Jump to content

KLAW Blog

Members
  • Content Count

    1,002
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Days Won

    13

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. Current as of 7-28-20 House: Adjourned until Thursday, August 6, 2020 10:00:00 AM Senate: Adjourned until Wednesday, July 29, 2020 10:00:00 AM Here is a list of some current bills introduced or passed in the legislative abyss for 2019-2020 so far. DocumentTypeDescriptionSB 0203 of 2019 (PA 3 of 2019)Senate BillMedical marihuana: licenses; definition of applicant; modify. Amends sec. 102 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102). Last Action: 04/17/2019 – ASSIGNED PA 0003’19 WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECTHB 4127 of 2019 (PA 32 of 2020)House BillMedical marihuana; other; requirement for health warning labels on medical marihuana products sold in Michigan; provide for. Amends sec. 206 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27206). Last Action: 02/20/2020 – assigned PA 32’20 with immediate effectHB 4440 of 2019House BillMedical marihuana; licenses; operating a facility without a license; provide prohibition for ineligibility to receive a license. Amends sec. 402 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27402). Last Action: 04/30/2019 – REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLEHB 4504 of 2019House BillWeapons; firearms; possessing or carrying a firearm while having a certain level of tetrahydrocannabinol in blood; allow prohibition. Amends sec. 7 of 2008 IL 1 (MCL 333.26427). TIE BAR WITH: HB 4501’19, HB 4503’19, HB 4502’19 Last Action: 04/30/2019 – bill electronically reproduced 04/25/2019HB 5085 of 2019House BillHealth occupations; veterinarians; consulting with animal owner on the use of marihuana and CBD oil; allow under certain circumstances. Amends 1978 PA 368 (MCL 333.1101 – 333.25211) by adding sec. 18817. Last Action: 02/26/2020 – referred to Committee on Ways and Means, with substitute (H-1)HB 5159 of 2019House BillMedical marihuana: other; marihuana that contains or has been combined with vitamin E acetate; prohibit the processing and sale of. Amends secs. 102, 502 & 504 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102 et seq.) & adds sec. 407b. Last Action: 02/11/2020 – REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON REGULATORY REFORMHB 5490 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; administration; court-appointed individual to operate medical marihuana facility; allow, and require promulgation of rules to establish procedures. Amends secs. 102 & 206 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102 & 333.27206) & adds sec. 206a. Last Action: 07/22/2020 – REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLEHB 5547 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; other; number of marihuana plants a licensee may grow; increase based on license type. Amends sec. 501 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27501). Last Action: 02/26/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 02/26/2020HB 5571 of 2020House BillFood; service establishments; issuance of a food service license to a licensed marihuana facility; allow if smoking marihuana is prohibited. Amends sec. 4107 of 2000 PA 92 (MCL 289.4107). Last Action: 03/03/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 03/03/2020HB 5622 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; other; sale of marihuana to a registered qualifying patient who is visibly intoxicated; prohibit, and create cause of action for harm that the registered qualifying patient causes. Amends 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27101 – 333.27801) by adding sec. 504a. Last Action: 03/12/2020 – referred to Committee on Government OperationsHB 5700 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; licenses; eligibility for medical marihuana license; modify. Amends sec. 102 & 402 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102 & 333.27402). Last Action: 06/04/2020 – REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY AND PUBLIC SAFETYHB 5893 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; other; rule prohibiting medical marihuana businesses from donating to nonprofit organizations; prohibit marijuana regulatory agency from promulgating. Amends secs. 102 & 206 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102 & 333.27206). Last Action: 06/24/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 06/24/2020HB 5922 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; licenses; proof of financial responsibility criteria; modify. Amends sec. 408 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27408). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5923’20 Last Action: 07/21/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 07/21/2020HB 5923 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; other; references to medical marihuana licensing board; replace with marijuana regulatory agency. Amends sec. 102 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27102). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5922’19 Last Action: 07/21/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 07/21/2020HB 6022 of 2020House BillMedical marihuana; caregivers; operation of medical marihuana caregivers in residential neighborhoods; prohibited unless allowed by ordinance. Amends sec. 4 of 2008 IL 1 (MCL 333.26424). Last Action: 08/06/2020 – bill electronically reproduced 08/06/2020If you are interested in opening a cannabis business you will need an attorney. Selecting a law firm is important and choosing one who has been fighting for medical marijuana patients and caregivers, adult recreational use and the legal rights of their clients for over 25 years is one of the first steps in achieving your goal in becoming a cannabis entrepreneur. Selecting an attorney who you are comfortable with and can develop a relationship with is extremely important. Komorn Law is the most recommended down to earth firm. To learn more contact the office 248-357-2550 or do some research on the website Komorn Law. Komorn Law Social Media Recent Posts Michigan Medical Marihuana – Legislative Bills Being a Registered Nurse and a Medical Marijuana Patient Revisiting People vs Feezel Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program Impaired Driving: According to the CDC Tag Cloud 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney. The post Michigan Medical Marihuana – Legislative Bills appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  2. This registered nurse stood to lose their livelihood or were going to be quietly forced into rehabilitation. Who Knew? Who knew that LARA was punishing Registered Nurses merely because they are a medical cannabis patient? Who knew that the same government agency (LARA) that regulates the licensing of the Physician (who recommended the use of medical cannabis,) and also regulates the licensing of Registered Nurses, punish those same Licensed Registered Nurses (by suspending and or attempting to revoke their Nursing Licenses) merely for following the medical advice and proscribed medical treatments made to them by their State Licensed Physician? Who knew that “Cannabis Dependence” with “Cannabis use disorder,” “Mild” was a medical diagnosis? Who knew that this so called disorder was categorized as “Mild” and or “Spicy”? Who knew that the States protocol for this “diagnosis” , mandates that the registered nurse admit to this disorder, sign a contract to complete an unknown length and unknown terms of substance abuse treatment, as a condition of retaining that nursing license? Who knew that this could be done without any evidence regarding the registered nurses performance at work? Who knew this could be done with evidence that the registered nurses performance at work was impeccable? Who knew that the Physicians contracted with the State (Health Professional Recovery Program -HPRP), and acting on behalf of LARA ( who diagnose medical cannabis patients with “Cannabis Dependence” with “Cannabis use disorder,” “Mild” ) and those that regulate nursing licenses don’t distinguish between active delta-9 THC, and any other cannabinoids, including the metabolite of THC, 11 Carboxy THC (which is not a controlled substance)? See an important Michigan Supreme Court Opinion – People vs Feezel Enter Komorn Law All of the above are real, and circumstances that we encountered in this more than a year long battle, with the Michigan licensing agency. Because of my client’s relentless and passionate pursuit for justice in their case. This Licensed Nurse is no longer left . Almost from day one, we were ready and looking forward to litigating this matter. My client, refused to settle, and there was no reason that they should. Komorn Law PLLC, is proud to announce another huge win and a long hard fought victory. Victory This past week we received the final order dismissing the complaint, and re-activating their nursing license. In light of the MMMA, the MMFLA and the MRTMA, this issue like many others remain overlooked, as unfinished business that the State of Michigan has failed to address. For a full perspective of this issue, see the link to the complaint filed in Federal Court, relating to HPRP. HPRP-Class-Action-Complaint. Additional links on this topic. ( that nursing power point I sent earlier) Huge Shout out to everyone at Komorn Law PLLC, specifically Ally McCormick, Steve Miller, Jenifer St. Amant, Jeff Frazier and Dan, nice job team!! Why Are You Here? Either you’re here just out of interest or you are searching for an attorney. If you need a law firm to protect and fight for your rights call our office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com and do your research. Komorn Law Social Media Recent Posts Being a Registered Nurse and a Medical Marijuana Patient Revisiting People vs Feezel Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program Impaired Driving: According to the CDC Michigan strengthens up roadside drug testing with addition of at least 32 officers Tag Cloud 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney. The post Being a Registered Nurse and a Medical Marijuana Patient appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  3. Michigan Supreme Court Opinion PEOPLE vs FEEZEL FILED JUNE 8, 2010 Feezel was driving when he encountered an intoxicated pedestrian in the street. Feezel struck the pedestrian whom as a result of the accident passed away. Feezel’s blood was analyzed which contained 6 nanograms of a THC metabolite called 11 Carboxy THC. Feezel was charged with OWI causing death and operating with the presence of a schedule one controlled substance. The trial judge refused to admit the evidence that the victim was extremely intoxicated. Feezel was convicted and appealed. The question was… whether the THC metabolite (defined below) was a derivative of THC thus making it a schedule one. The Michigan Supreme Court ruled that it was not (see linked opinion). In order to be convicted of Operating with the presence of drugs it must be active THC and not a metabolite. The court also ruled that the victim’s intoxication was material and should have been admitted into evidence. The People vs Feezel opinion by the Michigan Supreme Court has been used in many cases since as well as other case law. Many can be found listed here. Either you’re here just out of interest or you are searching for an attorney. If you need a law firm to protect and fight for your rights call our office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com and do your research. The justice system doesn’t like winners unless it’s them…They don’t like us. What are drug metabolites? A drug metabolite is a byproduct of the body breaking down, or “metabolizing,” a drug into a different substance. The process of metabolizing a drug is predictable and certain; everyone metabolizes drugs the same way. Therefore, the presence of a drug metabolite can be a reliable indicator that a person used the “parent” drug of that metabolite. Some metabolites remain in the body much longer than a drug. A drug test has a higher chance of identifying a user by looking for the metabolites of a drug, rather than the parent drug. Some examples of drug tests that detect metabolites, rather than the drug: Marijuana THC is the active substance in marijuana. The body quickly metabolizes the THC molecule into several metabolites with long chemical names. Urine drug tests typically detect the THC-COOH (nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) metabolite to identify marijuana users because it stays in the body much longer than the active THC drug. Cocaine A typical cocaine drug test kit looks for the presence of the metabolite benzoylecgonine. The presence of benzoylecgonine in a person’s system indicates cocaine use. Benzoylecgonine stays in a person’s system significantly longer than cocaine. Nicotine Nicotine is metabolized into cotinine, which has a much longer life in the body than the nicotine drug. A urine drug test for “nicotine” looks for the presence of cotinine as a sign of tobacco use. If you are looking for an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call The Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com Recent Posts Being a Registered Nurse and a Medical Marijuana Patient Revisiting People vs Feezel Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program Impaired Driving: According to the CDC Michigan strengthens up roadside drug testing with addition of at least 32 officers The post Revisiting People vs Feezel appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  4. May 19, 2020 – The Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) announced today an expansion of the eligibility criteria to its social equity program, as well as increased benefits, further reduced fees, and enhanced eligibility for certain applicants. Beginning June 1, 2020, this expansion will increase the number of disproportionately impacted communities from 41 to 184 and will make it easier for individuals from those communities to qualify to participate in the program. Expanded Communities Section 8 of the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act (MRTMA) requires the Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) to develop a plan to promote and encourage participation in the marijuana industry by people from communities that have been disproportionately impacted by marijuana prohibition and enforcement and to positively impact those communities. From the results of last year’s survey and workgroups, the MRA developed a Social Equity Program that identifies communities as eligible using two criteria: marijuana-related convictions and poverty rate. Currently, communities which have marijuana-related convictions greater than the state median and have 30% or more of the population living below the federal poverty level are identified as disproportionately impacted communities. On June 1, 2020, communities with 20% or more of the population living below the federal poverty level will now qualify. This expansion will result in 184 disproportionately impacted communities. The complete list is available at the end of this document. Fee Reduction: Eligibility Changes and Expansion Effective June 1, 2020, applicants will no longer be required to live in a disproportionately impacted community to be eligible for a marijuana-related conviction fee reduction or a caregiver fee reduction. In addition, a 40% fee reduction has been added for applicants who have been convicted of a marijuana-related felony. Below are available fee reductions, effective June 1, 2020: ___________________________________________________________ Residency – 25% fee reduction for residency in a disproportionately impacted community for at least 5 cumulative years of the last 10 years. Marijuana-Related Conviction – 25% fee reduction for having been convicted of a marijuana-related misdemeanor** OR 40% fee reduction or having been convicted of a marijuana-related felony** **Excluding distribution of a controlled substance to a minor Caregiver – 10% fee reduction for registration as a primary caregiver under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act for at least 2 years between 2008-2017 _______________________________________________________________ Effective June 1, 2020, applicants/licensees who qualify for the maximum fee reduction will now receive a 75% reduction in their application and annual licensing fees. An applicant can meet any of the above criteria and be eligible for the associated fee reduction, regardless of where they reside in Michigan. Currently, fee reductions last indefinitely so long as the applicant/licensee remains eligible for the fee reductions and operates within a disproportionately impacted community. Beginning June 1, 2020, applicants/licenses may now operate outside of a disproportionately impacted community; if they choose to do so, the fee reductions will expire after the first two years of operation. Application Assistance, Resources, Employment, and Training The MRA’s social equity representatives will continue to assist individuals with completing the social equity application, which will allow the MRA to determine if the individual qualifies for participation in the program. At this time, the social equity team will be providing remote application assistance to qualifying applicants applying for adult-use licenses. This will be available on a one-on-one basis as plans are made for a safe return to in-person sessions. Later this year the MRA will host a job fair. We are preparing to post job listings on our website and connect qualifying applicants with training resources that will help them develop the skills necessary for employment in the marijuana industry. Komorn Law has been at the forefront of commercial marijuana regulatory compliance since the inception of the industry. Put our extensive experience to work for you by calling us at 248-357-2550 or contacting us online. List of Communities by County Allegan: Fennville, Lee Township Arenac: Alger, Sterling Barry: Nashville Bay: Bay City, Midland, Pinconning Berrien: Benton Harbor, Berrien Spring, Coloma, Eau Claire, Niles, Oronoko Township, Sodus Township, Watervliet Branch: Bronson, Butler Township, Coldwater, Gilead Township, Quincy, Sherwood, Sherwood Township, Union City Calhoun: Albion, Battle Creek, Springfield, Tekonsha, Tekonsha Township, Union City Cass: Cassopolis, Dowagiac, Edwardsburg, Lagrange Township, Marcellus, Vandalia Eaton: Charlotte, Vermontville Emmet: McKinley Township, Wawatam Township Genesee: Clio, Flint, Flint Township, Mt. Morris, Mt. Morris Township Gratiot: Alma, Bethany Township, Breckenridge, Fulton Township, Perrinton, Seville Township, Wheeler Township Hillsdale: Montgomery Ingham: East Lansing, Lansing Ionia: Ionia, Muir, Orleans Township, Ronald