financial Services 2/8/2018 Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry. Introduced 1/17/2018 S. 1689 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1689 Marijuana Justice Act of 2017 Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ] Senate - Judiciary 8/1/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Introduced 8/1/2017 H.R. 331 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/331 States' Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 1/31/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 1/5/2017 H.R. 1227 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1227 Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2017 Rep. Garrett, Thomas A., Jr. [R-VA-5] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary 3/16/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 2/27/2017 H.R. 2020 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2020 To provide for the rescheduling of marijuana into schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. Rep. Gaetz, Matt [R-FL-1] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary 4/7/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health Introduced 4/6/2017 H.R. 975 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/975 Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2017 Rep. Rohrabacher, Dana [R-CA-48] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 2/10/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 2/7/2017 H.R. 4816 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4816 Stop Civil Asset Forfeiture Funding for Marijuana Suppression Act of 2018 Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33] House - Judiciary 1/24/2018 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 1/17/2018 H.R. 2920 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2920 CARERS Act of 2017 Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Veterans' Affairs 6/16/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 6/15/2017 S. 1374 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1374 CARERS Act of 2017 Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ] Senate - Judiciary 6/15/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Introduced 6/15/2017 S. 1764 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1764 CARERS Act of 2017 Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ] Senate - Judiciary 9/5/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary Introduced 9/5/2017 H.R. 1820 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1820 Veterans Equal Access Act Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3] House - Veterans' Affairs 3/31/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 1810 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1810 Small Business Tax Equity Act of 2017 Rep. Curbelo, Carlos [R-FL-26] House - Ways and Means 3/30/2017 Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Introduced 3/30/2017 S. 777 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/777 Small Business Tax Equity Act of 2017 Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] Senate - Finance 3/30/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. Introduced 3/30/2017 H.R. 3534 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3534 State Marihuana And Regulatory Tolerance Enforcement Act Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 8/4/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 7/28/2017 H.R. 4825 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4825 MEDS Act Rep. Bishop, Rob [R-UT-1] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary 1/24/2018 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 1/18/2018 S. 1803 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1803 MEDS Act Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] Senate - Judiciary 9/13/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Introduced 9/13/2017 S. 1008 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1008 Therapeutic Hemp Medical Access Act of 2017 Sen. Gardner, Cory [R-CO] Senate - Judiciary 5/2/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Introduced 5/2/2017 H.R. 3252 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3252 Second Chance for Students Act Rep. Foster, Bill [D-IL-11] House - Education and the Workforce 7/14/2017 Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. Introduced 7/14/2017 H.R. 5050 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5050 Sensible Enforcement of Cannabis Act of 2018 Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] House - Judiciary 2/15/2018 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Introduced 2/15/2018 H.R. 2273 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2273 Charlotte's Web Medical Access Act of 2017 Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-4] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Financial Services 6/2/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 5/1/2017 H.Res. 590 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/590 Calling on the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a clinical study assessing the effectiveness of treating chronic pain in veterans with cannabis in comparison to opioids. Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] House - Veterans' Affairs 10/26/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 10/26/2017 H.R. 715 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/715 Compassionate Access Act Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] House - Energy and Commerce, Judiciary 2/14/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. 