Jump to content

KLAW Blog

Members
  • Content Count

    939
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Days Won

    11

1 Follower

About KLAW Blog

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Supreme Leader Headquarters

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. March 2, 2020 – Today, the Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) announced a phase-out process for the transfer of marijuana and marijuana products into the regulated market from caregivers. The phase-out process begins immediately and ends on September 30, 2020 with a final termination of all external marijuana transfers. During the ongoing transition to a regulated market, the MRA has been committed to maintaining patient access to medical marijuana by allowing certain licensed facilities to continue to source product from caregivers without it resulting in disciplinary action against their licenses. Now, nearly 200 grower licenses and more than 25 processor licenses have been issued in the medical marijuana market. As more licenses have been issued and more plants grown and processed, the marijuana product produced by licensed facilities has resulted in an increase in the supply of medical marijuana to patients. “We have always put patients first when we make decisions regarding medical marijuana,” said MRA Executive Director Andrew Brisbo. “This phase out process is an important next step in implementing the will of Michigan voters and making sure that patients continue to have access to their medicine.” Licensed businesses will have nearly seven months to make the necessary plans to continue to maintain a sufficient supply of medical marijuana in Michigan. During this time, the MRA will work closely with licensees to build relationships and provide outreach and assistance during this transition period. Phase One – Growers and Processors The MRA gave notice in December, that – beginning on March 1, 2020 – growers and processors who obtain marijuana plants, concentrates, vape cartridges, or infused products from caregivers would be subject to disciplinary action. Phase One of the phase-out process begins immediately and runs through May 31, 2020. During phase one, growers and processors licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. Phase Two – Growers Phase two begins on June 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2020. During phase two, growers licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. During phase two, the total weight of marijuana flower that growers obtain from caregivers must be less than or equal to the total weight of marijuana flower that the licensee harvested (both wet and dry) between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 plus the projected harvest weight (dry) of all plants that are in the flowering process on May 31, 2020. Phase Two – Processors Phase two begins on June 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2020. During phase two, processors licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. During phase two, the total weight of marijuana flower that processors obtain from caregivers must be less than or equal to 50% of the total weight of marijuana flower the licensee obtained from caregivers between the dates of March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020. The marijuana flower obtained from caregivers must be processed and may not be sold or transferred as marijuana flower. End of Phase Out Process The phase out process for caregiver product ends on September 30, 2020. A licensee who accepts an external transfer after September 30, 2020 will be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA. SIGN UP JOIN THE CAREGIVER-PATIENT COALITION TO SAVE THE CURRENT SYSTEM HERE The post Marijuana Regulatory Agency Announces Elimination of Caregiver Product appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  2. Here’s a list of news articles related to Michigan State Police datamaster investigation into inaccurate settings by a contractor which may have lead to false readings for DUI checks. If you feel like your datamaster breathalyzer test was done on a faulty machine or was false and would like to hire an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call Our Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com Michigan State Police finds flaw in breath alcohol testing, suspends contractIt’s pretty bad,’ — Unknown breathalyzer flaw could impact MSP drunk driving casesMSP Statement on Temporarily Suspending Use of Datamaster DMT in Wake of Criminal Investigation into Contractor MalfeasanceDefense attorneys say drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug testsWhat to expect after Michigan State Police discover problems with breathalyzersMichigan State Police investigate potential fraud with breathalyzer testingDefense attorney says drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug testsDefense Attorneys suggest MSP May Have A Conflict of Interest Over Breathalyzer InvestigationMichigan State Police investigating ‘potential fraud’ committed by breathalyzer supplierMichigan State Police launch an investigation into breathalyzer test resultsMichigan police trade breath for blood during breathalyzer fraud probeDUI convictions across Metro Detroit could be impacted by breathalyzer flawMichigan State Police director testifies about investigation into breathalyzersUpdate on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program12 drunken-driving cases dismissedDUI Tests May Be Thrown Out over Bad Breathalyzer MaintenanceMichigan State Police Uncovers Breathalyzer FraudHalf of Michigan’s questionably calibrated breathalyzer machines returned to serviceDashcam footage shows lawmaker crash, fail sobriety tests during ‘super drunk’ driving arrestWayne County judge charged with domestic assault also dealing with drunken driving caseMichigan’s alcohol breath test devices are back amid probeMichigan’s unreliable breathalyzers back in service with little explanationIntoximeters, Breathalyzer Giant Accused of Fraud, Won’t Come Clean About Booze TestsBreath Test Program and Training Information The post MSP Datamaster Breathalyzer Issue News Links appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  3. 02.27.2020 Convicted Felon Sentenced to More Than Seven Years for Possessing a Firearm 02.27.2020 Berkeley County Man Admits to Wire Fraud Involving Hearts2Heros Organization 02.27.2020 Camden, New Jersey Man Pleads Guilty in Methamphetamine Conspiracy 02.27.2020 South Carolina Man Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison for the Kidnapping and Sexual Assault of an Alabama Woman 02.27.2020 Suburban Man Sentenced to More Than 12 Years in Prison for Amassing Child Pornography Collection 02.27.2020 Union County Man Arrested for Mortgage Fraud and Defrauding the Orange Public Library 02.27.2020 Local Man Sentenced for Role in West End Drug Case 02.27.2020 Member of Lightfoot Drug Trafficking Organization Pleads Guilty to Distributing Large Quantities of Cocaine 02.27.2020 Plant City Man Sentenced to Seven Years for Possessing Firearm and Ammunition 02.27.2020 Branford Man Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Nonprofit Employer and Individuals 02.27.2020 Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh Sentenced to Three Years in Federal Prison for Fraud Conspiracy and Tax Charges 02.27.2020 Long-Haul Trucker Indicted for Kidnapping and Child Pornography Crimes 02.27.2020 Former Harrisburg Businessman Sentenced to 37 Months’ Imprisonment for Defrauding College Faculty Union 02.27.2020 Apex Entrepreneur Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Water Remediation Investors and to Aggravated Identity Theft 02.27.2020 Gettysburg Man Charged with Receipt and Distribution of Child Pornography 02.27.2020 Chambersburg Man Sentenced to 10 Years’ Imprisonment for Sex and Drug Trafficking 02.27.2020 Former Prisoner Transport Officer Charged for Abusing Detainees in His Care and Threatening Them with Retaliation if They Reported His Abuse 02.27.2020 Federal Judge Sentences Asheville Man to Life in Prison for Co-Worker’s Murder 02.27.2020 Bronx Man Sentenced to 35 Years in Prison for Narcotics and Firearms Charges 02.27.2020 Bakersfield Attorney Indicted for Scheme to Defraud Her Clients 02.27.2020 Chinese National Sentenced for Stealing Trade Secrets Worth $1 Billion 02.27.2020 Former Senior Iraqi Military Officer During the Saddam Hussein Regime Has Been Sentenced and Denaturalized 02.27.2020 FBI Seeks the Public’s Help Locating Gang-Related Fugitives 02.27.2020 Georgia Woman Pleads Guilty to Providing Local Gang Members with Illegal Guns 02.27.2020 Niagara Falls Man Pleads Guilty for His Role in Drug Conspiracy 02.27.2020 West Saint Paul Man Pleads Guilty to Armed Robberies of Several Twin Cities Restaurants and Gas Stations 02.27.2020 Paterson Police Sergeant Charged with Conspiracy to Violate Civil Rights and Filing False Police Report 02.27.2020 Baltimore Drug Dealer Pleads Guilty to Discharging a Firearm in Furtherance of Drug Trafficking, Resulting in Death 02.27.2020 Bowling Green Attorney Pleads Guilty to Laundering Over $700,000 of Illegal Proceeds 02.27.2020 Federal Inmate Sentenced to Additional Prison Time for Using a Contraband Cell Phone to Post Videos to Facebook 02.27.2020 Former CFO of Naugatuck Company Charged with Fraud Offenses 02.27.2020 Former Kivalina Teacher Arrested and Charged for Child Exploitation Crimes 02.26.2020 Diamond Man Sentenced for Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Appleton City Man