Township Isabella: Coldwater Township, Fremont Township, Mt. Pleasant, Shepherd Jackson: Hanover, Jackson, Springport Kalamazoo: Galesburg, Kalamazoo Kent: Cedar Springs, Grand Rapids Lapeer: Clifford, Columbiaville, Imlay City, Lapeer Lenawee: Adrian, Morenci Macomb: Center Line, Mt. Clemens Mecosta: Aetna Township, Barryton, Big Rapids, Deerfield Township, Fork Township, Mecosta, Millbrook Township, Morley, Sheridan Township, Stanwood, Wheatland Township Monroe: Luna Pier Montcalm: Carson City, Crystal Township, Edmore, Greenville, Home Township, Howard City, Lakeview, McBride, Pierson, Stanton Muskegon: Holton Township, Muskegon, Muskegon Heights, Twin Lake Newaygo: Beaver Township, Big Prairie Township, Bridgeton Township, Denver Township, Fremont, Grant, Hesperia, Lilley Township, Merrill Township, Newaygo, Troy Township, White Cloud, Wilcox Township Oakland: Hazel Park, Pontiac, Royal Oak Township Ogemaw: Horton Township, Prescott, Richland Township, Rose City, West Branch Ottawa: Allendale Township Roscommon: Higgins Township, Richfield Township, Roscommon, Roscommon Township, St. Helen Saginaw: Bridgeport Township, Carrollton Township, Chapin Township, Chesaning, Kochville Township, Marion Township, Saginaw, Spaulding Township Shiawassee: Owosso St. Clair: Port Huron St. Joseph: Sturgis, Sturgis Township, Three Rivers, White Pigeon Township Tuscola: Akron, Caro, Dayton Township, Gagetown, Gilford Township, Kingston, Koylton Township, Mayville, Vassar, Vassar Township Van Buren: Arlington Township, Bangor Township, Bloomingdale, Breedsville, Columbia Township, Covert Township, Decatur, Decatur Township, Hartford, Keeler Township, Lawrence, Mattawan, Paw Paw, South Haven Washtenaw: Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti Wayne: Dearborn, Detroit, Ecorse, Hamtramck, Highland Park, Inkster, Melvindale, River Rouge, Wayne Wexford: Antioch Township, Cadillac, Colfax Township, Mesick, Slagle Township Source: https://www.michigan.gov/som/0,4669,7-192-47796-529549–,00.html Recent Posts Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program Impaired Driving: According to the CDC Michigan strengthens up roadside drug testing with addition of at least 32 officers Making Low Level Misdemeanors – Civil Infractions THE POLITICS OF PROSECUTORS The post Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  5. New law allows roadside drug testing throughout state – Whitmer signs roadside drug testing into law. LANSING, MI (WILX) — Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed three bills into law Thursday, including one that allows roadside drug testing. Senate Bill 718 establishes a one-year pilot program in five counties that will be selected by Michigan State Police, Whitmer’s office said in a news release. Under the law, drivers can be tested for controlled substance use. The MSP will also conduct another one-year program, adding more counties, at the end of the first one. The MSP then expanded the program to every county in the state. The agency will then have 90 days to submit a report to the state legislature detailing the number of traffic stops resulting in arrests for operating a vehicle under the influence of a controlled substance. The report must also say how many convictions were obtained from those arrests. MLIVE Michigan added at least 32 officers known as “drug recognition experts” to its roadside drug testing program between January and March 4, according to data state police provided MLive and a state House committee. State police are heading the expanded pilot program that is now in its second year and has grown to include law enforcement in all 83 Michigan counties. The second year of the pilot concludes Aug. 31, after which state police have 90 days to present results of the program to the legislature. In the meantime, the frequency and results of roadside drug tests being performed by drug recognition experts, who include state police, sheriff’s deputies, tribal, university and local police, remain secret. “There will be no data available until the pilot concludes, the results are analyzed and a report is prepared,” MSP spokeswoman Shanon Banner said Thursday, June 11. The program had 125 officers in January, Banner said at the time. The letter urged the committee to support Senate Bill 718, designed to clarify language in an existing law that outlined the roadside drug testing program. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed the bill into law Thursday; however, it doesn’t impact the scope of the pilot program. Read the rest here at MLIVE SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY (June 11, 2020) Act No. 87 Public Acts of 2020 Approved by the Governor June 11, 2020 Filed with the Secretary of State June 11, 2020 EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2020 ENROLLED SENATE BILL No. 718 STATE OF MICHIGAN 100TH LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION OF 2020 Introduced by Senator MacGregor ENROLLED SENATE BILL No. 718 AN ACT to amend 1949 PA 300, entitled “An act to provide for the registration, titling, sale, transfer, and regulation of certain vehicles operated upon the public highways of this state or any other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles and distressed vehicles; to provide for the licensing of dealers; to provide for the examination, licensing, and control of operators and chauffeurs; to provide for the giving of proof of financial responsibility and security by owners and operators of vehicles; to provide for the imposition, levy, and collection of specific taxes on vehicles, and the levy and collection of sales and use taxes, license fees, and permit fees; to provide for the regulation and use of streets and highways; to create certain funds; to provide penalties and sanctions for a violation of this act; to provide for civil liability of manufacturers, the manufacturers of certain devices, the manufacturers of automated technology, upfitters, owners, and operators of vehicles and service of process on residents and nonresidents; to regulate the introduction and use of certain evidence; to regulate and certify the manufacturers of certain devices; to provide for approval and certification of installers and servicers of certain devices; to provide for the levy of certain assessments; to provide for the enforcement of this act; to provide for the creation of and to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies; to impose liability upon the state or local agencies; to provide appropriations for certain purposes; to repeal all other acts or parts of acts inconsistent with this act or contrary to this act; and to repeal certain parts of this act on a specific date,” by amending section 625t (MCL 257.625t), as added by 2016 PA 243. The People of the State of Michigan enact: Sec. 625t (1) The department of state police may establish a pilot program in this state for roadside drug testing to determine whether an individual is operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance in violation of section 625. (2) A pilot program established under this section shall be for a period of 1 calendar year. The funding of a pilot program established under this section is subject to appropriation. (3) The department of state police shall develop a written policy for the implementation of the pilot program and the administration of roadside drug testing. (4) The department of state police may promulgate rules under the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, to implement a pilot program established under this section. (5) Not more than 90 days after the conclusion of a pilot program established under this section, the department of state police shall submit a report to the legislative committees of the senate and house of representatives with primary responsibility for judicial and criminal justice issues. The report shall cover both of the following: (a) The different types of law enforcement agencies in the pilot program participant counties that engaged in roadside drug testing. (b) Relevant statistical data, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) The number of traffic stops resulting in an arrest for operating under the influence of a controlled substance in violation of section 625 as a result of roadside drug testing by a certified drug recognition expert. (ii) The number and type of convictions resulting from an arrest made based on the result of a roadside drug test by a certified drug recognition expert. (6) As used in this section: (a) “Certified drug recognition expert” means a law enforcement officer trained to recognize impairment in a driver under the influence of a controlled substance rather than, or in addition to, alcohol. (b) “Controlled substance” means that term as defined in section 7104 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7104. This act is ordered to take immediate effect. Related: Defense attorney says drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug tests If you are looking for an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call The Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT) Act 300 of 1949 257.625t – Roadside drug testing pilot program. Sec. 625t. (1) The department of state police may establish a pilot program in 5 counties in this state for roadside drug testing to determine whether an individual is operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance in violation of section 625. (2) A pilot program established under this section shall be for a period of 1 calendar year. The funding of a pilot program established under this section is subject to appropriation. (3) Except as provided in subsection (8), the department of state police shall select 5 counties in which to implement a pilot program established under this section. (4) A county is eligible to participate in the pilot program if the county has a law enforcement agency within its boundary, including, but not limited to, a state police post, a sheriff’s department, or a municipal police department, that employs not fewer than 1 law enforcement officer who is a certified drug recognition expert. (5) The department of state police shall develop a written policy for the implementation of the pilot program and the administration of roadside drug testing. (6) The department of state police may promulgate rules under the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, to implement a pilot program established under this section. (7) Not more than 90 days after the conclusion of a pilot program established under this section, the department of state police shall submit a report to the legislative committees of the senate and house of representatives with primary responsibility for judicial and criminal justice issues. The report shall cover all of the following: (a) How pilot program participant counties were selected. (b) The different types of law enforcement agencies in the pilot program participant counties that engaged in roadside drug testing. (c) Relevant statistical data, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) The number of traffic stops resulting in an arrest for operating under the influence of a controlled substance in violation of section 625 as a result of roadside drug testing by a certified drug recognition expert. (ii) The number and type of convictions resulting from an arrest made based on the result of a roadside drug test by a certified drug recognition expert. (8) Upon the conclusion of a pilot program established under this section, the department of state police may, subject to appropriation, establish additional pilot programs in eligible counties not included among the 5 counties initially selected under subsection (3). The duration of a pilot program established under this subsection shall be for a period of 1 year. (9) As used in this section: (a) “Certified drug recognition expert” means a law enforcement officer trained to recognize impairment in a driver under the influence of a controlled substance rather than, or in addition to, alcohol. (b) “Controlled substance” means that term as defined in section 7104 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7104. If you are looking for an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call The Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com Related: https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/01/defense-attorneys-say-drivers-should-refuse-michigans-new-roadside-drug-tests.html MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT) Act 300 of 1949 257.625 Operating motor vehicle while intoxicated; “operating while intoxicated” defined; operating motor vehicle when visibly impaired; penalties for causing death or serious impairment of a body function; operation of motor vehicle by person less than 21 years of age; “any bodily alcohol content” defined; requirements; controlled substance; costs; enhanced sentence; guilty plea or nolo contendere; establishment of prior conviction; special verdict; public record; burden of proving religious service or ceremony; ignition interlock device; definitions; prior conviction; violations arising out of same transaction. Sec. 625. (1) A person, whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, within this state if the person is operating while intoxicated. As used in this section, “operating while intoxicated” means any of the following: (a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance. (b) The person has an alcohol content of 0.08 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine or, beginning October 1, 2021, the person has an alcohol content of 0.10 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine. (c) The person has an alcohol content of 0.17 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine. (2) The owner of a vehicle or a person in charge or in control of a vehicle shall not authorize or knowingly permit the vehicle to be operated upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of motor vehicles, within this state by a person if any of the following apply: (a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, other intoxicating substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance. (b) The person has an alcohol content of 0.08 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine or, beginning October 1, 2021, the person has an alcohol content of 0.10 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine. (c) The person’s ability to operate the motor vehicle is visibly impaired due to the consumption of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance. (3) A person, whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, within this state when, due to the consumption of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance, the person’s ability to operate the vehicle is visibly impaired. If a person is charged with violating subsection (1), a finding of guilty under this subsection may be rendered. (4) A person, whether licensed or not, who operates a motor vehicle in violation of subsection (1), (3), or (8) and by the operation of that motor vehicle causes the death of another person is guilty of a crime as follows: (a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 15 years or a fine of not less than $2,500.00 or more than $10,000.00, or both. The judgment of sentence may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. If the vehicle is not ordered forfeited under section 625n, the court shall order vehicle immobilization under section 904d in the judgment of sentence. (b) If the violation occurs while the person has an alcohol content of 0.17 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine, and within 7 years of a prior conviction, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not less than $2,500.00 or more than $10,000.00, or both. The judgment of sentence may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. If the vehicle is not ordered forfeited under section 625n, the court shall order vehicle immobilization under section 904d in the judgment of sentence. (c) If, at the time of the violation, the person is operating a motor vehicle in a manner proscribed under section 653a and causes the death of a police officer, firefighter, or other emergency response personnel, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not less than $2,500.00 or more than $10,000.00, or both. This subdivision applies regardless of whether the person is charged with the violation of section 653a. The judgment of sentence may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. If the vehicle is not ordered forfeited under section 625n, the court shall order vehicle immobilization under section 904d in the judgment of sentence. (5) A person, whether licensed or not, who operates a motor vehicle in violation of subsection (1), (3), or (8) and by the operation of that motor vehicle causes a serious impairment of a body function of another person is guilty of a crime as follows: (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not less than $1,000.00 or more than $5,000.00, or both. The judgment of sentence may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. If the vehicle is not ordered forfeited under section 625n, the court shall order vehicle immobilization under section 904d in the judgment of sentence. (b) If the violation occurs while the person has an alcohol content of 0.17 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine, and within 7 years of a prior conviction, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not less than $1,000.00 or more than $5,000.00, or both. The judgment of sentence may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. If the vehicle is not ordered forfeited under section 625n, the court shall order vehicle immobilization under section 904d in the judgment of sentence. (6) A person who is less than 21 years of age, whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, within this state if the person has any bodily alcohol content. As used in this subsection, “any bodily alcohol content” means either of the following: (a) An alcohol content of 0.02 grams or more but less than 0.08 grams per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine or, beginning October 1, 2021, the person has an alcohol content of 0.02 grams or more but less than 0.10 grams per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine. (b) Any presence of alcohol within a person’s body resulting from the consumption of alcoholic liquor, other than consumption of alcoholic liquor as a part of a generally recognized religious service or ceremony. (7) A person, whether licensed or not, is subject to the following requirements: (a) He or she shall not operate a vehicle in violation of subsection (1), (3), (4), (5), or (8) while another person who is less than 16 years of age is occupying the vehicle. A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a