1/27/2017 H.R. 714 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/714 LUMMA Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] House - Energy and Commerce 2/3/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 1/27/2017 S. 1276 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1276 Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] Senate - Judiciary 5/25/2017 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Introduced 5/25/2017 H.R. 2528 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2528 Respect States' and Citizens' Rights Act of 2017 Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 6/23/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 5/18/2017 H.R. 449 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/449 Synthetic Drug Awareness Act of 2017 Rep. Jeffries, Hakeem S. [D-NY-8] House - Energy and Commerce 1/25/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 1/11/2017 H.R. 2900 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2900 Synthetic Drug Prevention, Treatment, and Education Act Rep. Velazquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7] House - Energy and Commerce 6/16/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. Introduced 6/14/2017 H.Con.Res. 97 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/97 Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make corrections in the enrollment of H.R. 1. Rep. Polis, Jared [D-CO-2] House - Ways and Means, House Administration 12/18/2017 Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Introduced 12/18/2017 S.Res. 83 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-resolution/83 A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the trafficking of illicit fentanyl into the United States from Mexico and China. Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] Senate - Foreign Relations 3/15/2017 Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. Introduced 3/8/2017 H.Res. 572 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/572 Supporting the goals and ideals of Red Ribbon Week during the period of October 23 through October 31, 2017. Rep. Kuster, Ann M. [D-NH-2] House - Energy and Commerce 10/13/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 10/12/2017 S.Res. 10 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-resolution/10 A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the trafficking of illicit fentanyl into the United States from Mexico and China. Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] 4 Senate - Foreign Relations 1/10/2017 Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. Introduced 1/10/2017 H.R. 3096 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3096 Drug-Free Indian Health Service Act of 2017 Rep. Noem, Kristi L. [R-SD-At Large] House - Natural Resources, Energy and Commerce 7/13/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs. Introduced 6/28/2017 H.Res. 268 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/268 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the trafficking of illicit fentanyl into the United States from Mexico and China. Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1] House - Foreign Affairs, Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 5/18/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. Introduced 4/6/2017 S. 1662 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1662 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018 Sen. Shelby, Richard C. [R-AL] Senate - Appropriations 7/27/2017 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 186. Introduced 7/27/2017 H.R. 3647 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3647 Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2017 Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] House - Judiciary, Homeland Security, Oversight and Government Reform 9/21/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security. Introduced 8/8/2017 S. 1557 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1557 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018 Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS] Senate - Appropriations 7/13/2017 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 173. Introduced 7/13/2017 H.R. 4261 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4261 SAFE Justice Ac Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3] House - Judiciary, Energy and Commerce 11/21/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 11/6/2017 H.R. 3280 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3280 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2018 Rep. Graves, Tom [R-GA-14] House - Appropriations 7/26/2017 Committee on Appropriations Senate Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government. Hearings held on the subject prior to measure being received from the House. Hearings printed: S. Hrg. 115-191. Introduced 7/18/2017 H.R. 244 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/244 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 Rep. Cook, Paul [R-CA-8] House - Veterans' Affairs | Senate - Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 5/5/2017 Became Public Law No: 115-31. Introduced 1/4/2017 H.R. 1625 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1625 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39] House - Foreign Affairs | Senate - Foreign Relations, Foreign Relations 3/23/2018 Became Public Law No: 115-141. Introduced 3/20/2017 S. 1152 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1152 SAFE Banking Act Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR] Senate - Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 6/8/2017 Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-81. Introduced 5/17/2017 H.R. 2215 https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2215 SAFE Act of 2017 Rep. Perlmutter, Ed [D-CO-7] House - Financial Services, Judiciary 9/21/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Introduced 4/27/2017 View PDF Document in Table Format