Sentenced for Child Pornography 02.26.2020 ATF Operation Leads to Multiple Arrests, Recovery of 82 Firearms 02.26.2020 Maryland Man Pleads Guilty to Carjacking 02.26.2020 Hartford Man Pleads Guilty to Fentanyl and Crack Distribution Offenses 02.26.2020 Columbia Gas Agrees to Plead Guilty in Connection with September 2018 Gas Explosions in Merrimack Valley 02.26.2020 Mortgage Short Sale Negotiator Sentenced for Defrauding Mortgage Lenders 02.26.2020 Nashville Man Facing Federal Carjacking and Firearms Charges 02.26.2020 Arrests in Four States of Racially Motivated Violent Extremists Targeting Journalists and Activists 02.26.2020 Twenty-Four People in Milwaukee Charged with Heroin and Cocaine Trafficking and Firearms Offenses 02.26.2020 Former Veterans Affairs Official Sentenced to 18 Months in Federal Prison for Role in Bribery Scheme to Rig Federal Contracts 02.26.2020 Brooklyn Man Arrested for Making Race-Based Threats of Violence 02.26.2020 Philadelphia Felon Living in Butler, Pennsylvania, Pleads Guilty to Drug and Firearms Violations 02.26.2020 Arrest of José E. López-Piñeiro 02.26.2020 FBI Media Alert: Albuquerque FBI Division Accepting Applications for Summer Teen Academy 02.26.2020 Owner of Bend-Based Microbrewery Equipment Company Indicted on Fraud Charges 02.26.2020 Post Falls Women Sentenced to 10 Years for Murder-for-Hire Plot 02.26.2020 Former Atomwaffen Division Leader Arrested for Swatting Conspiracy 02.26.2020 Jackson Man Arrested Locally for Murder and Released on Bond Pleads Guilty Under Project EJECT to Illegally Possessing a Gun 02.26.2020 Former South Carolina Department of Corrections Officer Sentenced to Federal Prison for Stabbing Inmate 02.26.2020 Physician Charged for Alleged Role in an Over $120 Million Health Care Fraud and Money Laundering Conspiracy Involving Sponsorship of Ultimate Fighting Championship Hall of Famers 02.26.2020 Leader of Coles County Methamphetamine Trafficking Network Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison 02.26.2020 Three Bloomington Men Indicted on Charges of Child Sex Trafficking, Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Brockton Man Sentenced for Federal Firearm and Drug Offenses 02.26.2020 Fitchburg Woman Sentenced to 60 Months for Drug Trafficking 02.26.2020 Marion County Man Admits to Fleeing from Law Enforcement 02.26.2020 Harvey Psychiatrist Sentenced in Scheme to Defraud Medicare by Soliciting and Receiving Kickback Payments for Medically Unnecessary Home Health Referrals 02.26.2020 MS-13 Members Plead Guilty to Violent 2018 Attack 02.26.2020 Madisonville Pharmacist Charged with Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud 02.26.2020 Gang Member Sentenced to More Than Seven Years in Federal Prison for Fentanyl and Crack Offenses 02.26.2020 Boulder Man Pleads Guilty to Possession of Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Holyoke Resident Pleads Guilty to Heroin Distribution 02.26.2020 Springdale Man Sentenced to 20 Years in Federal Prison for Bank Robbery 02.26.2020 Two Los Angeles Pharmacy Owners Sentenced for Multi-Million-Dollar Scheme That Billed Medicare, Cigna $11.8 Million in Fraudulent Medication Claims 02.26.2020 Former Executive Director of Nonprofit is Sentenced for Illegally Diverting Charity Funds to Unnamed State Senator and Convicted Lobbyist 02.26.2020 Former Employee of Twin Cities Nonprofit Pleads Guilty to Charity Fraud Conspiracy 02.26.2020 Jury Convicts Local Man in Multiple Robberies 02.26.2020 Washington Woman Sentenced for Role in Methamphetamine Trafficking Ring 02.26.2020 Indictment: Honduran Citizen Attacked Immigration Officers 02.25.2020 Ocean County Man Charged with Online Enticement of a Minor and Possession of Child Pornography 02.25.2020 Westbrook Man Pleads Guilty to Child Sexual Exploitation Offense 02.25.2020 Member of New Haven Drug Ring Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison 02.25.2020 Latin Dragon Nation Member Sentenced to 18 Years in Prison Following a Conviction for Racketeering Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Former Hopi Reservation Ranger Sentenced in Arizona on Sexual Assault Charges and Destruction of Evidence 02.25.2020 Judge Sentences Rochester, Pennsylvania Man to Five Years in Prison for Texting Images Depicting the Sexual Exploitation of Minors 02.25.2020 Indiana Man Found Guilty of Kidnapping a Child in Calumet City 02.25.2020 New York Man Admits Role in Wire Fraud Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Lexington Businessman Convicted of Obstructing Justice 02.25.2020 Oregon FBI Tech Tuesday: Building a Digital Defense with Your Communications 02.25.2020 Kansas City Man Sentenced for Stolen Vehicle Conspiracy, Illegal Firearm 02.25.2020 Antioch Woman Sentenced to Federal Prison for Embezzlement 02.25.2020 Jackson Man Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison Under Project EJECT for Illegally Possessing a Firearm 02.25.2020 Madison County Man Indicted for Offenses Involving Sexually Explicit Images of Minors 02.25.2020 Bell County Man Sentenced to 121 Months for Methamphetamine Trafficking 02.25.2020 Portland Tax Return Preparer Sentenced to Prison for Preparing False Returns 02.25.2020 John Brown Named Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch 02.25.2020 Vicksburg Man Pleads Guilty to Bank Robbery 02.25.2020 South Philadelphia Drug Delivery Service Operators, Known as the ‘Friends,’ Convicted at Trial on All Counts 02.25.2020 Johnstown Crack Dealer Sentenced to Nearly Four Years in Prison 02.25.2020 Dubois Man Sentenced for Possessing of Child Pornography 02.25.2020 Erie Woman Pleads Guilty in Scheme That Used Homeless to Cash Stolen Checks 02.25.2020 Project Parkersburg Update: Final Four Defendants Plead Guilty to Role in Drug Trafficking Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Former Wilkinsburg Man Sentenced to Prison for Possessing Images and Videos Showing the Sexual Exploitation of Children 02.25.2020 Northern District of Texas Round-Up February 25 02.25.2020 Jury Convicts California Man of Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine 02.25.2020 Cincinnati City Council President Charged with Honest Services Wire Fraud, Bribery, Attempted Extortion 02.25.2020 Parent Sentenced in College Admissions Case 02.25.2020 Southwick Man Sentenced for Sending Threatening Letters and White Powder to Federal Agencies in Springfield The post Bored? Read Some FBI Files appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  4. MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program This morning Michigan State Police (MSP) Director Col. Joe Gasper provided testimony before the state’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee on the findings to-date of the department’s investigation into issues with the state’s Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments. As of 7 a.m., discrepancies have been identified involving eight instruments at the following locations: Instrument Location Period of Time in Question Number of Breath Tests Possible Criminal Act Alpena County Sheriff’s Department 11/14/19 – 1/9/20 8 Yes Beverly Hills Police Department 1/22/19 – 6/21/19 9 Yes Detroit Detention Center 10/10/19 – 10/13/19 6 No Montcalm County Sheriff’s Department 8/23/19 – 8/26/19 1 No Niles Law Enforcement Center 1/15/19 – 2/18/19 7 No Pittsfield Township Police Department 12/20/18 – 8/7/19 5 Yes Tecumseh Police Department 2/15/19 – 6/28/19 12 Yes Van Buren County Sheriff’s Department 11/21/19 – 12/9/19 4 No As irregularities are identified, notification is made to the affected prosecutor regarding impacted breath tests. Prosecutors will review each case on a case-by-case basis to determine what actions to take. On Jan. 13, 2020, the MSP took all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments in the state out of service until they could be inspected and verified by MSP personnel. As of 7 a.m. this morning, 37 of 203 instruments have been returned to service following verification by MSP personnel that the instruments are properly calibrated. MSP personnel are re-certifying the most frequently used instruments and those in areas with limited access to obtaining blood samples first, with hopes of returning all instruments to service by the end of February. A criminal investigation by MSP into potential fraud committed by contract employees of Datamaster vendor, Intoximeters, is ongoing. The below timeline of events was also shared with the committee today. Timeline of Events: September 1, 2018 – Effective date of three-year maintenance contract with Intoximeters Inc. Contract is $1.26 million; requires vendor’s three technicians to conduct 120-day certifications of all instruments, perform service calls and routine maintenance, and provide court testimony on the service and maintenance of the instruments. The technicians whose work is in question were hired in September and November of 2018. January 2019 – With the intent to bring the state’s evidentiary breath alcohol testing program into alignment with forensic laboratory standards and work toward national accreditation, the MSP created a new position, Breath Alcohol Technical Leader, within the Forensic Science Division. The accreditation process was expected to take at least 18 months. April 2019 – MSP put additional workflow requirements in place with the vendor to ensure compliance with state law and administrative rules and move toward accreditation. It was after these additional controls were put in place that the MSP began to notice noncompliance by the vendor’s technicians. August 9, 2019 – After identifying repeated failures by the technicians to meet contractual requirements and the inability to perform the mandated tasks of maintaining and certifying the Datamaster instruments, the MSP asked DTMB Central Procurement to issue a letter to Intoximeters outlining grounds for breach of contract and requesting a corrective action plan. Examples of improper actions include: Not performing timely 120-day certifications in 60 instances. Incorrect recording of important elements during instrument checks; these include dry gas lot numbers and expiration dates, which can create issues in court when the lot numbers recorded by the technicians are wrong, or do not exist. Sharing instrument passwords with jail staff. August 21, 2019 – MSP received a corrective action plan from Intoximeters that outlined their action plan to correct the contractual failures. August 23, 2019 – An Intoximeters technician committed a serious error that resulted in the dismissal of an OWI case in Montcalm County. On August 23, 2019, the technician went to the Montcalm County Jail and signed the Datamaster Maintenance Log. The technician did not notify the MSP nor Intoximeters of this visit and did not submit any paperwork regarding the reason for his visit. Later that day, an MSP sergeant arrested an individual for OWI and utilized that instrument for evidential testing. MSP was first made aware of this technician’s August 23rd visit by the Montcalm County Prosecutor’s Office on November 15, 2019. The technician and Intoximeters were both unable to explain this visit, casting doubt on the reliability of any tests conducted on August 23, 2019 through August 26, 2019 when an accuracy check was performed by the technician. This lack of documentation resulted in the dismissal of this OWI case.October 10, 2019 – Another serious error occurred that resulted in the dismissal of evidence in six cases in Wayne County. On this date, a technician arrived at the Detroit Detention Center to perform a 120-day certification. The instrument failed testing, but the technician did not notice the failure. Consequently, he left the instrument in service until October 13, 2019. During this 3-day period, the instrument was used for six OWI evidential breath tests. Because the instrument was not properly serviced and was left in service, these six cases did not have reliable breath evidence. The MSP sent a notice to the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, which decided to dismiss the evidence in these cases. Following discovery of this error, MSP requested removal of the technician responsible, with removal and replacement to occur no later than January 15, 2020. This never occurred due to the MSP actions taken on January 7 to issue the stop work order. December 2019 – MSP began the process of establishing a unit within the Forensic Science Division to oversee the state’s breath alcohol testing program. The unit will be comprised of three equipment technician positions to maintain and certify the state’s breath alcohol testing equipment. January 2, 2020 – During a routine audit of documents submitted by the vendor for the prior two-week period, an irregularity is noticed on an instrument at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Department. The MSP immediately requested the original documents from the technician. January 6, 2020 – MSP confirmed the irregularity was the result of the technician fabricating the paperwork for a required test that was not performed on the instrument. A criminal investigation is opened by the MSP into possible forgery of a public document. This investigation is ongoing.January 7, 2020 – With potential criminal acts committed by an Intoximeters technician, the MSP issues a stop work order with the vendor and secures all equipment and paperwork from the three technicians. January 10, 2020 – MSP finalizes an emergency plan to immediately bring all maintenance responsibilities for the state’s 203 instruments in-house, and notification is made to police and prosecutors of the stop work order and MSP’s new responsibilities. January 13, 2020- MSP personnel continued through the weekend to review records from the technicians yielding additional discrepancies involving a second technician and three more impacted instruments (Beverly Hills PD, Pittsfield Township PD, and Tecumseh PD), in which it is suspected that instrument calibration tests were again fabricated. With this new information, MSP removes all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments from service until they can be inspected and verified by MSP personnel to ensure they are properly calibrated. MSP recommends to police agencies that they utilize blood draws rather than Contact: Shanon Banner 517-284-3222 Jan. 16, 2020 The post MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  5. MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program This morning Michigan State Police (MSP) Director Col. Joe Gasper provided testimony before the state’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee on the findings to-date of the department’s investigation into issues with the state’s Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments. As of 7 a.m., discrepancies have been identified involving eight instruments at the following locations: Instrument Location Period of Time in Question Number of Breath Tests Possible Criminal Act Alpena County Sheriff’s Department 11/14/19 – 1/9/20 8 Yes Beverly Hills Police Department 1/22/19 – 6/21/19 9 Yes Detroit Detention Center 10/10/19 – 10/13/19 6 No Montcalm County Sheriff’s Department 8/23/19 – 8/26/19 1 No Niles Law Enforcement Center 1/15/19 – 2/18/19 7 No Pittsfield Township Police Department 12/20/18 – 8/7/19 5 Yes Tecumseh Police Department 2/15/19 – 6/28/19 12 Yes Van Buren County Sheriff’s Department 11/21/19 – 12/9/19 4 No As irregularities are identified, notification is made to the affected prosecutor regarding impacted breath tests. Prosecutors will review each case on a case-by-case basis to determine what actions to take. On Jan. 13, 2020, the MSP took all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments in the state out of service until they could be inspected and verified by MSP personnel. As of 7 a.m. this morning, 37 of 203 instruments have been returned to service following verification by MSP personnel that the instruments are properly calibrated. MSP personnel are re-certifying the most frequently used instruments and those in areas with limited access to obtaining blood samples first, with hopes of returning all instruments to service by the end of February. A criminal investigation by MSP into potential fraud committed by contract employees of Datamaster vendor, Intoximeters, is ongoing. The below timeline of events was also shared with the committee today. Timeline of Events: September 1, 2018 – Effective date of three-year maintenance contract with Intoximeters Inc. Contract is $1.26 million; requires vendor’s three technicians to conduct 120-day certifications of all instruments, perform service calls and routine maintenance, and provide court testimony on the service and maintenance of the instruments. The technicians whose work is in question were hired in September and November of 2018. January 2019 – With the intent to bring the state’s evidentiary breath alcohol testing program into alignment with forensic laboratory standards and work toward national accreditation, the MSP created a new position, Breath Alcohol Technical Leader, within the Forensic Science Division. The accreditation process was expected to take at least 18 months. April 2019 – MSP put additional workflow requirements in place with the vendor to ensure compliance with state law and administrative rules and move toward accreditation. It was after these additional controls were put in place that the MSP began to notice noncompliance by the vendor’s technicians. August 9, 2019 – After identifying repeated failures by the technicians to meet contractual requirements and the inability to perform the mandated tasks of maintaining and certifying the Datamaster instruments, the MSP asked DTMB Central Procurement to issue a letter to Intoximeters outlining grounds for breach of contract and requesting a corrective action plan. Examples of improper actions include: Not performing timely 120-day certifications in 60 instances. Incorrect recording of important elements during instrument checks; these include dry gas lot numbers and expiration dates, which can create issues in court when the lot numbers recorded by the technicians are wrong, or do not exist. Sharing instrument passwords with jail staff. August 21, 2019 – MSP received a corrective action plan from Intoximeters that outlined their action plan to correct the contractual failures. August 23, 2019 – An Intoximeters technician committed a serious error that resulted in the dismissal of an OWI case in Montcalm County. On August 23, 2019, the technician went to the Montcalm County Jail and signed the Datamaster Maintenance Log. The technician did not notify the MSP nor Intoximeters of this visit and did not submit any paperwork regarding the reason for his visit. Later that day, an MSP sergeant arrested an individual for OWI and utilized that instrument for evidential testing. MSP was first made aware of this technician’s August 23rd visit by the Montcalm County Prosecutor’s Office on November 15, 2019. The technician and Intoximeters were both unable to explain this visit, casting doubt on the reliability of any tests conducted