crime punishable as follows: (i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii), a person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $1,000.00 and to 1 or more of the following: (A) Imprisonment for not less than 5 days or more than 1 year. Not less than 48 hours of this imprisonment must be served consecutively. This term of imprisonment must not be suspended. (B) Community service for not less than 30 days or more than 90 days. (ii) If the violation occurs within 7 years of a prior conviction or after 2 or more prior convictions, regardless of the number of years that have elapsed since any prior conviction, a person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a felony and must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $500.00 or more than $5,000.00 and to either of the following: (A) Imprisonment under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections for not less than 1 year or more than 5 years. (B) Probation with imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than 1 year and community service for not less than 60 days or more than 180 days. Not less than 48 hours of this imprisonment must be served consecutively. This term of imprisonment must not be suspended. (b) He or she shall not operate a vehicle in violation of subsection (6) while another person who is less than 16 years of age is occupying the vehicle. A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable as follows: (i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii), a person who violates this subdivision may be sentenced to 1 or more of the following: (A) Community service for not more than 60 days. (B) A fine of not more than $500.00. (C) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days. (ii) If the violation occurs within 7 years of a prior conviction or after 2 or more prior convictions, regardless of the number of years that have elapsed since any prior conviction, a person who violates this subdivision must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $1,000.00 and to 1 or more of the following: (A) Imprisonment for not less than 5 days or more than 1 year. Not less than 48 hours of this imprisonment must be served consecutively. This term of imprisonment must not be suspended. (B) Community service for not less than 30 days or more than 90 days. (c) In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (a)(i) or (b)(i), the court may, unless the vehicle is ordered forfeited under section 625n, order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (a)(ii) or (b)(ii), the court shall, unless the vehicle is ordered forfeited under section 625n, order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. (d) This subsection does not prohibit a person from being charged with, convicted of, or punished for a violation of subsection (4) or (5) that is committed by the person while violating this subsection. However, points shall not be assessed under section 320a for both a violation of subsection (4) or (5) and a violation of this subsection for conduct arising out of the same transaction. (8) A person, whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, within this state if the person has in his or her body any amount of a controlled substance listed in schedule 1 under section 7212 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7212, or a rule promulgated under that section, or of a controlled substance described in section 7214(a)(iv) of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7214. (9) If a person is convicted of violating subsection (1) or (8), all of the following apply: (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following: (i) Community service for not more than 360 hours. (ii) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days, or, if the person is convicted of violating subsection (1)(c), imprisonment for not more than 180 days. (iii) A fine of not less than $100.00 or more than $500.00, or, if the person is guilty of violating subsection (1)(c), a fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $700.00. (b) If the violation occurs within 7 years of a prior conviction, the person must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $1,000.00 and 1 or more of the following: (i) Imprisonment for not less than 5 days or more than 1 year. Not less than 48 hours of the term of imprisonment imposed under this subparagraph must be served consecutively. (ii) Community service for not less than 30 days or more than 90 days. (c) If the violation occurs after 2 or more prior convictions, regardless of the number of years that have elapsed since any prior conviction, the person is guilty of a felony and must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $500.00 or more than $5,000.00 and to either of the following: (i) Imprisonment under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections for not less than 1 year or more than 5 years. (ii) Probation with imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than 1 year and community service for not less than 60 days or more than 180 days. Not less than 48 hours of the imprisonment imposed under this subparagraph must be served consecutively. (d) A term of imprisonment imposed under subdivision (b) or (c) must not be suspended. (e) In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (a), the court may order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (b) or (c), the court shall, unless the vehicle is ordered forfeited under section 625n, order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. (f) In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (b) or (c), the court may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. (10) A person who is convicted of violating subsection (2) is guilty of a crime as follows: (a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 93 days or a fine of not less than $100.00 or more than $500.00, or both. (b) If the person operating the motor vehicle violated subsection (4), a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not less than $1,500.00 or more than $10,000.00, or both. (c) If the person operating the motor vehicle violated subsection (5), a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not less than $1,000.00 or more than $5,000.00, or both. (11) If a person is convicted of violating subsection (3), all of the following apply: (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following: (i) Community service for not more than 360 hours. (ii) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days. (iii) A fine of not more than $300.00. (b) If the violation occurs within 7 years of 1 prior conviction, the person must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $200.00 or more than $1,000.00, and 1 or more of the following: (i) Imprisonment for not less than 5 days or more than 1 year. Not less than 48 hours of the term of imprisonment imposed under this subparagraph must be served consecutively. (ii) Community service for not less than 30 days or more than 90 days. (c) If the violation occurs after 2 or more prior convictions, regardless of the number of years that have elapsed since any prior conviction, the person is guilty of a felony and must be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $500.00 or more than $5,000.00 and either of the following: (i) Imprisonment under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections for not less than 1 year or more than 5 years. (ii) Probation with imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than 1 year and community service for not less than 60 days or more than 180 days. Not less than 48 hours of the imprisonment imposed under this subparagraph must be served consecutively. (d) A term of imprisonment imposed under subdivision (b) or (c) must not be suspended. (e) In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (a), the court may order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (b) or (c), the court shall, unless the vehicle is ordered forfeited under section 625n, order vehicle immobilization as provided in section 904d. (f) In the judgment of sentence under subdivision (b) or (c), the court may impose the sanction permitted under section 625n. (12) If a person is convicted of violating subsection (6), all of the following apply: (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b), the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or both of the following: (i) Community service for not more than 360 hours. (ii) A fine of not more than $250.00. (b) If the violation occurs within 7 years of 1 or more prior convictions, the person may be sentenced to 1 or more of the following: (i) Community service for not more than 60 days. (ii) A fine of not more than $500.00. (iii) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days. (13) In addition to imposing the sanctions prescribed under this section, the court may order the person to pay the costs of the prosecution under the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 760.1 to 777.69. (14) A person sentenced to perform community service under this section must not receive compensation and must reimburse the state or appropriate local unit of government for the cost of supervision incurred by the state or local unit of government as a result of the person’s activities in that service. (15) If the prosecuting attorney intends to seek an enhanced sentence under this section or a sanction under section 625n based upon the defendant having 1 or more prior convictions, the prosecuting attorney shall include on the complaint and information, or an amended complaint and information, filed in district court, circuit court, municipal court, or family division of circuit court, a statement listing the defendant’s prior convictions. (16) If a person is charged with a violation of subsection (1), (3), (4), (5), (7), or (8) or section 625m, the court shall not permit the defendant to enter a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of violating subsection (6) in exchange for dismissal of the original charge. This subsection does not prohibit the court from dismissing the charge upon the prosecuting attorney’s motion. (17) A prior conviction must be established at sentencing by 1 or more of the following: (a) A copy of a judgment of conviction. (b) An abstract of conviction. (c) A transcript of a prior trial or a plea-taking or sentencing proceeding. (d) A copy of a court register of actions. (e) A copy of the defendant’s driving record. (f) Information contained in a presentence report. (g) An admission by the defendant. (18) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (20), if a person is charged with operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance or other intoxicating substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance in violation of subsection (1) or a local ordinance substantially corresponding to subsection (1), the court shall require the jury to return a special verdict in the form of a written finding or, if the court convicts the person without a jury or accepts a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court shall make a finding as to whether the person was under the influence of a controlled substance or other intoxicating substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance at the time of the violation. (19) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (20), if a person is charged with operating a vehicle while his or her ability to operate the vehicle was visibly impaired due to his or her consumption of a controlled substance or other intoxicating substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance in violation of subsection (3) or a local ordinance substantially corresponding to subsection (3), the court shall require the jury to return a special verdict in the form of a written finding or, if the court convicts the person without a jury or accepts a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court shall make a finding as to whether, due to the consumption of a controlled substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance, the person’s ability to operate a motor vehicle was visibly impaired at the time of the violation. (20) A special verdict described in subsections (18) and (19) is not required if a jury is instructed to make a finding solely as to either of the following: (a) Whether the defendant was under the influence of a controlled substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance at the time of the violation. (b) Whether the defendant was visibly impaired due to his or her consumption of a controlled substance or a combination of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or other intoxicating substance at the time of the violation. (21) If a jury or court finds under subsection (18), (19), or (20) that the defendant operated a motor vehicle under the influence of or while impaired due to the consumption of a controlled substance or a combination of a controlled substance, an alcoholic liquor, or other intoxicating substance, the court shall do both of the following: (a) Report the finding to the secretary of state. (b) On a form or forms prescribed by the state court administrator, forward to the department of state police a record that specifies the penalties imposed by the court, including any term of imprisonment, and any sanction imposed under section 625n or 904d. (22) Except as otherwise provided by law, a record described in subsection (21)(b) is a public record and the department of state police shall retain the information contained on that record for not less than 7 years. (23) In a prosecution for a violation of subsection (6), the defendant bears the burden of proving that the consumption of alcoholic liquor was a part of a generally recognized religious service or ceremony by a preponderance of the evidence. (24) The court may order as a condition of probation that a person convicted of violating subsection (1) or (8), or a local ordinance substantially corresponding to subsection (1) or (8), shall not operate a motor vehicle unless that vehicle is equipped with an ignition interlock device approved, certified, and installed as required under sections 625k and 625l. (25) As used in this section: (a) “Intoxicating substance” means any substance, preparation, or a combination of substances and preparations other than alcohol or a controlled substance, that is either of the following: (i) Recognized as a drug in any of the following publications or their supplements: (A) The official United States Pharmacopoeia. (B) The official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States. (C) The official National Formulary. (ii) A substance, other than food, taken into a person’s body, including, but not limited to, vapors or fumes, that is used in a manner or for a purpose for which it was not intended, and that may result in a condition of intoxication. (b) “Prior conviction” means a conviction for any of the following, whether under a law of this state, a local ordinance substantially corresponding to a law of this state, a law of the United States substantially corresponding to a law of this state, or a law of another state substantially corresponding to a law of this state, subject to subsection (27): (i) Except as provided in subsection (26), a violation or attempted violation of any of the following: (A) This section, except a violation of subsection (2), or a violation of any prior enactment of this section in which the defendant operated a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating or alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, or a combination of intoxicating or alcoholic liquor and a controlled substance, or while visibly impaired, or with an unlawful bodily alcohol content. (B) Section 625m. (C) Former section 625b. (ii) Negligent homicide, manslaughter, or murder resulting from the operation of a vehicle or an attempt to commit any of those crimes. (iii) Section 601d or 626(3) or (4). (26) Except for purposes of the enhancement described in subsection (12)(b), only 1 violation or attempted violation of subsection (6), a local ordinance substantially corresponding to subsection (6), or a law of another state substantially corresponding to subsection (6) may be used as a prior conviction. (27) If 2 or more convictions described in subsection (25) are convictions for violations arising out of the same transaction, only 1 conviction must be used to determine whether the person has a prior conviction. History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;– Am. 1951, Act 270, Eff. Sept. 28, 1951 ;– Am. 1954, Act 10, Eff. Aug. 13, 1954 ;– Am. 1956, Act 34, Eff. Aug. 11, 1956 ;– Am. 1958, Act 113, Eff. Sept. 13, 1958 ;– Am. 1976, Act 285, Eff. Apr. 1, 1977 ;– Am. 1978, Act 57, Imd. Eff. Mar. 10, 1978 ;– Am. 1978, Act 391, Eff. Jan. 15, 1979 ;– Am. 1980, Act 515, Eff. Apr. 1, 1981 ;– Am. 1982, Act 309, Eff. Mar. 30, 1983 ;– Am. 1987, Act 109, Eff. Mar. 30, 1988 ;– Am. 1991, Act 98, Eff. Jan. 1, 1992 ;– Am. 1993, Act 359, Eff. Sept. 1, 1994 ;– Am. 1994, Act 211, Eff. Nov. 1, 1994 ;– Am. 1994, Act 448, Eff. May 1, 1995 ;– Am. 1994, Act 449, Eff. May 1, 1995 ;– Am. 1996, Act 491, Eff. Apr. 1, 1997 ;– Am. 1998, Act 350, Eff. Oct. 1, 1999 ;– Am. 1999, Act 73, Eff. Oct. 1, 1999 ;– Am. 2000, Act 77, Eff. Oct. 1, 2000 ;– Am. 2000, Act 460, Eff. Mar. 28, 2001 ;– Am. 2003, Act 61, Eff. Sept. 30, 2003 ;– Am. 2004, Act 62, Eff. May 3, 2004 ;– Am. 2006, Act 564, Imd. Eff. Jan. 3, 2007 ;– Am. 2008, Act 341, Eff. Jan. 1, 2009 ;– Am. 2008, Act 462, Eff. Oct. 31, 2010 ;– Am. 2008, Act 463, Eff. Oct. 31, 2010 ;– Am. 2012, Act 543, Eff. Mar. 31, 2013 ;– Am. 2013, Act 23, Imd. Eff. May 9, 2013 ;– Am. 2014, Act 219, Eff. Sept. 24, 2014 ;– Am. 2017, Act 153, Eff. Feb. 6, 2018 Compiler’s Notes: Section 2 of Act 309 of 1982 provides: “All proceedings pending and all rights and liabilities existing, acquired, or incurred at the time this amendatory act takes effect are saved and may be consummated according to the law in force when they are commenced. This amendatory act shall not be construed to affect any prosecution pending or initiated before the effective date of this amendatory act, or initiated after the effective date of this amendatory act for an offense committed before that effective date.” Popular Name: Heidi’s Law © 2020 Legislative Council, State of Michigan Komorn Law has been at the forefront of commercial marijuana regulatory compliance since the inception of the industry. Put our extensive experience to work for you by calling us at 248-357-2550 or contacting us online. PUBLIC HEALTH CODE (EXCERPT) Act 368 of 1978 333.7212 Schedule 1; controlled substances included. Sec. 7212. (1) The following controlled substances are included in schedule 1: (a) Any of the following opiates, including their isomers, esters, the ethers, salts, and salts