  49. 1 point
    Michael Komorn is dedicated to defending his clients from both criminal charges and civil asset forfeiture. During a committee meeting on House Bill 4158, a bill to reform asset forfeiture, House Committee member Triston Cole tried to find any possible way to attack Komorn's client testimony. With Michael's 9 years of dedicated experience to medical marijuana , he was ready to get deep into analyzing each question. Finally turning the questions around on Mr. Cole and defending his clients, once again, but this time in the public eye of a committee meeting. Watch below as Michael knows every nook and cranny detail of the Michigan Medical Marijuana program, and uses that knowledge to support the bill. But Lucido's bill may be in trouble. Police and prosecutor unions including PAAM are fighting tooth and nail to keep those assets and any auctions they run to sell off peoples property. Police have been relying on asset forfeiture which has encouraged them to abuse the system. The majority of forfeitures were for $1000, who would hire a $3500 lawyer to fight to get $1000 back? Most people walk away from their own property forfeitures because the economics of it. Lucido Wants To Finish The Job On Reform of Civil Asset Forfeiture Rep. Peter LUCIDO (R-Shelby Twp.) says he wants to finish the job of reforming civil asset forfeiture in Michigan and has introduced HB 4158 to prohibit its use by police unless a person has been convicted of a crime. He told the House Judiciary Committee today that improvements made last year require police to report how much property they seize and end residents needing to post bond to get their property back. However, he wants more (See "No Bond Needed To Get Seized Property Back Under Passed Bill," 3/22/16). "Last year, Michigan law enforcement agencies seized over $15 million and change, along with 2,037 vehicles. They seized 806 weapons, 276 financial securities, and 15,160 other pieces of personal property," Lucido told the committee. Before that, agencies weren't required to report seizures, so it is not known how much property police confiscated, he said. Police use civil asset forfeiture as a way to battle drug trafficking. The process allows police to seize property believed to have been used in the course of committing a crime, like the vehicle that drugs are transported in or cash from drug deals. Lucido said no one should profit from criminal activity, but he contends the process is being used in some cases excessively, and in some cases to supplement police department budgets. "No one was charged with a crime in 523 cases of those 5,290 cases," Lucido said about last year's statistics. "Ten percent of the crimes, that they claim were crimes, but (people were) never charged, never convicted, and lost their property without even being charged as a criminal. Another 196 people were charged but never convicted." Committee Chair Jim RUNESTAD (R-White Lake) held an extended session of the committee meeting, but didn't call a vote on the bills. He said he would take more testimony on the proposal in the coming week. Today's testimony was all from individuals in support of ending the practice. He expects law enforcement agencies will testify next week in defense of the use of civil asset forfeiture. He said the committee has to hear from both sides. Attorney Michael KOMORN brought several of his clients before the committee to tell of their experiences with civil asset forfeiture. Amanda JOSLIN, a medical marijuana user, said police raided her home in 2015, seizing her home, car, a game system and her son's paychecks from his job. She said they even took a steam mop. Eventually, charges were dismissed against her, but she got none of the property back. Joslin contended that while civil asset forfeiture may have been intended to combat drug dealing, police have concluded "they can take money from the low-hanging fruit, which is the medical marijuana community." Ted NELSON, who is retired from the Michigan State Police, spoke in favor of eliminating civil asset forfeiture. He said it was intended to battle drug smuggling and to confiscate the cash generated by drug sales. Now it is being used excessively. "If they needed a couch for their office, they would take a couch. In my opinion, that is not was civil asset forfeiture was intended to do," Nelson told the committee. Former State Trooper: Cops, Prosecutors Misuse Problematic Asset Forfeiture Law ‘Civil asset forfeiture erodes the public trust in law enforcement’ By EVAN CARTER | Feb. 8, 2018 | Follow Evan Carter on Twitter Editor's Note: This article was updated to note that when civil asset forfeiture first began to be used in Michigan, narcotics enforcement would obtain the proceeds of criminal activity. The Michigan