on August 23, 2019 through August 26, 2019 when an accuracy check was performed by the technician. This lack of documentation resulted in the dismissal of this OWI case.October 10, 2019 – Another serious error occurred that resulted in the dismissal of evidence in six cases in Wayne County. On this date, a technician arrived at the Detroit Detention Center to perform a 120-day certification. The instrument failed testing, but the technician did not notice the failure. Consequently, he left the instrument in service until October 13, 2019. During this 3-day period, the instrument was used for six OWI evidential breath tests. Because the instrument was not properly serviced and was left in service, these six cases did not have reliable breath evidence. The MSP sent a notice to the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, which decided to dismiss the evidence in these cases. Following discovery of this error, MSP requested removal of the technician responsible, with removal and replacement to occur no later than January 15, 2020. This never occurred due to the MSP actions taken on January 7 to issue the stop work order. December 2019 – MSP began the process of establishing a unit within the Forensic Science Division to oversee the state’s breath alcohol testing program. The unit will be comprised of three equipment technician positions to maintain and certify the state’s breath alcohol testing equipment. January 2, 2020 – During a routine audit of documents submitted by the vendor for the prior two-week period, an irregularity is noticed on an instrument at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Department. The MSP immediately requested the original documents from the technician. January 6, 2020 – MSP confirmed the irregularity was the result of the technician fabricating the paperwork for a required test that was not performed on the instrument. A criminal investigation is opened by the MSP into possible forgery of a public document. This investigation is ongoing.January 7, 2020 – With potential criminal acts committed by an Intoximeters technician, the MSP issues a stop work order with the vendor and secures all equipment and paperwork from the three technicians. January 10, 2020 – MSP finalizes an emergency plan to immediately bring all maintenance responsibilities for the state’s 203 instruments in-house, and notification is made to police and prosecutors of the stop work order and MSP’s new responsibilities. January 13, 2020- MSP personnel continued through the weekend to review records from the technicians yielding additional discrepancies involving a second technician and three more impacted instruments (Beverly Hills PD, Pittsfield Township PD, and Tecumseh PD), in which it is suspected that instrument calibration tests were again fabricated. With this new information, MSP removes all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments from service until they can be inspected and verified by MSP personnel to ensure they are properly calibrated. MSP recommends to police agencies that they utilize blood draws rather than Contact: Shanon Banner 517-284-3222 Jan. 16, 2020 The post MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  6. Michigan is an open carry state. There is no law that says it is illegal to do so. The Michigan State Police legal update describes Michigan’s open carry law as follows: In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed. You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm. Prohibited premises: Schools or school property but may carry while in a vehicle on school property while dropping off or picking up if a parent or legal guardian Public or private day care center, public or private child caring agency, or public or private child placing agency. Sports arena or stadium A tavern where the primary source of income is the sale of alcoholic liquor by the glass consumed on the premises Any property or facility owned or operated by a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other place of worship, unless the presiding official or officials allow concealed weapons An entertainment facility that the individual knows or should know has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more A hospital A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university A Casino Anyone with a concealed pistol license (CPL) may carry a non-concealed firearm in the above listed premises. And it’s important to note a CPL holder is not required by law to carry a pistol concealed. A CPL holder may carry a pistol concealed or non-concealed. Private Property A private property owner has the right to prohibit individuals from carrying firearms on his or her property, whether concealed or otherwise, and regardless of whether the person is a CPL holder. If a person remains on the property after being told to leave by the owner, the person may be charged with trespassing. Schools Michigan schools are allowed to make their own rules about guns. The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled school districts are allowed to ban guns from their buildings and ask anyone with a gun to leave. Trespassing charges can be pursued if the person does not leave the school when asked. M I C H I G A N S T A T E P O L I C E LEGAL UPDATE O C T O B E R 2 6 , 2 0 1 0 FIREARMS LAW As more and more police officers are encountering citizens who are openly carrying firearms in Michigan, the Michigan State Police offers this special edition of the Update to assist officers in familiarizing themselves with Michigan laws regarding both open and concealed carrying of firearms. Open carry of firearms In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed. You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm. MCL 750.234d provides that it is a 90 day misdemeanor to possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following: A depository financial institution (e.g., bank or credit union) A church or other place of religious worship A court A theater A sports arena A day care center A hospital An establishment licensed under the Liquor Control Code The above section does not apply to any of the following: The owner or a person hired as security (if the firearm is possessed for the purpose of providing security) A peace officer A person with a valid concealed pistol license (CPL) issued by any state A person who possesses on one of the above listed premises with the permission of the owner or owner’s agent Officers must be aware of the above exemption for valid CPL holders as many of the citizens who openly carry firearms possess valid CPLs. An individual with a valid CPL may carry a non-concealed firearm in the above listed premises. A CPL holder is not required by law to carry a pistol concealed. A CPL holder may carry a pistol concealed or non-concealed. A private property owner has the right to prohibit individuals from carrying firearms on his or her property, whether concealed or otherwise, and regardless of whether the person is a CPL holder. If a person remains on the property after being told to leave by the owner, the person may be charged with trespassing (MCL 750.552). MCL 750.226 states it is a felony for a person to carry a dangerous weapon, including a firearm, with the intent to use the weapon unlawfully against another person. Possession of firearms in public by a minor is addressed in MCL 750.234f. Brandishing firearms MCL 750.234e provides that it is a 90-day misdemeanor for a person to knowingly brandish a firearm in public. Brandishing is not defined in Michigan law and there are no reported Michigan cases that define the term. Attorney General Opinion No. 7101 provides guidance and states, “A person when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm….” In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining “brandishing,” it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: “1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish.” This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, “brandishing” a weapon is defined to mean “that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner.” Transporting firearms Michigan law details how firearms may be transported in a vehicle. MCL 750.227c and MCL 750.227d discuss the transportation of firearms, other than pistols, in vehicles. MCL 750.227(2) makes it a felony for a person to transport a pistol anywhere in a vehicle unless the person is licensed to carry a concealed pistol. Exceptions to the above statute are found in MCL 750.231a. One such exception allows for transportation of pistols in a vehicle for a “lawful purpose.” A lawful purpose includes going to or from any one of the following: A hunting or target area A place of repair Moving goods from a home or business to another home or business A law enforcement agency (for a safety inspection or to turn the pistol over to the agency) A gun show or place of sale or purchase A public shooting facility Public land where shooting is legal Private property where a pistol may be lawfully used. MCL 750.231a also provides that a pistol transported for a “lawful purpose” by a person not licensed to carry a concealed pistol must be all of the following: Unloaded In a closed case designed for firearms In the trunk (or if the vehicle has no trunk, it must not be readily accessible to the occupants) There is no way to “open carry” a pistol in a vehicle. An individual, without a CPL or otherwise exempted (e.g., a police officer), who transports a pistol in a vehicle to an area where he or she intends to “open carry” may