of isomers, esters, and ethers, unless specifically excepted, when the existence of these isomers, esters, ethers, and salts is possible within the specific chemical designation: Acetylmethadol Difenoxin Noracymethadol Allylprodine Dimenoxadol Norlevorphanol Alpha-acetylmethadol Dimepheptanol Normethadone Alphameprodine Dimethylthiambutene Norpipanone Alphamethadol Dioxaphetyl butyrate Phenadoxone Benzethidine Dipipanone Phenampromide Betacetylmethadol Ethylmethylthiambutene Phenomorphan Betameprodine Etonitazene Phenoperidine Betamethadol Etoxeridine Piritramide Betaprodine Furethidine Proheptazine Clonitazene Hydroxypethidine Properidine Dextromoramide Ketobemidone Propiram Diampromide Levomoramide Racemoramide Diethylthiambutene Levophenacylmorphan Trimeperidine Morpheridine (b) Any of the following opium derivatives, their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, unless specifically excepted, when the existence of these salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation: Acetorphine Drotebanol Morphine-N-Oxide Acetyldihydrocodeine Etorphine Myrophine Benzylmorphine Heroin Nicocodeine Codeine methylbromide Hydromorphinol Nicomorphine Codeine-N-Oxide Methyldesorphine Normorphine Cyprenorphine Methyldihydromorphine Pholcodine Desomorphine Morphine methylbromide Thebacon Dihydromorphine Morphine methylsulfonate (c) Any material, compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances, their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, unless specifically excepted, when the existence of these salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation: 2-Methylamino-1-phenylpropan-1-one Some trade and other names: Methcathinone Cat Ephedrone 3, 4-methylenedioxy amphetamine 5-methoxy-3, 4-methylenedioxy amphetamine 3, 4, 5-trimethoxy amphetamine Bufotenine Some trade and other names: 3-(B-dimethylaminoethyl)-5 hydrozyindole 3-(2-dimethylaminoethyl)-5 indolol N,N-dimethylserotonin; 5-hydroxy-N-dimethyltryptamine Mappine 2, 5-Dimethoxyamphetamine Some trade or other names: 2, 5-Dimethoxy-a-methylphenethylamine; 2,5-DMA 4-Bromo-2, 5-Dimethoxyamphetamine Some trade or other names: 4-bromo-2, 5 dimethoxy-a-methylphenethylamine; 4-bromo 2,5-DMA Diethyltryptamine Some trade and other names: N,N-Diethyltryptamine; DET Dimethyltryptamine Some trade or other names: DMT 4-methyl-2, 5-dimethoxyamphetamine Some trade and other names: 4-methyl-2, 5-dimethoxy-a-methyl-phenethylamine DOM, STP 4-methoxyamphetamine Some trade or other names: 4-methoxy-a-methylphenethylamine; paramethoxy amphetamine; PMA Ibogaine Some trade and other names: 7-Ethyl-6,6a,7,8,9,10,12,13 Octahydro-2-methoxy-6,9-methano-5H- pyrido (1, 2:1, 2 azepino 4, 5-b) indole tabernanthe iboga Lysergic acid diethylamide Except as provided in subsection (2), Marihuana, including pharmaceutical-grade cannabis Mecloqualone Mescaline Peyote N-ethyl-3 piperidyl benzilate N-methyl-3 piperidyl benzilate Psilocybin Psilocyn Thiophene analog of phencyclidine Some trade or other names: 1-(1-(2-thienyl)cyclohexyl) piperidine 2-thienyl analog of phencyclidine; TPCP (d) Synthetic equivalents of the substances contained in the plant, or in the resinous extractives of cannabis and synthetic substances, derivatives, and their isomers with similar chemical structure or pharmacological activity, or both, such as the following, are included in schedule 1: (i) /\1 cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and their optical isomers. (ii) /\6 cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and their optical isomers. (iii) /\3,4, cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and their optical isomers. (e) Synthetic cannabinoids. As used in this subdivision, “synthetic cannabinoids” includes any material, compound, mixture, or preparation that is not otherwise listed as a controlled substance in this schedule or in schedules II through V, is not approved by the federal food and drug administration as a drug, and contains any quantity of the following substances, their salts, isomers (whether optical, positional, or geometric), homologues (analogs), and salts of isomers and homologues (analogs), unless specifically excepted, whenever the existence of these salts, isomers, homologues (analogs), and salts of isomers and homologues (analogs) is possible within the specific chemical designation: (i) Any compound containing a 3-(1-naphthoyl)indole structure, also known as napthoylindoles, with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: JWH-007, JWH-015, JWH-018, JWH-019, JWH-073, JWH-081, JWH-122, JWH-200, JWH-210, JWH-398, AM-1220, AM-2201, and WIN-55, 212-2. (ii) Any compound containing a 1H-indol-3-yl-(1-naphthyl)methane structure, also known as napthylmethylindoles, with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: JWH-175, and JWH-184. (iii) Any compound containing a 3-(1-naphthoyl)pyrrole structure, also known as naphthoylpyrroles with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the pyrrole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2- piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the pyrrole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: JWH-370, JWH-030. (iv) Any compound containing a naphthylideneindene structure with substitution at the 3-position of the indene ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the indene ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: JWH-176. (v) Any compound containing a 3-phenylacetylindole structure, also known as phenacetylindoles, with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the phenyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: RCS-8 (SR-18), JWH-250, JWH-203, JWH-251, and JWH-302. (vi) Any compound containing a 2-(3-hydroxycyclohexyl)phenol structure, also known as cyclohexylphenols, with substitution at the 5-position of the phenolic ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not substituted on the cyclohexyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: CP-47,497 (and homologues(analogs)), cannabicyclohexanol, and CP-55,940. (vii) Any compound containing a 3-(benzoyl)indole structure, also known as benzoylindoles, with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the phenyl ring to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: AM-694, pravadoline (WIN-48,098), RCS-4, AM-630, AM-679, AM-1241, and AM-2233. (viii) Any compound containing a 11-hydroxy-/\8-tetrahydrocannabinol structure, also known as dibenzopyrans, with further substitution on the 3-pentyl group by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkyethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: HU-210, JWH-051, JWH-133. (ix) Any compound containing a 3-(L-adamantoyl)indole structure, also known as adamantoylindoles, with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by an alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl, or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted on the adamantyl ring system to any extent. Examples of this structural class include but are not limited to: AM-1248. (x) Any other synthetic chemical compound that is a cannabinoid receptor agonist and mimics the pharmacological effect of naturally occurring cannabinoids that is not listed in schedules II through V and is not approved by the federal food and drug administration as a drug. (f) Compounds of structures referred to in subdivision (d), regardless of numerical designation of atomic positions, are included. (g) Gamma-hydroxybutyrate and any isomer, salt, or salt of isomer of gamma-hydroxybutyrate. Some trade and other names: Sodium oxybate 4-hydroxybutanoic acid monosodium salt (h) 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine. Some trade and other names: Ecstasy MDMA (i) N-Benzylpiperazine Some trade and other names: BZP Benzylpiperazine 1-(phenylmethyl)-piperazine (j) 3-Chlorophenylpiperazine Some trade and other names: MCPP (k) 1-(3-Trifluoromethylphenyl)piperazine Some trade and other names: TFMPP (l) 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxybenzylpiperazine Some trade and other names: 2C-B-BZP (m) All of the following: (i) (6aR,10aR)-9-(Hydroxymethyl)-6,6-dimethyl-3-(2-methyloctan-2-yl)-6a,7,10,10a-tetrahydrobenzo[c]chromen-1-ol. Some trade and other names: HU-210 (ii) 2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-5-(2-methyloctan-2-yl)phenol and its side chain homologues. Some trade and other names: CP47,497 (iii) 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole. Some trade and other names: JWH-018 (iv) 1-butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole. Some trade and other names: JWH-073 (v) (2-methyl-1-propyl-1H-indol-3-yl)-1-naphthalenyl-methanone. Some trade and other names: JWH-015 (vi) [1-[2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-1H-indol-3-yl]-1-naphthalenyl-methanone. Some trade and other names: JWH-200 (vii) 1-(1-pentyl-1H-indol-3-yl)-2-(2-methoxyphenyl)-ethanone. Some trade and other names: JWH-250 (n) Mephedrone (4-methylmethcathinone). Some trade and other names: 4-MMC, M-Cat, meow meow, miaow miaow, bounce, bubbles, bubble love, mad cow, plant food, drone, and neo doves (o) 4-Methyl-alpha-pyrrolidinobutyrophenone. Some trade and other names: MPBP (p) Methylenedioxypyrovalerone Some trade and other names: MDPV, Bath salts, charge plus, cloud nine, hurricane Charlie, ivory wave, ocean, red dove, scarface, sonic, white dove, white lightning (q) 5,6-Methylenedioxy-2-aminoindane Some trade and other names: MDAI Woof-woof (r) Naphyrone (Naphthylpyrovalerone) Some trade and other names: NRG-1 Rave (s) Pyrovalerone (1-(4-Methylphenyl)-2-(1-pyrrolidinyl)-1-pentanone) (t) Catha edulis; except as provided in subdivision (u) and section 7218, all parts of the plant presently classified botanically as catha edulis, whether growing or not; the leaves and seeds of that plant; any extract from any part of that plant; and every compound, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of that plant or its leaves, seeds, or extracts. Some trade and other names: Khat Qat (u) Cathinone. (v) Salvia divinorum; except as provided in subdivision (w), all parts of the plant presently classified botanically as salvia divinorum, whether growing or not; the leaves and seeds of that plant; any extract from any part of that plant; and every compound, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of that plant or its leaves, seeds, or extracts. (w) Salvinorin A. (x) Synthetic cathinones. As used in this subdivision, “synthetic cathinones” includes any material, compound, mixture, or preparation that is not otherwise listed as a controlled substance in this schedule or in schedules II through V, is not approved by the federal food and drug administration as a drug, and contains any quantity of the following substances, their salts, isomers (whether optical, positional, or geometric), homologues (analogs), and salts of isomers and homologues (analogs), unless specifically excepted, whenever the existence of these salts, isomers, homologues (analogs), and salts of isomers and homologues (analogs) is possible within the specific chemical designation: (i) Any compound containing a 2-amino-1-propanone structure with substitution at the 1-position with a monocyclic or fused polycyclic ring system and a substitution at the nitrogen atom by an alkyl group, cycloalkyl group, or incorporation into a heterocyclic structure. Examples of this structural class include, but are not limited to, dimethylcathinone, ethcathinone, and alpha-pyrrolidinopropiophenone. (ii) Any compound containing a 2-amino-1-propanone structure with substitution at the 1-position with a monocyclic or fused polycyclic ring system and a substitution at the 3-position carbon with an alkyl, haloalkyl, or alkoxy group. Examples of this structural class include, but are not limited to, naphyrone. (iii) Any compound containing a 2-amino-1-propanone structure with substitution at the 1-position with a monocyclic or fused polycyclic ring system and a substitution at any position of the ring system with an alkyl, haloalkyl, halogen, alkylenedioxy, or alkoxy group, whether or not further substituted at any position on the ring system to any extent. Examples of this structural class include, but are not limited to, mephedrone, methylone, and 3-fluoromethylone. (2) Marihuana, including pharmaceutical-grade cannabis, is a schedule 2 controlled substance if it is manufactured, obtained, stored, dispensed, possessed, grown, or disposed of in compliance with this act and as authorized by federal authority. (3) For purposes of subsection (1), “isomer” includes the optical, position, and geometric isomers. History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978 ;– Am. 1979, Act 125, Imd. Eff. Oct. 22, 1979 ;– Am. 1982, Act 352, Imd. Eff. Dec. 21, 1982 ;– Am. 1993, Act 25, Eff. May 1, 1993 ;– Am. 1998, Act 248, Imd. Eff. July 9, 1998 ;– Am. 2002, Act 710, Eff. Apr. 1, 2003 ;– Am. 2010, Act 171, Eff. Oct. 1, 2010 ;– Am. 2011, Act 88, Eff. Aug. 1, 2011 ;– Am. 2012, Act 183, Eff. July 1, 2012 ;– Am. 2013, Act 268, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 2013 Compiler’s Notes: In subsection (1)(e)(ix), “3-(L-adamantoyl)indole structure” evidently should read “3-(1-adamantoyl)indole structure.” Popular Name: Act 368 Drugs of Abuse AlcoholClub DrugsCocaineFentanylHallucinogensHeroinInhalantsKratomMarijuanaMDMA (Ecstasy/Molly)MethamphetamineOpioidsOver-the-Counter MedicinesPrescription MedicinesSteroids (Anabolic)Synthetic Cannabinoids (K2/Spice)Synthetic Cathinones (Bath Salts)Tobacco/Nicotine & Vaping The post Michigan strengthens up roadside drug testing with addition of at least 32 officers appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  6. Concealed Pistol License Requirements An outline of requirements for those who want to obtain a Michigan Concealed Pistol License. A. State Requirements An applicant for a Michigan CPL must: 1. Be at least 21 years of age. 2. Be a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted into the United States. 3. Be a legal resident of Michigan and reside in Michigan for at least six months immediately prior to application. An applicant is a resident of Michigan if one of the following applies: • The applicant possesses a valid, lawfully obtained Michigan driver’s license or official Michigan personal identification card. • The applicant is lawfully registered to vote in Michigan. • The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and is stationed outside of Michigan, but Michigan is the applicant’s home of record. • The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and is permanently stationed in Michigan, but the applicant’s home of record is another state. Note: The county clerk shall waive the six-month residency requirement if one of the following applies: • For an emergency license, if the applicant is a petitioner for a personal protection order issued under MCL 600.2950 or MCL 600.2950a. • For an emergency license, if the county sheriff determines that there is clear and convincing evidence to believe that the safety of the applicant or the safety of a member of the applicant’s family or household is endangered by the applicant’s inability to immediately obtain a license to carry a concealed pistol. • For a new resident, if the applicant holds a valid concealed pistol license issued by another state at the time the applicant’s residency in this state is established 4. Have knowledge and training in the safe use and handling of a pistol by successfully completing an appropriate pistol safety training course or class. 5. Not be subject to an order or disposition for any of the following: • Involuntary hospitalization or involuntary alternative treatment. • Legal incapacitation. • Personal protection order. • Bond or conditional release prohibiting purchase or possession of a firearm. • Finding of not guilty by reason of insanity. 6. Not be prohibited from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving, or distributing a firearm under MCL 750.224f. 7. Have never been convicted of a felony in Michigan or elsewhere, and a felony charge against the applicant is not pending in Michigan or elsewhere at the time he or she applies for a CPL. 8. Have not been dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces. 9. Have not been convicted of a misdemeanor violation of any of the following in the eight years immediately preceding the date of the application and a charge for a misdemeanor violation of any of the following is not pending against the applicant in this state or elsewhere at the time he or she applies for a CPL: • MCL 257.617a, failing to stop when involved in a personal injury accident • MCL 257.625, operating while intoxicated or with any presence of a Schedule 1 controlled substance or cocaine, punishable as a second offense under, MCL 257.625(9)(b) • MCL 257.625m, operating a commercial motor vehicle with alcohol content, punishable as a second offense under MCL 257.625m(4) • MCL 257.626, reckless driving • MCL 257.904(1), operating while license suspended/revoked/denied or never applied for a license, punishable as a second or subsequent offense • MCL 259.185, operating an aircraft while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance with prior conviction • MCL 290.629, hindering or obstructing certain persons performing official weights and measures duties • MCL 290.650, hindering, obstructing, assaulting, or committing bodily injury upon director of the Department of Agriculture or authorized representative of the director • MCL 324.80176, operating a vessel under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, or with an unlawful blood alcohol content, punishable as a second or subsequent offense under MCL 324.80177(1)(b) • MCL 324.81134, operating an off-road vehicle (ORV) under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance or with an unlawful alcohol content, punishable as a second or subsequent offense under MCL 324.81134(8)(b) • MCL 324.82127, operating a snowmobile under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, or with an unlawful blood alcohol content, or with any presence of a Schedule 1 controlled substance or cocaine, punishable as a second or subsequent offense under MCL 324.82128(1)(b) MCL 333.7403, possessing a controlled substance, controlled substance analogue, or prescription form • MCL 462.353, operating a locomotive under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, or while visibly impaired, punishable as a second offense under MCL 462.353(4) • MCL 722.677, displaying sexually explicit matter to minors • MCL 750.81, assault or domestic assault • MCL 750.81a(1) or (2), aggravated assault or aggravated domestic assault • MCL 750.115, breaking and entering or entering without breaking • MCL 750.136b(7), fourth-degree child abuse • MCL 750.145n, vulnerable adult abuse • MCL 750.157b(3)(b), solicitation to commit a felony • MCL 