State Police detective who helped train the state police in how to conduct civil asset forfeiture says the police are misusing it. Former Michigan State Police Detective Sergeant Ted Nelson, who developed a curriculum on civil asset forfeiture for the department and taught it for more than a decade, made those comments to the state House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 6. The committee hearing was the first of many which are scheduled to be heard on House Bill 4158 over the next couple weeks. After that, the committee may vote on whether to send the bill to the full state House of Representatives. The bill would require police officers and other law enforcement officials to convict someone in a criminal court before they could take ownership of cash and other assets they seize, for property valued at $50,000 or less. “Law enforcement is an extremely important vocation in our society and it is as important today as yesterday,” Nelson told the committee. “I believe that the policy and procedures of civil asset forfeiture erodes the public trust in law enforcement.” Nelson told Michigan Capitol Confidential that during his 26 years with the department, he saw law enforcement officials receive by forfeit items, such as furniture, that they believed could be used in department offices or sold for a profit. Nelson, who supports HB 4158, said this type of behavior wasn’t the reason civil asset forfeiture was introduced. Nelson said he first received training on civil asset forfeiture in the late 1980s when the practice was considered part of the war on drugs. At the time, civil forfeiture was used mainly for major drug crimes, in which narcotics enforcement would obtain the proceeds of criminal activity. Nelson developed a curriculum to teach the state police’s drug teams. He was the expert state police troopers called when they seized money and they weren’t sure it could be tied to a drug crime. “We’re the foot soldiers of the Constitution and sometimes we forget that,” Nelson said. Nelson said he doesn’t believe enacting HB 4158 would change how police officers do their job, but he believes it would change how prosecutors do their job. Shelby Township Republican Rep. Peter Lucido is the primary sponsor of the legislation. At the hearing, he said law enforcement officials can use mechanisms other than civil asset forfeiture to ensure that those believed to have participated in criminal activity cannot make a profit from ill-gotten gains or get rid of illicit substances. “We lost the war on drugs, and civil asset forfeiture has penalized the poor,” Lucido said to the committee. “Officers were sworn to protect, and not take.” Attorney Michael Komorn, who is president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, attorney John Shea and national civil asset forfeiture expert Lee McGrath also testified in support of the bill. Not everyone who appeared before the committee supported the bill, however. Waterford Police Chief Scott Underwood said that while he wouldn’t directly offer an opinion on the legislation being discussed, he believes civil asset forfeiture is a useful tool for law enforcement. “I would say that for the most part, that civil asset forfeiture comes from good police work,” Underwood said to the committee. “The numbers with asset forfeiture don’t lead, they follow.” Lucido said in an interview that while he doesn’t want to imply police officers are corrupt, he believes that civil asset forfeiture is too easily abused. “If even one cop abuses it, it’s too much,” Lucido said to Michigan Capitol Confidential. “I had cops who took kid’s piggy banks and dart boards and I’m done with it.” Currently, law enforcement officials do not need to convict, prosecute, or even charge a person of a crime before they can get ownership of seized property through civil asset forfeiture procedures. In 2016, one out of every 10 Michigan residents whose property was taken by law enforcement using civil asset forfeiture was never charged with a crime. According to a Michigan State Police report, more than 700 people were either not charged with a crime, or charged with a crime but not convicted. Since 2000, the state has taken possession of forfeited property worth $20-$25 million annually. The legislation may be part of a larger package aimed at reforming the state’s civil asset forfeiture law. If the measure passes and is signed into law by Gov. Rick Snyder, Michigan will join the 14 states (along with the District of Columbia) that already require a conviction for law enforcement to take possession of seized property. http://www.record-eagle.com/news/local_news/state-lawmakers-eye-forfeiture-reform/article_63727629-81b7-5091-ac45-0e87ddec26fa.html State lawmakers eye forfeiture reform Local officials support 'common sense' legislation BY KYLE KAMINSKI kkaminski@record-eagle.com TRAVERSE CITY — A bill aimed at protecting property rights of the accused is amassing support from local officials as it gains steam among state lawmakers. House Bill 4158 — introduced this month by Republican state Rep. Peter Lucido — would safeguard residents from court-ordered property seizures unless they’ve been convicted of a crime. Lucido contended its passage would affect hundreds annually. “We have people that get their property taken by police who are not detached, neutral magistrates or judges,” Lucido said. “That’s violation of property rights 101. … It’s called due