be in violation of MCL 750.227. Carrying concealed weapons MCL 750.227 also makes it a felony for a person to carry a concealed pistol on or about his or her person unless the person is exempt under MCL 750.231 or MCL 750.231a. Complete invisibility is not required. The carrying of a pistol in a holster or belt outside the clothing is not carrying a concealed weapon. Carrying a pistol under a coat is carrying a concealed weapon. Op. Atty. Gen. 1945, O-3158. According to the Court of Appeals in People v. Reynolds, a weapon is concealed if it is not observed by those casually observing the suspect as people do in the ordinary course and usual associations of life. 38 Mich App. 159 (1970). Firearms Act MCL 28.422 provides that a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in Michigan without first having obtained a License to Purchase and registering the pistol. The statute contains exemptions for certain persons and additional exemptions are located in MCL 28.422a and in MCL 28.432. A person with a valid Michigan CPL does not have to obtain a License to Purchase; however, he or she still has to register the pistol after he or she purchases or otherwise acquires it using a Pistol Sales Record (MCL 28.422a). Violation is a state civil infraction. Gun Belongs To Another Person? Additionally, a person with a valid CPL can carry, possess, use, or transport a properly registered pistol belonging to another (MCL 28.432). Gun Records Pistol buyers are required to have in their possession their copy of the License to Purchase or Pistol Sales Record when carrying, using, possessing, and transporting the pistol for 30 days after they acquire the pistol. These records are commonly referred to as Registration Certificates or Green Cards. Officers are reminded that after 30 days, there is no requirement to have either record in their possession or to keep either record. CPL (Where It Get Confusing) MCL 28.425o provides that a person with a valid CPL shall not carry a concealed pistol in a pistol free zone. The following is a list of the premises (excluding parking lots) included in the statute: First offense is a state civil infraction. School or school property, except a parent or legal guardian who is dropping off or picking up a child and the pistol is kept in the vehicle Public or private day care center Sports arena or stadium A bar or tavern where sale and consumption of liquor by the glass is the primary source of income (does not apply to owner or employee of the business). Any property or facility owned or operated by a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other place of worship, unless authorized by the presiding official An entertainment facility that has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more A hospital A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university A casino (R 432.1212, MCL 432.202) Note, the above statute applies to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. If the CPL holder is carrying a non-concealed pistol, the statute does not apply. As noted above, the unlawful premises listed in MCL 750.234d do not apply to persons with a valid CPL. Therefore, a person with a valid CPL may carry a non-concealed pistol in the areas described in MCL 28.425o and MCL 750.234d. Additionally, the above listed pistol-free zones for CPL holders do not apply to the following individuals when they are licensed to carry a concealed weapon: Retired police officers Persons employed or contracted by a listed entity to provide security where carrying a concealed pistol is a term of employment Licensed private detectives or investigators Sheriff’s department corrections officers State police motor carrier officers or capital security officers Members of a sheriff’s posse Auxiliary or reserve officers of a police or sheriff’s department Parole or probation officers of the department of corrections Current or retired state court judges Out-of-state residents Non-residents may legally possess a firearm more than 30 inches in length in Michigan. In order for a non-resident to possess a pistol in Michigan, he or she must either be licensed to carry a concealed pistol or be licensed by his or her state of residence to purchase, carry, or transport a pistol. The ownership of property in Michigan does not qualify a non-resident to possess a pistol in Michigan. Non-resident concealed pistol possession. MCL 750.231a makes it legal for a non-resident of Michigan with a valid CPL issued by his or her state of residence to carry a concealed pistol in Michigan as long as the pistol is carried in conformance with any and all restrictions appearing on the license. Individuals with out of state CPLs are subject to Michigan laws that govern Michigan CPL holders. As many states issue CPLs to out of state residents, officers should verify that the person actually resides in the state that issued the license. If the person does not reside in the state that issued the license, Michigan does not recognize the CPL and the person may not carry a concealed pistol in Michigan. Possession of pistols by non-residents MCL 28.432 makes it legal for non-residents of Michigan who hold valid CPLs issued by another state to possess a non-concealed pistol in Michigan without complying with Michigan’s pistol registration requirements. Additionally, MCL 28.422 exempts residents of other states from Michigan’s pistol registration requirements therefore, allowing them to possess a pistol in Michigan, if all of the following requirements are met: The person is licensed by his or her state of residence to purchase, transport, or carry a pistol, The person is in possession of the license while in Michigan, The person owns the pistol possessed in Michigan, The person possesses the pistol for a lawful purpose as defined in MCL 750.231a, and The person is in Michigan less than 180 days and does not intend to establish residency here. A non-resident must present the license issued by his or her state of residence to a police officer upon demand. Failure to do so is a 90-day misdemeanor. When transporting a firearm in Michigan, non-residents must transport pistols in compliance with MCL 750.231a (discussed above in the Transporting Firearms section), unless they have a concealed pistol license issued by their state of residence. Officers are reminded that the Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Carrying a nonconcealed firearm is generally legal. Officers may engage in a consensual encounter with a person carrying a non-concealed pistol; however, in order to stop a citizen, officers are required to have reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. For example, officers may not stop a person on the mere possibility the person may be carrying an unregistered pistol. Officers must possess facts rising to the level of reasonable suspicion to believe the person is carrying an unregistered pistol. Officers are also reminded there is no general duty for a citizen to identify himself or herself to a police officer unless the citizen is being stopped for a Michigan Vehicle Code violation. Here is the link to the Michigan State Police Legal Update from where the information was obtained. Please Note: Laws change so please consult an attorney for any legal questions. The post Is Michigan an open carry gun state? appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  7. The Michigan State Police says it has discontinued the use of 203 breathalyzer machines, and it’s accusing the contractor involved of possible fraud. The Michigan State Police have opened its own investigation into Intoximeters Inc., who calibrate the state’s DataMaster breathalyzer machines. It alleged “performance-related issues” that could lead to more issues with the way the devices were serviced. The issue could go all the way back to the beginning of MSP’s million dollar yearly contract with Intoximeters, which was signed in late 2018. But several defense attorneys say Michigan State Police should not be in charge of any investigation into the matter, and are accusing MSP of a conflict of interest as they investigate one of their own contractors. The attorneys are calling for an independent investigation into the matter. Michael Komorn a Farmington Hills-based defense attorney whose main focus is on DUI and drugged driving cases says that an independent investigation would also help with the question of what happens to the countless DUI cases that might be affected by this. “If we have a full investigation by an independent body, maybe they would make a recommendation,” says Komorn. “That is a better way of going about it where an independent body identifies those who have been harmed, if people have been harmed, and they put forth a remedy of some kind, some redress for people versus some finding that’s in question.” Related Michigan State Police launch an investigation into breathalyzer test results The post Defense Attorneys suggest MSP May Have A Conflict of Interest Over Breathalyzer Investigation appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  8. The Michigan State Police suspended the contract with Intoximeters Inc, the company that issues the state’s breath alcohol testing devices amid concerns the test results could be flawed. A letter written to police departments and prosecutors statewide, stated police officials warned law enforcement agencies about “performance-related issues” with the Datamaster DMT breathalyzer devices, according to The Detroit News . Such issues could affect drunken driving cases. The letter did not identify the problems or how they were uncovered. Attorney Michael Komorn stated “The idea that those two entities that are working together in a contract are now…one of them is investigating the other one for fraud is a remarkable circumstance. ” What is the impact going to be on those that have been convicted of these breath tests that were not disclosed to potentially be accurate that were not properly calibrated” Komorn questioned State police Lt. Michael Shaw stated a stop order was issued when they “noticed some issues with the vendor that was responsible for maintenance and auditing the DataMasters around the state.” “We will be (setting) up a unit in order to assume the responsibilities of that vendor,” Shaw said. “Authorities will keep using the devices, but Michigan State Police, not the vendor, will calibrate them,” Shaw said. State police will also take over the contractor’s duties of certifying and serving the breathalyzer units. Oakland University criminal justice professor Daniel Kennedy said such issues with the breathalyzer devices could be troublesome for drunken driving cases in Michigan. “This could open the floodgates for appeals,” Kennedy said. “In drunk driving cases, one of the first questions any defense attorney asks is, ‘When was the last time the device was calibrated?’ So, if they found problems with how these things were being calibrated, that could wind up being one big mess.” Here is the complete MSP statement on the situation: Based on new information learned over the weekend, the Michigan State Police (MSP) is aggressively investigating potential fraud committed by contract employees of Datamaster vendor, Intoximeters, and also moving today to take all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments out of service until MSP can inspect and verify each instrument to ensure it is properly calibrated. In the interim period, the MSP recommends that police agencies utilize blood draws rather than breath tests to establish evidence of drunk driving. On Jan. 10, 2020, the MSP alerted prosecutors and police departments statewide that it had issued a stop order on the current vendor’s contract due to performance-related issues. The vendor, Intoximeters, employs three contract employees who were responsible for servicing all 203 Datamaster DMT instruments in the state, and it is records from these service sessions that are in question. Effective Jan. 10, 2020, fully certified MSP personnel have taken over responsibility for ensuring all Datamaster DMTs are certified, calibrated and serviced according to state law and industry standard. Review of vendor records in the last two days has yielded additional discrepancies that may point to the potential for a more widespread issue with the way in which some instruments were being serviced. While the discrepancies do not directly impact or deal with the results of evidential breath tests, it is concerning that it appears as though some certification records have been falsified. As a result, the MSP has opened a criminal investigation that is looking into possible forgery of public documents. Read the Rest of The Story Here at WXYZ TV See the marijuana test machine that may possibly and could inaccurately cause havoc in the lives of many. Read Also https://komornlaw.com/defense-attorney-says-drivers-should-refuse-new-roadside-drug-tests/ Recent Posts Michigan State Police launch an investigation into breathalyzer test results Defense attorney says drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug tests The post Michigan State Police launch an investigation into breathalyzer test results appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  9. Defense attorneys say drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug tests. Multiple defense attorneys say they would advise that their clients refuse Michigan’s new statewide roadside drug tests. They’re too untrustworthy, they said. The penalty for refusing the test is a civil infraction, the fine for which varies by community, but it’s a better option than having unreliable results used to prosecute you in court, said Michael Komorn, a highly experienced drugged- and drunk-driving attorney, who also specializes in marijuana law. With legalization of recreational marijuana in November 2018 and the opening of retail marijuana shops across the state underway, the impact of marijuana on impaired driving and public safety has heightened. The usefulness of the saliva swab tests in identification of drug-impaired driving is exactly what state police hope to determine with a second-yearlong pilot program that kicked off in October. The first year of the pilot program lasted from November 2017 to November 2018 and included 12 police agencies or state police posts in five counties. The second yearlong pilot includes 125 officers, dubbed “drug recognition experts” who are trained to detect drug impairment and administer saliva tests. To become a drug recognition expert, participating law enforcement must complete 72 hours of classroom study and 40 hours of field training. Read the Rest of The Story Here at MLIVE The post Defense attorney says drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug tests appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  10. The Michigan Supreme Court says the public can bring laptops, tablets and phones into local courthouses. The public can now bring cell phone, tablets and laptops into Michigan courthouses under a groundbreaking policy announced Wednesday by the state Supreme Court. The new rule covers the use of electronic devices in courtrooms and clerk’s offices, where public documents are stored. Of course many elected clerks had opposed the policy during the drafting stage because it would allow people who voted for them to copy PUBLIC RECORDS and avoid fees source of revenue beyond what they are already absconding anyway. Surely they will make it up somewhere else like the government always does. The rule change improves access and “will help make sure the doors to our courts are open to all,” Chief Justice Bridget McCormack said. The public can bring electronic devices into courtrooms to take notes, use the internet or exchange email and text messages, under the rule, which starts May 1 in circuit, district and probate courts. Photos or video are prohibited unless approved by a judge. Copies of court documents can be made as long as the “device leaves no mark or impression on the document and does not unreasonably interfere with the operation of the clerk’s office,” the rule states. The rule says judges can restrict devices if the activity “is disruptive or distracting to a court proceeding.” Policies regarding phones have varied throughout the state. In Macomb County and Kent County the courthouse allows phones but Oakland County and the Wayne County criminal courthouses do not. Source: AP – Read More The post Michigan Supreme Court Gives OK to Phones in Courts appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  11. You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana – In Illinois. 11,000 marijuana conviction expungements on 2020 new years day – In Illinois. One database fills while another “empties”. Rumors that Illinois gun owners will lose their firearms if they use cannabis under the state’s new legalization mandate are false. That’s according to multiple authorities after major news outlets published stories claiming gun owners who purchase adult-use cannabis in Illinois would be placed into a database banning them from buying firearms. The Illinois State Police said Dec. 31 it will not revoke Firearm Owner Identification Cards based solely on someone’s marijuana usage. Illinois State Rifle Association lobbyist Ed Sullivan said cannabis dispensaries cannot share identifying information with law enforcement agencies unless the customer authorizes it. But Sullivan notes the federal government still considers marijuana a Schedule I narcotic. He said this allows the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) to obtain the records of medical cannabis users and potentially restrict their ability to buy guns from Federal Firearms License (FFL) dealers. “If you intend to use cannabis and own a firearm taking the recreational cannabis route has less potential, detrimental effects on your 2nd Amendment rights than the medical cannabis route,” Sullivan said. What about Michigan… Is anybody out there? Hello?…………………..What about Michigan? Read the Rest of the Story Here Recent Posts You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana Marijuana Regulatory Agency Releases Licensing for Adult-Use Applications National Expungement Panel of Legislators in Michigan Federal Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against Cops Accused Of Stealing $225K Michigan State Police Drunk Driving Audit Report The post You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  12. Overcharged As it goes, my clients were overcharged with crimes involving drugs, guns, bombs and money. We litigated this case for over three years including 5 days of preliminary exam testimony, and several motions litigated at the District Court and the Circuit Court. We had made several appearances in circuit court in our continued effort to challenge the governments search and seizure of evidence because of the illegal “Knock and Talk” Knock and Talk When the police don’t have enough evidence to get a search warrant, they sometimes employ a procedure they have nicknamed “knock and talk” to investigate further. Courts have ruled that a police officer has the same right as an everyday citizen (for example, a Girl Scout selling cookies) to visit your house, knock on your front door, and ask to speak with you. Unfortunately, abuses of the “knock and talk” technique are now rampant. Two Cases Two somewhat recent cases in Michigan have helped clarify the law in this area. In one case, from 2015, when no one answered the front door, the police started walking around the property knocking on back doors and side doors until they spotted some marijuana through a window in the back of the house. The instinctual fourth amendment argument is that the police need a warrant before they roam around your back-yard peering into your windows. In July 2016, however, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal without deciding the issue. People v. Radandt That same month a similar case before the Michigan Supreme Court, was heard, arguing that a so-called “knock and talk” violates the Fourth Amendment when it is conducted in the middle of the night. Michigan Supreme Court – People v. Radandt 2016 Michigan Supreme Court 2016 PDF Michigan Court Of Appeals – People v Randandt vs Fuller 2014 People v. Frederick; People v. Van Doome In June 2017 the Michigan Supreme Court agreed with this argument and held that the police were trespassing, and therefore violating the Fourth Amendment, when they woke up suspects and their families in the middle of the night to interrogate them in their homes. People v. Frederick; People v. Van Doorne; In People v Frederick, 500 Mich 228, 895 NW2d 541 (2017), the supreme court considered the scope of the implied license a homeowner extends to the general public in People v Frederick, 500 Mich 228, 895 NW2d 541 (2017). The police had visited defendants’ homes during the early morning hours (4:00 and 5:30 a.m.) and knocked on the door. After conversations during which both defendants consented to searches of their homes, the police searched the homes and recovered marijuana products. The court concluded that the procedure was not a permissible “knock and talk,” which is permitted because the public, and the police, have an implied license to approach the door, knock and wait briefly to be received, and then, if not invited to stay longer, leave. The court reasoned that the scope of the implied license is time sensitive and that generally there is no implied license to knock at someone’s door in the middle of the night. In exceeding the scope of the implied license, the police were trespassing. The trespass, coupled with information gathering (the police were seeking to find something or gain information), constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment, and because the police did not have warrants and no exception to the warrant requirement existed, the approaches violated the Fourth Amendment. The court further held that defendants’ consent, even if voluntary, was invalid unless it was sufficiently attenuated from the warrantless search. A court considers the following factors in making that determination: (1) the temporal proximity of the illegal act and the alleged consent, (2) the presence of intervening circumstances, and (3) the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct. The court remanded the case for a weighing of those factors by the trial court. Back to the Case at Hand The facts of this case were very similar to the Fredericks case. Here several officers ( some in uniform, some in raid gear and none of them in girl scout uniforms), in several different vehicles, (some marked some unmarked), encroached and trespassed upon my clients property, came into the back yard and insisted that FANG had the authority to do a compliance check of their medical marihuana grow. We took issue with the coming into the back yard, because it was a trespass. We also took issue with the concept that a multi-jurisdictional task force has the authority to do a compliance check for MMMA behavior, or would be able to determine compliance if they did have the authority and by asserting the authority ( that they did not have), directly impacted the volition of the alleged consent to search. MCL 333.26426 (g) 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 the person or property of the person possessing or applying for the registry identification card, or otherwise subject the person or property of the person to inspection by any local, county or state governmental agency. The evidentiary hearings had been very contentious, and it may be fair to say that the investigators and officers in this matter did not like my suggestions that they had trampled all over my clients 4th amendment rights. Status Quo: Overcharged The original overcharging of by the prosecutor’s office is a common practice. Anytime allegations involve the combination of narcotics and firearms (even if licensed, registered, CCW or CPL) Prosecutors love to charge felony firearm. Felony firearm mandates a 2 years term of imprisonment in the Michigan Department of Corrections to run consecutive to any other sentence. The jury instruction is complicated, and sometimes a compromised jury will think it is doing a favor for the accused and find him or her not guilty of the underlying felony and guilty of the felony firearm only. This is illogical in any legal analysis but does not matter and will still result in a mandatory 2 years in prison. Bomb Making Charge – Because It Exploded One of the more outrageous and memorable examples of prosecutors overcharging, and incidentally was one of the counts dismissed at the exam, was for the crime of bomb making. This count was literally created by the police after seizing legal fireworks, ( what are commonly known as M80’s- flash powder) then testing the fireworks (they blew off some fireworks) and then created a report that concluded that the fireworks were bombs because they created an explosion. As I said this count was dismissed at the exam, but this bomb making count is just another example of the awesome power that the prosecutors have. They are literally the “Kings of the Court Room.” Kings of the Courtroom The Kings of the Courtroom (and Queens) run their kingdom like a well-oiled machine. They have the awesome power to charge any crime they want. It is only the Prosecutors who can add to the charges, amend the charges, increase or decrease the charges or dismiss the charges. And of course, they have absolute immunity from civil liability while doing it. This is the reason that 95-97 percent of people charged with crimes plead guilty. “A study by Northwestern University Law School’s Centre on Wrongful Convictions found that 46% of documented wrongful capital convictions between 1973 and 2004 could be traced to false testimony by snitches—making them the leading cause of wrongful convictions in death-penalty cases. The Innocence Project keeps a database of Americans convicted of serious crimes but then exonerated by DNA evidence. Of the 318 it lists, 57 involved informants—and 30 of the convicted had entered a guilty plea.” “The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty and reputation than any other person in America,” said Robert Jackson, the attorney-general, in 1940. American prosecutors are more powerful than ever before. The Pressure to Plead Guilty Several legal changes have empowered them. The first is the explosion of plea bargaining, where a suspect agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge if the more serious charges against them are dropped. Plea bargains were unobtainable in the early years of American justice. But today more than 95% of cases end in such deals and thus are never brought to trial.” “Jed Rakoff, a district judge in New York, thinks it unlikely that 95% of defendants are guilty. Of the 2.4m Americans behind bars, he thinks it possible that “thousands, perhaps tens of thousands” confessed despite being innocent. One reason they might do so is because harsh, mandatory-minimum sentencing rules can make such a choice rational. Rather than risk a trial and a 30-year sentence, some cop a plea and accept a much shorter one.” Battle Weary: Back to the Case at Hand As it goes, and only because of our hard work, my client’s will, desire and commitment to this battle, today we were finally rewarded. Clients were beyond joyful for the results today, but even with that said, it is hard to really understand, unless you live through it, just how overwhelming the State can be when they want. All charges were dismissed as to one of the accused, and a plea to a few benign misdemeanors, with immediate sentencing to fines for the other. Case over. It was a long hard battle and one that we were prepared to continue. The motivation to resolve as we did today, was primarily because the allegations in this case had a lot of potential liability. which was one of the motivations to resolve the case as we did. Case Dismissed – Case Closed…It was a good day. See the Court Register of Actions Here Case Register Of Actions-Smith Case Register Of Actions-Burns The post Case Dismissed-Case Closed appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  13. Colorado courts are still trying to figure out the ground rules for people using medical marijuana while on probation, and the state Supreme Court will weigh in when it hears oral arguments Thursday in an El Paso County case where a judge denied a woman’s use of the drug while on probation for DUI. The woman will ask justices to decide whether a defendant must provide evidence that the marijuana is medically necessary or whether