process under the Fourth amendment and the 14th amendment.” Lucido noted law enforcement — specifically through task forces like the Traverse Narcotics Team — have been overly empowered by laws that allows police to confiscate property from those suspected to be involved with drugs. Michigan’s law enforcement agencies collected more than $244 million in gross forfeiture proceeds between 2001 and 2013, averaging about $19 million per year, according to a report from the Institute for Justice. And none required a conviction. Police agencies, in turn, are authorized by law to offload those assets and keep a portion of the proceeds to buy equipment and “enhance all law enforcement activities.” Records show TNT seized at least $400,000 during the past six years. The bill would prohibit forfeitures unless a suspect is found guilty of a crime in court, amending a section of an existing state law. It would take effect next year if passed into law, and would only apply to seizures under $50,000. “$50,000 is a little bit much to have in your pocket,” Lucido explained. Local and state officials — including those who soon could be stripped of their authority to confiscate property — have praised the spirit of the bill. Others, while recognizing need for further reform, were hesitant to endorse the changes. “It would be easier for us and more fair to those who are having their property forfeited to have a criminal conviction,” said Grand Traverse County Undersheriff Nate Alger. “Our system is based on being innocent until proven guilty.” Attorney General Bill Schuette this week said conviction before seizure is a “good principle” to maintain. County Prosecutor Bob Cooney noted most local forfeiture cases include a criminal conviction but said current laws force them to continue. “I wish the state would better fund narcotics teams and not incentivize them in anyway to go after forfeiture dollars,” Cooney said. “At the same time, those laws were set up to take away profits from those selling illegal drugs. That’s the idea.” Lucido’s bill eliminates the requirement people negotiate for the return of their possessions but some officials — like Kalkaska County Prosecutor Mike Perreault — are concerned it could unfairly entwine property seizures with plea bargains. His office tries to avoid forfeiture altogether. The bill could connect those cases with criminal matters and force him into the business regardless, he suggested. “I’m a little concerned that by tying them to a criminal conviction, it’s going to bring me people who try to barter their way out of things,” Perreault said. “I could also see the argument then that we’re only prosecuting people to take their stuff.” Advocacy groups for years have lobbied against statutes that allow civil forfeiture cases to proceed. Some contended they disproportionally impact lower income residents because of often costly legal battles attached to reclaiming property. Others have said seizures lead to “policing for profit” because police, in most cases, can keep the proceeds for their own department. Michigan State Police officials have contended the concept helps save taxpayer dollars and deprives criminals of cash. State Rep. Larry Inman said he supports Lucido’s bill and noted police shouldn’t be able to keep property without a conviction. Benzie County Sheriff Ted Schendel said “common sense” dictates police first need to prove someone guilty of a crime. “I know forfeiture is a huge asset, especially for drug enforcement teams. There’s never enough money to fund those things,” Schendel said. “But I like to err on the side of the people and the Constitution.” A legislative analysis contended the bill would have an indeterminate fiscal impact for law enforcement. It noted its passage likely would result in declined forfeiture-related revenues and impact federal revenue sharing for Michigan State Police. The bill — introduced last week in the House — was recently referred to the Committee on Judiciary. Lucido said lawmakers soon will hear testimony as it pushes forward in the legislature. Visit record-eagle.com for continued coverage.
  50. 1 point
    I shall be writing more of my thoughts on this soon. In 1973, the 36 Cal. App Court ruled in People v. Vargas, that marijuana soaked in alcohol is not a narcotic. "As to the conviction for possession of marijuana, appellant testified that the jar found among his personal effects contained medicine for his rheumatism. Both Agent Velasquez and the court interpreter, Mrs. Ostendorf, testified that a mixture of alcohol and marijuana is commonly used by persons of Mexican descent in the treatment of arthritis, rheumatism and other muscular aches and pains. Agent Velasquez and Mrs. Ostendorf said that in their opinions the substance as it then existed could not be used as a narcotic, fn. 2 and Mrs. Ostendorf said that the substance is poisonous if taken internally. There was no evidence as to whether the substance could be converted from the condition it was then in to a form which could be used as a narcotic, for example, whether it could be dried and then used as a narcotic or if its poisonous quality would continue to render it unusable. From all that appears from the evidence herein, the marijuana mixed with alcohol could never again be used as a narcotic substance by ingestion, by smoking or otherwise. The judgment of conviction of count II (possession of marijuana) is reversed."
×
×
  • Create New...