probationers can use it unless a judge decides it’s appropriate for the sentence. The case also questions to what lengths a probationer must go to prove the marijuana is critical to their health. Attorneys who represent criminal defendants hope the court’s decision will provide more clarity on the issue. Supreme Court decisions take months. A county court judge prohibited Alysha Walton from using medical marijuana while on probation for a DUI, and a district court judge agreed with the decision. But the Colorado Public Defender’s Office, which represented Walton, has argued the county court abused its discretion and violated Walton’s rights, according to the opening brief to the Supreme Court. The judge placed an undue burden on Walton when she demanded that Walton have her doctor testify in court about the necessity of marijuana, the public defenders said. Walton had brought her state-issued medical marijuana card to court. Read the rest of the story HERE at the Denver Post The post Colorado Supreme Court to weigh in on how judges decide when people on probation can use medical marijuana appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  14. Nearly a year after voters approved adult use of recreational marijuana, Oakland County resident Kevin John Carlson continues to fight a possession/intent to deliver case, which he believes stems from a search warrant that should never have been granted. Carlson, 30, was charged in early 2018 after police searched his Bloomfield Township home and reportedly found marijuana and other evidence — months prior to cannabis being legalized in Michigan. At the time Carlson was a registered marijuana patient and caregiver, legally allowed to have a certain amount of cannabis. The magistrate who issued the search warrant — based on police reportedly smelling marijuana outside the home — was wrong to do so because it wasn’t based on probable cause, Carlson claimed. Thinking of Starting a Cannabis or Hemp Business? When it comes to cannabis and hemp business. Komorn Law is the law firm you need with local as well as international networks and assets when your business needs to go global. Contact our office to find out more information. Call 248-357-2550 The court further found that the 2008 Michigan Medical Marihuana Act didn’t shield Carlson from the search, stating “the police were not obligated to determine, before obtaining a search warrant, the legality of the marijuana-related activities inside the defendant’s home and whether the defendant’s activities complied with the MMMA.” However, Carlson’s defense attorney Michael Komorn said the judges failed to address if current Michigan marijuana law can be applied retroactively and are wrong in not considering its relevancy, as well as the state reclassification of medical marijuana as a Schedule II drug — permitted for some use. Carlson’s case is next headed to the Michigan Supreme Court for consideration, which earlier had remanded it to the Court of Appeals. “This case is important for Fourth Amendment issues (regarding protection against unreasonable search and seizure) for constitutional reasons,” Komorn said, “and for the citizens of Michigan…just because somebody is doing something suspicious, that’s not enough for probable cause.” Read the rest of the story HERE at the Oakland Press By Aileen Wingblad awingblad@medianewsgroup.com @awingblad on Twitter Contact Us For a Free Case Evaluation First Name Last Name Email Phone Message 6 + 10 = Submit The post Is smell enough to justify search warrant? Bloomfield Township man appealing decision on marijuana case appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  15. October 9, 2019 – Iron Laboratories, LLC, a Walled Lake marijuana safety compliance facility that had its license summarily suspended in August, has entered into a settlement agreement with the Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA), MRA Executive Director Andrew Brisbo and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced today. In August, the MRA determined the safety and health of customers and employees was jeopardized by Iron Laboratories’ continued operations. As a result, the MRA took emergency action and issued a formal complaint and summary suspension of the facility’s license for alleged violations related to Iron Laboratories’ testing and reporting results for pesticides, yeasts and molds (microbials), and THC content. Today’s settlement requires Iron Laboratories to pay a $100,000 fine, update its procedures and practices, and provide additional data and reports to the MRA for one year. Several requirements outlined in the settlement agreement must be completed before Iron Laboratories may resume operations. In addition, Iron Laboratories agreed that its Chief Operating Officer, Michael Goldman, would not attend or participate in sampling events, enter or alter data in the statewide monitoring system, or engage in any financial transactions with customers for 180 days. If Iron Laboratories fails to comply with the requirements of the agreement, it could be subject to fines or other sanctions. “While we are pleased that the licensee worked quickly to resolve these issues, it is clear that these actions never should have happened in the first place,” said MRA Executive Director Andrew Brisbo. “It is imperative that our safety compliance facilities – and all of our licensees – adhere strictly to the law and the administrative rules. The diligence with which our enforcement team investigated and brought these issues to light demonstrates the commitment that the MRA has in protecting marijuana patients here in Michigan.” “Michigan’s marijuana laws and rules were established to provide safe sources of medical marijuana to Michigan residents,” said Attorney General Dana Nessel. “Accurate testing and transparent reporting are critical to ensuring a safe product, and misleading or unreliable information only impedes that process. Our office is committed to working closely with the Marijuana Regulatory Agency to take action against those facilities that disregard the rules to the detriment of the public and industry fairness.” A copy of the settlement agreement can be read here. Charged or Arrested for DUI or drugged driving? CONTACT KOMORN LAW TO FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS 248-357-2550 Media + Blog Planet Green Trees Podcast Komorn Law In The News Media Iron Laboratories to Pay 100K Fine as Part of Settlement with Michigan’s MRA Oct 11, 2019 Iron Laboratories, LLC, a Walled Lake marijuana safety compliance facility that had its license summarily suspended in August, has entered into a settlement agreement with the Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) Marijuana Regulatory Agency Releases Licensing for Adult-Use Applications Oct 4, 2019 The Michigan Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) released the application process and requirements for adult-use recreational marijuana business licenses. Michigan AG Establishes Wrongful Imprisonment Compensation Board Sep 28, 2019 September 25, 2019 LANSING –Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel today established a four-member Wrongful Imprisonment Compensation Act (WICA) Board to review each WICA request and make recommendations on key decisions in the litigation of WICA cases. Once cases... Michigan AG Joins Bipartisan Coalition of 21 Attorneys General Urging Congress to Pass Marijuana Banking Bill Sep 27, 2019 LANSING – Taking steps to protect Michigan’s emerging marijuana industry and its consumers, Attorney General Dana Nessel joined a bipartisan group of 21 Attorneys General Monday, urging Congress to pass legislation that allows legal businesses to access the... National Expungement Panel of Legislators in Michigan Sep 24, 2019 Local Expungement Panel of legislators and victims of the system discuss and tell their stories about working toward getting criminal records expunged for millions throughout the U.S. Federal Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against Cops Accused Of Stealing $225K Sep 22, 2019 A federal appellate court on dismissed a lawsuit claiming that 3 police officers alleged to have stolen more than $225,000 in property from two California men, reasoning that the officers did not violate the men’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and... Michigan State Police Drunk Driving Audit Report Sep 20, 2019 The crash program has been in existence since Public Act 300 of 1949. All law enforcement agencies in Michigan submit accident data to the MSP Criminal Justice Information Center on UD-10 Traffic Crash Reports. A crash report is completed when: the driver of a motor... The Michigan Medical Marijuana Act: The First 24-Months Sep 17, 2019 In Case You Missed It - What was someone thinking in 2010 about Michigan Medical Marijuana. A blog from way back machine. This article chronicles the implementation of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, passed via referendum in the 2008 general election. As expected,... Michigan communities with highest violent crime rate Sep 16, 2019 Benton Harbor was Michigan's most violent city in 2017, based mostly on FBI statistics released Sept. 24. The FBI reported violent crime rates for communities all through the USA. Rape is outlined by the FBI as any sexual assault that entails penetration or tried... « Older Entries The post Iron Laboratories to Pay 100K Fine as Part of Settlement with Michigan’s MRA appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
×
×
  • Create New...