750.215, impersonating a peace officer or medical examiner • MCL 750.223, illegal sale of a firearm or ammunition • MCL 750.224d, illegal use or sale of a self-defense spray or foam device • MCL 750.226a, sale or possession of a switchblade • MCL 750.227c, improper transporting or possessing a loaded firearm in or upon a vehicle • MCL 750.229, pawnbroker accepting a pistol in pawn, or any second-hand or junk dealer accepting a pistol and offering or displaying it for resale • MCL 750.232, failure to register the purchase of a firearm or a firearm component • MCL 750.232a, improperly obtaining a pistol, making a false statement on an application to purchase a pistol, or using or attempting to use false identification of another to purchase a pistol • MCL 750.233, intentionally pointing or aiming a firearm without malice • MCL 750.234, discharging a firearm while intentionally aimed without malice • MCL 750.234d, possessing a firearm on prohibited premises • MCL 750.234e, brandishing a firearm in public • MCL 750.234f, possession of a firearm in public by an individual less than 18 years of age • MCL 750.235, discharging a firearm pointed or aimed intentionally without malice causing injury • MCL 750.235a, parent of a minor who violates the Firearms Chapter of the Michigan Penal Code in a weapon-free school zone • MCL 750.236, setting a spring or other gun, or any trap or device • MCL 750.237, carrying, possessing, using, or discharging a firearm while under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, while having an unlawful alcohol content, or while visibly impaired • MCL 750.237a, weapon-free school zone violation • MCL 750.335a, indecent exposure • MCL 750.411h, stalking • MCL 750.520e, fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct • Former MCL 750.228, failure to have a pistol inspected • MCL 752.861, careless, reckless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in injury or death • MCL 752.862, careless, reckless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in property damage • MCL 752.863a, reckless discharge of a firearm • A violation of a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above 10. Have not been convicted of a misdemeanor violation of any of the following in the three years immediately preceding the date of application and a charge for a misdemeanor violation of any of the following is not pending against the applicant in this state or elsewhere at the time he or she applies for a license: • MCL 257.625, operating while intoxicated, visibly impaired, under 21 years of age with any bodily alcohol content, or with any presence of a Schedule 1 controlled substance or cocaine • MCL 257.625a, refusal of commercial motor vehicle operator to submit to a preliminary chemical breath test • MCL 257.625k, ignition interlock device reporting violation • MCL 257.625l, circumventing or tampering with an ignition interlocking device • MCL 257.625m, operating a commercial motor vehicle with alcohol content, punishable under MCL 257.625m(3) • MCL 259.185, operating an aircraft under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance • MCL 324.81134, operating an ORV under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, with an unlawful alcohol content, with any presence of a Schedule 1 controlled substance or cocaine, or while visibly impaired • MCL 324.82127, operating a snowmobile under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, with an unlawful blood alcohol content, with any presence of a Schedule 1 controlled substance or cocaine, or while visibly impaired • MCL 333.7401 to 333.7461, controlled substance violation • MCL 462.353, operating a locomotive under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, while visibly impaired, or with an unlawful alcohol content, punishable under MCL 462.353(3) • MCL 750.167, disorderly person • MCL 750.174, embezzlement • MCL 750.218, false pretenses with intent to defraud or cheat • MCL 750.356, larceny • MCL 750.356d, second or third degree retail fraud • MCL 750.359, larceny from vacant structure or building • MCL 750.362, larceny by conversion • MCL 750.362a, refuse or neglect to return vehicle, trailer, or other tangible property delivered on a rental or lease basis with intent to defraud the lessor • MCL 750.377a, malicious destruction of personal property • MCL 750.380, malicious destruction of real property • MCL 750.535, buying, receiving, possessing, concealing, or aiding in the concealment of stolen, embezzled, or converted property • MCL 750.540e, malicious use of service provided by telecommunications service provider • A violation of a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above 11. Have not been found guilty but mentally ill of any crime, and has not offered a plea of not guilty of, or been acquitted of, any crime by reason of insanity. 12. Is not currently and has never been subject to an order of involuntary commitment in an inpatient or outpatient setting due to mental illness. 13. Not have a diagnosed mental illness at the time the application is made that includes an assessment that the individual presents a danger to himself or herself or to another, regardless of whether he or she is receiving treatment for that illness. 14. Not be under a court order of legal incapacity in this state or elsewhere. 15. The applicant has a valid state-issued driver’s license or personal identification card. B. Federal Requirements Pursuant to MCL 28.426, a CPL may not be issued to a person prohibited under federal law from possessing or transporting a firearm as determined through the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Questions regarding the NICS check should be directed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) NICS Section at 1-(877) FBI-NICS (877-324-6427). Concealed Pistol License Requirements DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney. Komorn Law Social Media Recent Posts Michigan Expands The Social Equity Program Impaired Driving: According to the CDC Michigan strengthens up roadside drug testing with addition of at least 32 officers Making Low Level Misdemeanors – Civil Infractions Michigan Gun Laws and CPL Requirements Tag Cloud 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post Michigan Gun Laws and CPL Requirements appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  7. A growing number of prosecutors are reforming their local criminal legal systems, fueled by activists’ calls for change and rising electoral mobilization around district attorney races. Many other prosecutors are fighting reform, whether locally or through statewide lobbying. Some even do both. The Appeal: Political Report has launched a new interactive page to track how the reform movement is affecting the practices and policies of prosecutors nationwide. What reforms are they rolling out, and are they actually implementing them? Who is more ambitious in their proposals, and who is most resistant to targeting mass incarceration? After all, prosecutors enjoy tremendous discretion, and policies they set—like whether to seek bail, to treat minors as adults, or to prosecute marijuana cases—impact the scale of mass incarceration. Explore these developments chronologically below, or geographically with this interactive map HERE. Recent Posts Making Low Level Misdemeanors – Civil Infractions Posted: June 8, 2020 Driving a snowmobile without a registration and other low-level misdemeanors would become civil infractions under a “decriminalization” package the House Judiciary Committee started work on this week. Failing to put plates on a vehicle when buying a new car, driving farm equipment on the road without proper registration, and failing to show a safety certificate […] THE POLITICS OF PROSECUTORS Posted: June 7, 2020 A growing number of prosecutors are reforming their local criminal legal systems, fueled by activists’ calls for change and rising electoral mobilization around district attorney races. Many other prosecutors are fighting reform, whether locally or through statewide lobbying. Some even do both. The Appeal: Political Report has launched a new interactive page to track how the reform movement is affecting […] Cannabis and Taxes – The challenges of non-deductible expenses Posted: June 6, 2020 What is Section 280 E? Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income […] 91 More Drug Cases Tied to Ex-Texas Cop to Be Dismissed Posted: May 26, 2020 Prosecutors announced they expect to dismiss possibly 91 more drug convictions tied to an indicted ex-Houston Texas police officer. A look back at botched Harding Street raid… The Harris County DA’s Office had announced in February it would dismiss 73 cases connected to the former officer, Gerald Goines, whose cases are being reviewed following a […] Charges brought on two technicians who allegedly faked tests on breathalyzer machines. Posted: May 22, 2020 The Michigan AG filed charges against two technicians contracted to service all the DataMaster DMT breath alcohol testing instruments for the Lower Peninsula One device is at the Beverly Hills Police Department in Oakland County, the other at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Office. Michigan State Police’s Breath Alcohol Program says it found problems when conducting a routine review of records […] Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections Posted: May 17, 2020 Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections and Marijuana could regulate the main gateway COVID-19 enters host cells in patients, new research concludes. New research into preventive measures and possible treatment for the coronavirus could be cannabis. At first public health officials warned that inhalation of burning marijuana could lead to more vulnerability to contracting the […] Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus Posted: May 14, 2020 Israel Researchers Believe CBD Could Play Role In COVID-19 Treatment. This product, which is expected to be administrated by inhalation, will be tested against a variety of lung infections. Israeli scientists have launched clinical trials into whether cannabis can play an effective role in stopping or slowing the coronavirus. Israeli scientists will study cannabidiol (CBD) […] Could Zoom jury trials become the norm during the coronavirus pandemic? Posted: May 11, 2020 In April, a Florida court held a bench trial over Zoom to decide a child abduction case under the Hague Convention. Later that month, the same state held a major virtual trial on the voting rights of convicted felons, with the public listening in by phone. As criminal courts grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, some […] Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Posted: May 11, 2020 Eric J. Smith (Michigan politician) – Wikipedia Eric Smith is the an American attorney and the former Prosecuting Attorney of Macomb County, Michigan. He resigned in 2020 after his arrest of embezzlement and corruption charges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_J._Smith_(Michigan_politician) MACOMB DAILY NEWS – 2018 Source Macomb Daily News County treasurer wants state review of prosecutor‘s ‘off book’ bank accounts […] Lighthouse LIVE Posted: May 7, 2020 Join us for Lighthouse LIVE Fundraiser Saturday, May 9th2:00 p.m. – 2:00 a.m. LIVE on Facebook and YouTube. LIVE Since the COVID-19 crisis began, Lighthouse has been working to keep up with the growing need in our community. We have increased our capacity for emergency shelter by more than 100% and moved to a safe […] Tags 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post THE POLITICS OF PROSECUTORS appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  8. What is Section 280 E? Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. The IRS has subsequently applied Section 280E to state-legal cannabis businesses, since cannabis is still a Schedule I substance. Reagan Era Law Created during the Reagan Administration, Section 280E originated from a 1981 court case in which a convicted cocaine trafficker asserted his right under federal tax law to deduct ordinary business expenses. In 1982, Congress created 280E to prevent other drug dealers from following suit. It states that no deductions should be allowed on any amount “in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business consists of trafficking in controlled substances.” With 23 states and the District of Columbia now allowing some form of legal marijuana, 280E is applied to state-regulated cannabis businesses more often than it is to the types of illegal drug dealers that the provision was intended to penalize. What types of business expenses are under 280E? Employee salaries Payments to contractors Utility costs Internet Health insurance premiums Advertising costs Repairs and maintenance Rental fees Security and more What deductions are challenged? General and administrative costs (bookkeeping, legal expenses, technology costs) State excise tax Storage of cannabis Product Purchases Product Depreciation Product Losses Theft and more 2015 IRS Memorandum 2018 US Tax Court The Tax Court decision in Patients Mutual Assistance Collective Corporation d.b.a. Harborside Health Center v. Commissioner held that the medical marijuana dispensary could not deduct business expenses despite operating its business legally under California law. The Tax Court denied Harborside’s deductions from 2007 to 2012, citing Code Section 280E, which prevents any trade or business that “consists of trafficking in controlled substances from deducting any business expenses.” Harborside has appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit. The Harborside case is not the first time that an entity specializing in the processing, sale or distribution of cannabis has challenged the constitutionality of Code Section 280E, but it is very likely the largest and the most closely watched case. And if the Ninth Circuit agrees with the appellant, it will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court. 2019 Harborside Inc. Receives Final Ruling by US Tax Court on 280E OAKLAND, CA and TORONTO, Oct. 21, 2019 /PRNewswire/ – Harborside Inc. (“Harborside” or the “Company”) (CSE: HBOR), today announced that the U.S. Tax Court has issued a final decision under Tax Court Rule 155 on the income tax deficiency for Patients Mutual Assistance Collective Corporation (“PMACC”), the Company’s 100% owned subsidiary and owner of the iconic Harborside Oakland cannabis dispensary. The U.S. Tax Court has ruled that PMACC owes an aggregate tax deficiency of approximately $11.0 million for the fiscal years 2007 through 2012. This amount is consistent with the Company’s one-time provision for its estimated tax obligation for PMACC expensed in its financial results for the three-month period ended June 30, 2019. All dollar amounts in this press release are expressed in U.S. dollars. “The Tax Court’s final computation of our tax obligation in PMACC’s long-standing 280E case is a good outcome for Harborside shareholders. By challenging the IRS’s overly aggressive interpretation of the tax law as it applies to cannabis businesses operating legally under State law, we have succeeded in reducing Harborside’s liability from the $36 million originally sought by the IRS to approximately $11 million – a $25 million reduction. The reduction includes $6 million in penalties that the court previously ruled we did not need to pay because of the unclear state of the law, and because Harborside acted in good faith,” said Harborside CEO Andrew Berman. “This ruling is also an important one for the cannabis industry in that, through this litigation, the court recognized there are legitimate deductions that legal cannabis companies can take in cost of goods sold. Harborside still intends to appeal the Tax Court’s ruling with regard to aspects of the decision as it pertains to the calculation of cost of goods sold, and has already retained appellate tax counsel.” Steve DeAngelo, Harborside’s co-founder and Chairman Emeritus, also commented, “Harborside’s policy towards the federal government has always been to exhaust all reasonable available legal options to pursue justice. That policy has been validated by the Tax Court’s downward adjustment of PMACC’s liability. This outcome has strengthened our already strong resolve to continue pursuing justice by appealing the decision, with the goal of modifying or reducing 280E liability for Harborside, and in the future, eliminating it for every other state legal cannabis business in the United States. The issues at stake are of importance to the entire cannabis industry.” The Company has 90 days within which to file an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Harborside Inc. Announces Filing Appeal in Tax Case The Tax Court decision was issued on Nov. 29, 2018. The ruling became final on Oct. 11, 2019, when liability of US$11,013,237 was formally entered by the Tax Court. Harborside is properly filing its appeal within 90 days from that date. What impact does this have on the cannabis industry and states attempting to regulate marijuana? Most cannabis business owners would like to be considered legitimate by paying federal and state taxes. But the current tax scenario has some convinced to ignore 280E on their tax filings, or don’t pay taxes at all. These businesses would rather gamble on the IRS overlooking their filing than see their revenues evaporate due to 280E. Treasury Inspector General Recommends More Tax Audits for Cannabis The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report on March 30, 2020 which made recommendations to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regarding tax compliance and the cannabis industry. The purpose of the report was to “evaluate the IRS’s examination and education approach to certain cash-based industries with an emphasis on legal marijuana operations,” as stated by the TIGTA. https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2020reports/202030017fr.pdf KOMORN LAW can help you with these types of issues – Call Our Office to Find Out More Information 248-357-2550 Recent Posts Making Low Level Misdemeanors – Civil Infractions Posted: June 8, 2020 Driving a snowmobile without a registration and other low-level misdemeanors would become civil infractions under a “decriminalization” package the House Judiciary Committee started work on this week. Failing to put plates on a vehicle when buying a new car, driving farm equipment on the road without proper registration, and failing to show a safety certificate […] Cannabis and Taxes – The challenges of non-deductible expenses Posted: June 6, 2020 What is Section 280 E? Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income […] 91 More Drug Cases Tied to Ex-Texas Cop to Be Dismissed Posted: May 26, 2020 Prosecutors announced they expect to dismiss possibly 91 more drug convictions tied to an indicted ex-Houston Texas police officer. A look back at botched Harding Street raid… The Harris County DA’s Office had announced in February it would dismiss 73 cases connected to the former officer, Gerald Goines, whose cases are being reviewed following a […] Charges brought on two technicians who allegedly faked tests on breathalyzer machines. Posted: May 22, 2020 The Michigan AG filed charges against two technicians contracted to service all the DataMaster DMT breath alcohol testing instruments for the Lower Peninsula One device is at the Beverly Hills Police Department in Oakland County, the other at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Office. Michigan State Police’s Breath Alcohol Program says it found problems when conducting a routine review of records […] Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections Posted: May 17, 2020 Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections and Marijuana could regulate the main gateway COVID-19 enters host cells in patients, new research concludes. New research into preventive measures and possible treatment for the coronavirus could be cannabis. At first public health officials warned that inhalation of burning marijuana could lead to more vulnerability to contracting the […] Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus Posted: May 14, 2020 Israel Researchers Believe CBD Could Play Role In COVID-19 Treatment. This product, which is expected to be administrated by inhalation, will be tested against a variety of lung infections. Israeli scientists have launched clinical trials into whether cannabis can play an effective role in stopping or slowing the coronavirus. Israeli scientists will study cannabidiol (CBD) […] Could Zoom jury trials become the norm during the coronavirus pandemic? Posted: May 11, 2020 In April, a Florida court held a bench trial over Zoom to decide a child abduction case under the Hague Convention. Later that month, the same state held a major virtual trial on the voting rights of convicted felons, with the public listening in by phone. As criminal courts grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, some […] Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Posted: May 11, 2020 Eric J. Smith (Michigan politician) – Wikipedia Eric Smith is the an American attorney and the former Prosecuting Attorney of Macomb County, Michigan. He resigned in 2020 after his arrest of embezzlement and corruption charges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_J._Smith_(Michigan_politician) MACOMB DAILY NEWS – 2018 Source Macomb Daily News County treasurer wants state review of prosecutor‘s ‘off book’ bank accounts […] Lighthouse LIVE Posted: May 7, 2020 Join us for Lighthouse LIVE Fundraiser Saturday, May 9th2:00 p.m. – 2:00 a.m. LIVE on Facebook and YouTube. LIVE Since the COVID-19 crisis began, Lighthouse has been working to keep up with the growing need in our community. We have increased our capacity for emergency shelter by more than 100% and moved to a safe […] THE EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR Act 302 of 1945 Posted: May 4, 2020 State of Emergency or Disaster Declaration…Pursuant to Michigan Emergency Management Act, the Governor may declare a “state of emergency” or “state of disaster” and activate applicable relief forces if an emergency or disaster or imminent threat thereof exists. MICHIGAN – EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR (EXCERPT)Act 302 of 1945 Proclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of […] Tags 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post Cannabis and Taxes – The challenges of non-deductible expenses appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  9. Prosecutors announced they expect to dismiss possibly 91 more drug convictions tied to an indicted ex-Houston Texas police officer. A look back at botched Harding Street raid… The Harris County DA’s Office had announced in February it would dismiss 73 cases connected to the former officer, Gerald Goines, whose cases are being reviewed following a deadly drug raid. Goines’ work with the Houston Police Department’s narcotics unit has come under scrutiny following the January 2019 drug raid in which Dennis Tuttle, 59, and his wife, Rhogena Nicholas, 58, were killed. Prosecutors allege Goines, 55, lied to obtain the warrant to search the couple’s home by claiming that a confidential informant had bought heroin there. Goines later said there was no informant and that he had bought the drugs himself, they allege. Five officers, including Goines, were injured in the raid. In the 73 cases announced in February, Goines was the only witness to alleged drug buys. In the 91 cases announced Thursday, Goines wrote affidavits that were used to secure search warrants in drug cases. Police stop by your place uninvited? You are going to need a lawyer! Komorn Law handles all types of cases similar to police raids, marijuana arrests, criminal charges as well as DUI and Drugged Driving. Call Our Office 248-357-2550 before you swallow the prosecutor’s “plea bargain” hook, line and sinker. All of the individuals in the 164 cases being dismissed are minorities and the majority are African American, prosecutors said. “We will continue to work to clear people convicted solely on the word of a police officer who we can no longer trust,” said Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg. “We are committed to making sure the criminal justice is fair and just for everyone.” Nicole DeBorde, Goines’ attorney, accused Ogg of using the ex-officer’s case for political gain. Ogg is up for re-election in November. HARRIS COUNTY D.A. KIM OGG DIDN’T DELIVER ON HER PROMISE OF REFORM. NOW ANOTHER ONE OF HER FORMER PROSECUTORS IS RUNNING AGAINST HER. Read More Here At Click2Houston Related News Reports Video Playlist of News Reports Latest News Reports 91 more cases connected to former HPD officer Gerald Goines could be overturned – May 21, 202091 additional drug convictions connected to officer charged in Harding Street raid to be overturned – May 21, 2020Looking Back – Individual Video News Reports HPD RAID: Harris Co. district attorney review widens to 2000 cases – Mar 4, 2019Timeline: What led to a botched HPD raid? – Mar 19, 2019Video by neighbor who witnessed portions of deadly botched drug raid in Houston – Apr 2, 2019Botched drug raid: Autopsy results – May 2, 2019Allegations of uncollected evidence after botched drug raid – May 6, 2019Harding Street raid fallout: District Attorney one-on-one – Aug 29, 2019Forensic investigator reveals his findings on the Harding Street raid – Nov 6, 2019The ex-husband of the woman who called 911 prior to the deadly Harding Street raid said she could be vindictive.Family of Harding Street raid victims want more answers from police – Nov 21, 2019The post 91 More Drug Cases Tied to Ex-Texas Cop to Be Dismissed appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  10. The Michigan AG filed charges against two technicians contracted to service all the DataMaster DMT breath alcohol testing instruments for the Lower Peninsula One device is at the Beverly Hills Police Department in Oakland County, the other at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Office. Michigan State Police’s Breath Alcohol Program says it found problems when conducting a routine review of records early on Jan. 2, Nessel’s statement said. They issued a stop order on the Intoximeters contract on Jan. 7. “Discrepancies in some submitted diagnostic reports came to light during a routine technical review by MSP’s Breath Alcohol Program on Jan. 2, 2020. Specifically, it is alleged that two of Intoximeters Inc.’s three technicians” Nessel’s statement said. 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 AG News Release May 22, 2020 LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel on Thursday filed charges against two technicians contracted to service all the DataMaster DMT (DataMaster Transportable) breath alcohol testing instruments for the Lower Peninsula. The DataMaster DMT (often referred to as a breathalyzer) is the evidentiary instrument used by law enforcement across Michigan to measure the alcohol level of motor vehicle drivers suspected of being under the influence of alcohol. The Michigan State Police (MSP) entered into a contract with Intoximeters Inc. that began Sept. 1, 2018 to provide ongoing maintenance and repairs, as well as 120-day on-site inspections on each of the 203 DataMaster DMTs in the state. Each technician was required to physically visit each site to conduct various diagnostic verifications, calibrations and repairs. Discrepancies in some submitted diagnostic reports came to light during a routine technical review by MSP’s Breath Alcohol Program on Jan. 2, 2020. Specifically, it is alleged that two of Intoximeters Inc.’s three technicians — Andrew Clark and David John — created fictitious documents to show they completed certain diagnostic tests and repairs on two DataMaster instruments for which they had responsibility for calibration and performance—one incident involved the DataMaster DMT instrument located at the Beverly Hills Police Department and the other incident involved the DataMaster DMT instrument located at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Office. Upon discovery of this issue, the MSP temporarily removed all instruments from service and launched an investigation, notifying both its criminal justice partners and the public of its discovery. The MSP promptly began working with the Attorney General’s Public Integrity Unit, continuing to demonstrate a steadfast belief that public trust and accountability are essential in government. The combined efforts of the MSP Breath Alcohol Program, MSP Fraud Investigation Section and the Attorney General’s Public Integrity Unit have culminated in the charges announced today. Following a four-month investigation led by the Attorney General’s Public Integrity Unit and the MSP, a total of nine felony charges were filed against David John, age 59, of Kalamazoo, and a total of six felony charges were filed against Andrew Clark, 53, of Oxford. Specific charges are as follows: Andrew Clark, charged in Eaton County: Two counts, forgery of a public record, a 14-year felony charge; Two counts, uttering and publishing, a 14-year felony charge; and Two counts, use of a computer to commit a crime, a 10-year felony charge. David John, charged in Kalamazoo County: Three counts, forgery of a public record, a 14-year felony charge; Three counts, uttering and publishing, a 14-year felony charge; and Three counts, use of a computer to commit a crime, a 10-year felony charge. “Those who hold positions of trust and responsibility at any level within our overall system of justice must be held to a high standard. When that trust is betrayed, it is incumbent upon my department to ensure accountability on behalf of the people of our state.” Nessel said. “I’m grateful for the Michigan State Police’s assistance in this investigation, and I know that the MSP and my Public Integrity Unit have handled this matter appropriately and in the public’s best interest.” “From the time we first uncovered discrepancies, the MSP was committed to conducting a complete and thorough investigation, and to being as transparent as possible regarding the outcomes of this situation,” stated Col. Joe Gasper, director of the MSP. “We recognize the critical role these instruments can play in drunk driving convictions and we are confident that a properly calibrated and maintained DataMaster remains an extremely reliable instrument.” Certified MSP staff have been performing the ongoing maintenance, repairs and 120-day inspections for all DataMaster instruments since Jan. 10, 2020, and will continue to do so. The State of Michigan’s contract with Intoximeter’s Inc. was officially terminated effective April 9, 2020. Clark has been arraigned in the Eaton County District Court and was given a personal recognizance bond. He is scheduled for a probable cause conference at 4 p.m. June 1. John will be arraigned at a later date due to reduced court operations related to COVID-19. Click here to view video from Attorney General Nessel. Note: A criminal charge is just an allegation and that the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. At least that’s what it’s supposed to be. Related Operating the DatamasterDatamaster-DMT Acquisitions Recent Posts Charges brought on two technicians who allegedly faked tests on breathalyzer machines. Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus Could Zoom jury trials become the norm during the coronavirus pandemic? Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Tags 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post Charges brought on two technicians who allegedly faked tests on breathalyzer machines. appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  11. Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections and Marijuana could regulate the main gateway COVID-19 enters host cells in patients, new research concludes. New research into preventive measures and possible treatment for the coronavirus could be cannabis. At first public health officials warned that inhalation of burning marijuana could lead to more vulnerability to contracting the coronavirus. A new study published in the journal Preprints finds some cannabis strains could prevent the severity and spread of COVID-19. See PDF Here. Note: Preprints is not peer-reviewed Like most respiratory diseases, the droplets carrying the disease are expelled by coughing or sneezing. When a non-infected person inhales the droplets, it typically enters your body through cells in your lungs and corresponding tissue. The scientific community has recently identified the ACE2 protein as the primary gateway the coronavirus infects patients. Researchers suspect modulating the level of proteins present in a patients could prevent susceptibility to the disease. In a study completed before the pandemic, researchers had observed the combination of THC and CBD cannabinoids could lower gene expressions that produce and regulate ACE2 proteins. “While our most efficacious extracts require further validation in a large-scale analysis and an animal model, our study is crucial for the future analysis of the effects of medical cannabis on COVID-19,” concluded the researchers. “Given the current dire and rapidly developing epidemiological situation, every possible therapeutic opportunity and avenue needs to be considered.” Read the Rest HERE on FreshToast Related Ace2 Reading for the Scientist In You https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angiotensin-converting_enzyme_2https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15141377/https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-ace2-receptor-how-is-it-connected-to-coronavirus-and-why-might-it-be-key-to-treating-covid-19-the-experts-explain-136928In Search of Preventative Strategies: Novel Anti-Inflammatory High-CBD Cannabis Sativa Extracts Modulate ACE2 Expression in COVID-19 Gateway TissuesScholarly Articles Search in Google (Going Deep) cannabis and ace2 protein receptors Recent Posts Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus Could Zoom jury trials become the norm during the coronavirus pandemic? Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Lighthouse LIVE Tag Cloud 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis Remote science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  12. Israel Researchers Believe CBD Could Play Role In COVID-19 Treatment. This product, which is expected to be administrated by inhalation, will be tested against a variety of lung infections. Israeli scientists have launched clinical trials into whether cannabis can play an effective role in stopping or slowing the coronavirus. Israeli scientists will study cannabidiol (CBD) alongside existing treatment options as a possible solution. InnoCan Pharma Collaborates with Tel Aviv University to Develop a New Revolutionary Approach to Treat the COVID-19 Corona Virus with Exosomes-Loaded CBD Exosomes are small particles created when stem cells are multiplied. Exosomes can target specific damaged organs and have an important role in cell-to-cell communication. When the cell healing properties of the exosomes are combined with the anti-inflammatory properties of CBD, it is expected to reach high synergetic effect. The research results may be beneficial to additional treatments for Central Nerve System ( CNS ) indications such as epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. Under the terms of the Research Agreement, InnoCan and a team led by Prof. Daniel Offen, a leading researcher specializing in Neuroscience and Exosome technology at Tel Aviv University, will collaborate to develop the cell therapy product, based on Prof. Offen’s work in the field. Innocan has agreed to fund the research based on agreed milestones, in the aggregate amount of approximately US $450,000 for the first stage. InnoCan and Ramot are collaborating on a new, revolutionary exosome-based technology that targets both central nervous system (CNS) indications and the Covid-19 Corona Virus. CBD-Loaded Exosomes hold the potential to provide a highly synergistic effect of anti-inflammatory properties and help in the recovery of infected lung cells. This product, which is expected to be administrated by inhalation, will be tested against a variety of lung infections. Read The rest HERE Also: More Research if you are interested: The basics of ACE2 Related NORML Gives Marijuana Consumption Safety Guidelines During Coronavirus OutbreakFact Check: Marijuana Won’t Cure The CoronavirusFeds Will Pay Scientists To Study Marijuana’s Effects On COVID-19 Recent Posts Initial Study Says Cannabis Might Help Prevent COVID-19 Infections Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus Could Zoom jury trials become the norm during the coronavirus pandemic? Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Lighthouse LIVE Disclaimer: Posted on this site is information gathered from the internet. We try to determine if they are facts or truth or atleast somewhat useful before posting but can never be 100% sure. Read these posts with a grain of salt and do further research before you consider following any guidance or information provided by these sources or anything on the internet. The internet is full of misconceptions, redirection, false information, unproven research, uneducated opinions, fake reports, news to influence, scammers, hackers and just flat out lies just for the fun of it. If you do not know that this by now you should turn off your computer and crawl under a rock. The post Scientists launch clinical trials to see if cannabis can be effective against the coronavirus appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  13. Eric J. Smith (Michigan politician) – Wikipedia Eric Smith is the an American attorney and the former Prosecuting Attorney of Macomb County, Michigan. He resigned in 2020 after his arrest of embezzlement and corruption charges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_J._Smith_(Michigan_politician) MACOMB DAILY NEWS – 2018 Source Macomb Daily News County treasurer wants state review of prosecutor‘s ‘off book’ bank accounts By Mitch Hotts, mhotts@digitalfirstmedia.com and @Mhotts on Twitter Aug 27, 2018 An emerging scandal in the Macomb County Prosecutor‘s Office or a rush to judgement by an inexperienced treasurer? +4 LOCAL NEWS FEATURED Macomb County prosecutor defends ‘off the books’ funds By Jameson Cook, jcook@digitalfirstmedia.com and @JamesonCook on Twitter Aug 29, 2018 Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith said he was about to reach an agreement with county officials a month ago over his office’s four “off the … OPINION Facts missing on prosecutor’s bank accounts, lottery raffle By Ken Kish For Digital First Media Sep 6, 2018 Transparency in government has taken two steps backward from a pair of unlikely sources – the office of Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith an… +2 COPS AND COURTS Macomb prosecutor unveils Uber plan to drive crime victims to court at criminals’ expense Sep 19, 2018 Crime victims and witnesses now have their own personal chauffeurs to drive them to Macomb County courts at the expense of convicted criminals… +2 LOCAL NEWS FEATURED Macomb County prosecutor hands over forfeiture funds to county treasurer By Jameson Cook, jcook@digitalfirstmedia.com and @JamesonCook on Twitter Dec 12, 2018 The Macomb County treasurer and prosecutor reached an agreement in their dispute over control of four bank accounts that contain forfeiture funds. +2 COPS AND COURTS FEATURED Judge rules bank records are public in Macomb County prosecutor dispute By Mitch Hotts, mhotts@digitalfirstmedia.com and @Mhotts on Twitter Dec 17, 2018 Macomb County’s treasurer and prosecutor may have reached an agreement in their dispute over so-called “off the books” bank accounts that cont… MACOMB DAILY NEWS – 2019 COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Macomb County prosecutor to appeal judge’s ruling on financial records By Mitch Hotts, mhotts@digitalfirstmedia.com and @Mhotts on TwitterJan 7, 2019The Macomb County Prosecutor‘s Office plans to appeal a judge’s ruling that stated they have to turn over additional “off-the-books” financial… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED ‘Off books’ spending revealed as Macomb prosecutor loses appeal By Mitch Hotts, mhotts@digitalfirstmedia.com and @Mhotts on TwitterJan 23, 2019The Michigan Court of Appeals has denied a request by the Macomb County Prosecutor‘s Office for a stay in the controversy surrounding “off-the… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED As scrutiny mounts, Macomb Prosecutor Smith defends use of funds By Mitch Hotts and Jameson Cook Macomb Daily Staff WritersJan 24, 2019Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith on Thursday defended his use of tens of thousands of dollars from asset forfeiture funds as two other top … LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Backup data sought to support spending from Prosecutor‘s Office ‘off the books’ fund By Jameson Cook, jcook@digitalfirstmedia.com and @JamesonCook on TwitterJan 27, 2019The ongoing squabble over the Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith’s so-called “off the books” accounts continues as the plaintiff in the Freed… Jared Maynard Frank Cusumano Jan 28, 2019Jared Maynard, left, and his attorney, Frank Cusumano, talk Monday following a hearing in Macomb County Circuit Court over county Prosecutor E… checks forfeiture Feb 18, 2019Copies of three of hundreds of checks written from a forfeiture fund controlled by Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith. LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith‘s obscure fund raises questions, likely to receive scrutiny By Jameson Cook, jcook@digitalfirstmedia.com and @JamesonCook on TwitterFeb 19, 2019Some $160,000 for building security, over $100,000 each paid to dozens of nonprofit organizations and credit card companies, and thousands of … LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County commissioners vote to audit of prosecutor‘s obscure fund By Mitch Hotts mhotts@medianewsgroup.com; @Mhotts on TwitterFeb 20, 2019An independent audit firm will conduct an “in depth” seven-year analysis of a so-called “off-the-books” fund controlled by Macomb County Prose… audit smith Mitch HottsFeb 20, 2019Bob Smith, center, chairman of the Macomb County Board of Commissioners, voted Wednesday along with the rest of the board to have an in-depth … NEWSFEATURED Hackel calls for state AG investigation into Macomb County Prosecutor‘s special fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterFeb 23, 2019Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel is calling for a state investigation into a controversial, obscure fund controlled by county Prosecutor Er… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Smith, Hackel hurl accusations at each other in back-to-back press conferences By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterFeb 25, 2019In what has evolved into a full-blown scandal in county politics, Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel announced Monday he is seeking a state c… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County commissioners continue plan to seek audit of prosecutor fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterFeb 26, 2019The Macomb County Board of Commissioners is forging ahead with its plan to hire an accounting firm for an investigative audit of a prosecutor … LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County Commission chairman to step away from audit controversy By Mitch Hotts mhotts@medianewsgroup.com @mhotts on TwitterFeb 27, 2019Macomb County Board of Commissioners Bob Smith — brother of embattled county Prosecutor Eric Smith — will no longer be involved in board dec… Bob Smith 4 Feb 27, 2019Bob Smith, chairman of the Macomb County Board of Commissioners, said Wednesday that due to a “perceived conflict of interest,” he will not be… OPINION Macomb political titans battle over forfeiture fund spending By Ken Kish For MediaNews GroupMar 7, 2019Eric Smith may have thought of himself as the Robin Hood of Macomb County, doling out thousands of dollars to those in need. LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County asks judge to endorse current status of disputed forfeiture fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMar 15, 2019Macomb County is asking a judge to rule that forfeiture funds under the control of county Prosecutor Eric Smith must go through the county Tre… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith to hire outside firm for forfeiture fund lawsuit By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMar 24, 2019A subcommittee of the Macomb County Board of Commissioners approved an outside attorney firm to represent county Prosecutor Eric Smith in a la… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Michigan State Police opens investigation into Eric Smith forfeiture fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 1, 2019Michigan State Police has opened an investigation into expenditures from a forfeiture fund controlled for several years by Macomb County Prose… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED State Police asks Macomb County officials to not interfere with forensic audit of prosecutor‘s fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 11, 2019Michigan State Police is asking Macomb County officials to refrain from interfering with an accounting firm’s forensic audit of a controversia… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED State police raid Macomb County Prosecutor‘s Office, confiscate documents By Jameson Cook and Norb Franz Macomb Daily Staff WritersApr 17, 2019Michigan State Police detectives Wednesday morning raided Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith‘s offices at the County Administration Building. LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Timeline of events in Macomb Prosecutor Smith ‘off book’ accounts scandal By Macomb Daily StaffApr 17, 2019A timeline of events that led up to the Michigan State Police raid of Prosecutor Eric Smith‘s office Wednesday. LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County Prosecutor, county attorneys argue over representation, FOIA role By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMay 10, 2019Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith will seek independent counsel for at least three ongoing court cases after a county Board of Commissioner’… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED State Police raid prosecutor‘s home as part of forfeiture fund probe By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMay 14, 2019At least three security cameras were seized from exterior of Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith’s home by Michigan State Police on Tuesday mo… Eric Smith cameras May 14, 2019A Michigan State Police evidence technician Tuesday morning removes a security camera from the exterior of Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith… Eric Smith raid wiring May 14, 2019Michigan State Police investigators handle wiring inside Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith‘s attached garage during a search of his Macomb T… Shaw Smith raid May 14, 2019Michigan State Police Lt. Michael Shaw on Tuesday morning watches colleagues work to remove a security camera from the exterior of Macomb Coun… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Citizen activist sues Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith over search warrant documents By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMay 18, 2019A transparency advocate has sued Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith and the county for documents related to a police search of his offices as… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Macomb County panel gives initial approval for Smith to hire independent counsel for legal battle By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJun 8, 2019A Macomb County Board of Commissioners panel on Thursday gave initial approval to county Prosecutor Eric Smith to hire an independent attorney… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Eric Smith releases documents related to police raid of his offices, home By Jameson Cook and Norb Franz Macomb Daily staff writersJun 10, 2019Macomb County Eric Smith on Monday afternoon released documents related to a police investigation of his office after a judge ordered him to do so. COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Figure tied to Macomb County prosecutor scandal busted for drunk driving By Mitch Hotts mhotts@medianewsgroup.comJun 11, 2019The owner of a security firm that is connected to the ongoing controversy over Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith is due in court later this … COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Prosecutor accused of making false representations about forfeiture fund By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJun 12, 2019A Republican activist is asking a judge to hold Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith and an assistant in contempt of court, claiming they misre… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Activist sues Michigan State Police for Macomb prosecutor raid documents By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJun 30, 2019A transparency advocate has sued two state agencies seeking details from two known search warrants and two newly revealed actions as part of t… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Man tied to Macomb County prosecutor pleads to three charges in traffic stop By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJul 2, 2019The owner of a security company connected to an investigation of Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith pleaded no contest to three misdemeanors … LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Hackel accuses Macomb County board chairman of trying to overstep his duties By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJul 6, 2019Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel said he no longer has a relationship with board Chairman Bob Smith, accusing him of trying to usurp the ex… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Probation for security firm owner tied to Eric Smith By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterJul 18, 2019The owner of a security company tied to an investigation of Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith received one-year reporting probation for drun… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Smith Legal Defense Fund gets $30,000 from Political Action Committee By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterSep 29, 2019Some of the proceeds from Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith’s annual birthday-bash fundraiser next week could be used to defend him against … COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Eric Smith‘s top chief assistant retiring but will return as part-timer By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterDec 18, 2019Macomb County’s chief assistant prosecuting attorney is retiring but will return to the office as a part-time independent contractor in anothe… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED De La Salle parents: School issues ‘go beyond football’ By George Pohly gpohly@medianewsgroup.com @GPohly on TwitterDec 18, 2019Saying the issues that have plagued De La Salle Collegiate High School this year “go beyond football,” a group of parents called for the head … LOCAL NEWSFEATURED 2019: Prosecutor investigation tops Macomb news By Macomb Daily StaffDec 30, 2019Macomb County is known for its political intrigue. The county whose voters became known as “Reagan Democrats” in the 1980s and delivered Michi… MACOMB DAILY NEWS – 2020 LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Charges likely against Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith By Macomb Daily StaffMar 23, 2020Suspected of expending thousands of dollars from a forfeiture fund, Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith is expected to be criminally charged Tuesday. COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Eric Smith denies wrongdoing, alleges politically motivated state investigation By Norb Franz and Jameson Cook Macomb Daily Staff WritersMar 24, 2020Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith countered criminal allegations of illicit spending of public funds by accusing state officials of a politi… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Macomb County Board could vote to remove embattled prosecutor By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMar 25, 2020At least one Macomb County commissioner wants to initiate a process that could result in a board vote on whether to remove Prosecutor Eric Smi… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Macomb board panel chair agrees to meeting over Prosecutor Smith By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMar 27, 2020The day before he is set to be formally charged, a Macomb County Board of Commissioners committee chair has agreed to hold a meeting to discus… OPINION Letters to the Editor 3-28-20: Eric Smith charges Mar 27, 2020Smith needs to step down NEWSFEATURED Eric Smith resigns as Macomb County prosecutor By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterMar 30, 2020Eric Smith has resigned as Macomb County prosecutor. LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Full text of Eric Smith resignation letter Mar 30, 2020On Monday, three days after he was charged with 10 felonies, Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith resigned the post he has held since 2004. The… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Eric Smith stays positive, overlooks issues in farewell letter to staff By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 1, 2020Former Macomb County prosecutor Eric Smith maintained a positive approach in his final-day farewell message to his staff but glossed over some… ELECTIONSFEATURED Peter Lucido is first to file for Macomb County Prosecutor By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com @jamesoncook on TwitterApr 1, 2020State Sen. Peter Lucido is the first official candidate for Macomb County prosecutor. COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Derek Miller’s attorney says client ‘has done nothing wrong’ By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 2, 2020The lawyer for a top official in the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office charged with two felonies says his client is innocent of any wrongdoing. COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Eric Smith could be compiling cash to fight criminal charges By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 5, 2020Former Macomb County prosecutor Eric Smith has created a modest yet possibly growing war chest for a potential expensive legal fight against c… ELECTIONSFEATURED Jodi Switalski files for Macomb County prosecutor post By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 6, 2020A former assistant Macomb County prosecutor and Oakland County judge has filed to run for the open county prosecutor position. OPINION Eric Smith case shows Michigan needs forfeiture reform By Kathy Sanchez and Daryl James Guest OpinionApr 7, 2020Public trust might be running low in Michigan following criminal charges against Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith, who resigned March 30 am… ELECTIONSFEATURED Mary Chrzanowski, criminal defense lawyer running for Macomb County prosecutor By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 7, 2020Retired Macomb County judge Mary Chrzanowski and a veteran criminal defense attorney are the latest candidates to file for the vacant county p… LOCAL NEWSFEATURED Hackel: Macomb County board’s FOIA ordinance ‘invalid’ and ‘unenforceable’ By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 8, 2020Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel says a Freedom of Information Act ordinance passed by the county board last month is “invalid and unenforc… COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Macomb County judges to meet in May to appoint interim prosecutor Apr 9, 2020The Macomb County Circuit Court bench on May 20 will name an interim county prosecutor to serve until after a new prosecutor is elected in November. NEWSFEATURED Top official in Macomb County prosecutor‘s office fired By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 14, 2020A former longtime assistant Macomb County prosecutor and ally of Eric Smith has been fired. ELECTIONSFEATURED Warren Treasurer Barnwell, fellow Democrat hope to unseat Rocca By Norb Franz nfranz@medianewsgroup.com; @NorbFranz on TwitterApr 14, 2020With political eyes on the field of candidates hoping to become Macomb County’s next prosecutor in the wake of criminal charges filed against … COPS AND COURTSFEATURED MSP revisits Macomb Prosecutor‘s Office to inspect equipment, electronics By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 15, 2020Michigan State Police visited the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office on Tuesday to look at computer and related electronic equipment as part of… NEWSFEATURED Macomb County government money managers optimistic in investments despite stock-market drop By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 17, 2020Investors of Macomb County governmental funds are cautiously optimistic investments will remain stable despite the recent volatility of the st… ELECTIONSFEATURED Two more candidates finalize Macomb County prosecutor primary field By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 27, 2020COPS AND COURTSFEATURED By Norb Franz nfranz@medianewsgroup.com; @NorbFranz on TwitterApr 27, 2020COPS AND COURTSFEATURED Derek Miller to be arraigned for alleged role in Eric Smith case By Jameson Cook jcook@medianewsgroup.com; @JamesonCook on TwitterApr 30, 2020https://www.macombdaily.com/search/?q=prosecutor+eric+smith+forfeiture&d1=2018-01-01&d2=2020-05-11&s=start_time&sd=asc&l=100&nsa=eedition Just think what would be going on if he won… Eric Smith turns down request to run for Attorney General Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith has declined a request by Democratic Party and union leaders to run for state Attorney General. Smith, 51, the prosecutor since 2005, said he was asked to run last fall but informed state party officials last week that the time is not right for him to run. He enjoys his current job and doesn’t wont to inject disruptions of a statewide campaign and possible move to Lansing into the lives of his wife and three children. ‘I was approached by Democratic leaders and elected officials and a broad range of Democratic Party allies,’ Smith said. ‘I appreciated their interested and the discussions about this important law-enforcement position in our state. But … I decided this was not the right time for my office and my family.’ He said his office is running at peak efficiency and he isn’t ready to relinquish the reins. He is very involved with his two daughters, Ella and Violet, 12 and 9, respectively, and son, Robert, 7, and their sports and other activities. ‘I’m coaching four teams right now,’ Smith said. He said one of his assistants, Derek Miller, a former Democratic state representative and county treasurer, counseled and assisted him in the discussions with union, party and elected officials. The post will be open with current Republican Attorney General Bill Schuette running for governor to succeed Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican. ‘I think Macomb County would be represented well in Lansing for a change,’ he said. Read the Rest Here—> https://www.macombdaily.com/news/nation-world-news/eric-smith-turns-down-request-to-run-for-attorney-general/article_1c1cc556-0a30-5249-875e-4ca617601660.html Sounds like you need a lawyer….Can you feel it Eric? SUBMIT AND OBEY Unless you have some fight in you…Then call our office. KOMORN LAW 248-357-2550 Recent Posts Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case Lighthouse LIVE THE EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR Act 302 of 1945 The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act MICHIGAN HOUSE BILL NO. 5709 Tags 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan Michigan State Police MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post Timeline in Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith Corruption Case appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  14. State of Emergency or Disaster Declaration…Pursuant to Michigan Emergency Management Act, the Governor may declare a “state of emergency” or “state of disaster” and activate applicable relief forces if an emergency or disaster or imminent threat thereof exists. MICHIGAN – EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR (EXCERPT) Act 302 of 1945 Proclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of firearms, ammunition, or other weapons. Document Links and Descriptions DocumentTypeDescriptionSection 10.31SectionProclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of firearms, ammunition, or other weapons.10.31 Proclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of firearms, ammunition, or other weapons. Sec. 1. (1) During times of great public crisis, disaster, rioting, catastrophe, or similar public emergency within the state, or reasonable apprehension of immediate danger of a public emergency of that kind, when public safety is imperiled, either upon application of the mayor of a city, sheriff of a county, or the commissioner of the Michigan state police or upon his or her own volition, the governor may proclaim a state of emergency and designate the area involved. After making the proclamation or declaration, the governor may promulgate reasonable orders, rules, and regulations as he or she considers necessary to protect life and property or to bring the emergency situation within the affected area under control. Those orders, rules, and regulations may include, but are not limited to, providing for the control of traffic, including public and private transportation, within the area or any section of the area; designation of specific zones within the area in which occupancy and use of buildings and ingress and egress of persons and vehicles may be prohibited or regulated; control of places of amusement and assembly and of persons on public streets and thoroughfares; establishment of a curfew; control of the sale, transportation, and use of alcoholic beverages and liquors; and control of the storage, use, and transportation of explosives or inflammable materials or liquids deemed to be dangerous to public safety. (2) The orders, rules, and regulations promulgated under subsection (1) are effective from the date and in the manner prescribed in the orders, rules, and regulations and shall be made public as provided in the orders, rules, and regulations. The orders, rules, and regulations may be amended, modified, or rescinded, in the manner in which they were promulgated, from time to time by the governor during the pendency of the emergency, but shall cease to be in effect upon declaration by the governor that the emergency no longer exists. (3) Subsection (1) does not authorize the seizure, taking, or confiscation of lawfully possessed firearms, ammunition, or other weapons. History: 1945, Act 302, Imd. Eff. May 25, 1945 ;– CL 1948, 10.31 ;– Am. 2006, Act 546, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 2006Section 10.32SectionConstruction of act.10.32 Construction of act. Sec. 2. It is hereby declared to be the legislative intent to invest the governor with sufficiently broad power of action in the exercise of the police power of the state to provide adequate control over persons and conditions during such periods of impending or actual public crisis or disaster. The provisions of this act shall be broadly construed to effectuate this purpose.Section 10.33SectionViolation; misdemeanor.10.33 Violation; misdemeanor. Sec. 3. The violation of any such orders, rules and regulations made in conformity with this act shall be punishable as a misdemeanor, where such order, rule or regulation states that the violation thereof shall constitute a misdemeanor.Linkhttp://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-10-33Executive Order 2019-01 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-02Executive Order 2019-03Executive Order 2019-04 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-05Executive Order 2019-06Executive Order 2019-07Executive Order 2019-08Executive Order 2019-09Executive Order 2019-10Executive Order 2019-11 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-12 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-13Executive Order 2019-14Executive Order 2019-15Executive Order 2019-16Executive Order 2019-17 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-18Executive Order 2019-19Executive Order 2020-01Executive Order 2020-04 – Declaration of State of Emergency (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-05 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-06 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-07 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-08 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-09 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-10 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-11 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-12 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-13 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-14 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-15 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-16 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-17 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-18 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-19 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-20 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-21 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-22 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-23 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-24 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-25 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-26 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-27 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-28 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-29 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-30 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-31 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-32 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-33 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-34 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-35 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-36 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-37 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-38 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-39 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-40 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-41 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-42 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-43 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-44 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-45 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-46 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-47 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-48 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-49 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-50 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-51 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-52 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-53 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-54 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-55 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-56 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-57 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-58 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-59 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-60 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-61 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-62 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-63 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-64 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-65 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-66 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-67 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-68 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-69 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-70 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-71 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-72 (COVID-19)current to 5-3-20 (Check for new ones here) SUBMIT AND OBEY…Unless you have some fight in you… Then call our office for a legal defense case evaluation 248-357-2550 Recent Posts THE EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR Act 302 of 1945 The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act MICHIGAN HOUSE BILL NO. 5709 Executive Order 2020-70 (COVID-19) US Supreme Court votes remotely to deny voters right to vote remotely 2020 autism BMMR cannabis CBD corona virus corruption. prosecutors covid-19 DEA detroit dispensary DUI expungement forfeiture ginnifer hency hemp komorn komornlaw lara LARA ALERTS LARA Bulletin LARA FAQ Law law enforcement abuse laws legal Legalization marijuana medical Medical Marijuana Michigan Michigan State Police MMFLA MMMA MMMA Regulations MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis science shattuck supreme court Traffic Stop Vote The post THE EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR Act 302 of 1945 appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  15. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT) Act 390 of 1976 AN ACT to provide for planning, mitigation, response, and recovery from natural and human-made disaster within and outside this state; to create the Michigan emergency management advisory council and prescribe its powers and duties; to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies and officials; to prescribe immunities and liabilities; to provide for the acceptance of gifts; and to repeal acts and parts of acts. History: 1976, Act 390, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1976 ;– Am. 1990, Act 50, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1990 ;– Am. 2006, Act 267, Imd. Eff. July 7, 2006 After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of disaster terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of disaster for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. Whitmer used one executive order to terminate Michigan’s current state of emergency, which was set to expire Thursday 4/30/20, and cited two emergency powers laws, one from 1945 and another from 1976, as the legal basis for unilaterally extending the state of emergency. Whitmer indicated she will continually evaluate the need for both executive orders and will “terminate the states of emergency and disaster if the threat or danger has passed.” Note: Executive Orders and State Of Emergency are different. So basically it sounds like she pulled the old reset button out. Sec. 3. (1) The governor is responsible for coping with dangers to this state or the people of this state presented by a disaster or emergency. (2) The governor may issue executive orders, proclamations, and directives having the force and effect of law to implement this act. Except as provided in section 7(2), an executive order, proclamation, or directive may be amended or rescinded by the governor. (3) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of disaster if he or she finds a disaster has occurred or the threat of a disaster exists. The state of disaster shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the disaster has been dealt with to the extent that disaster conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of disaster has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of disaster terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of disaster for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. An executive order or proclamation issued pursuant to this subsection shall indicate the nature of the disaster, the area or areas threatened, the conditions causing the disaster, and the conditions permitting the termination of the state of disaster. An executive order or proclamation shall be disseminated promptly by means calculated to bring its contents to the attention of the general public and shall be promptly filed with the emergency management division of the department and the secretary of state, unless circumstances attendant upon the disaster prevent or impede its prompt filing. (4) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of emergency if he or she finds that an emergency has occurred or that the threat of an emergency exists. The state of emergency shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the emergency has been dealt with to the extent that emergency conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of emergency has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of emergency terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of emergency for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. An executive order or proclamation issued pursuant to this subsection shall indicate the nature of the emergency, the area or areas threatened, the conditions causing the emergency, and the conditions permitting the termination of the state of emergency. An executive order or proclamation shall be disseminated promptly by means calculated to bring its contents to the attention of the general public and shall be promptly filed with the emergency management division of the department and the secretary of state, unless circumstances attendant upon the emergency prevent or impede its prompt filing. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT) Act 390 of 1976 Links to sections including descriptions DocumentTypeDescriptionSection 30.401SectionShort title.Sec. 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the “emergency management act”.Section 30.402SectionDefinitions.30.402 Definitions. Sec. 2. As used in this act: (a) “Chief executive official” means: (i) In the case of a county with an elected county executive, the county executive. (ii) In the case of a county without an elected county executive, the chairperson of the county board of commissioners, or the appointed administrator designated by appropriate enabling legislation. (iii) In the case of a city, the mayor or the individual specifically identified in the municipal charter. (iv) In the case of a township, the township supervisor. (v) In the case of a village, the village president or the individual specifically identified in the village charter. (b) “Council” means the Michigan emergency management advisory council. (c) “Department” means the department of state police. (d) “Director” or “state director of emergency management” means the director of the department of state police or his or her designee. (e) “Disaster” means an occurrence or threat of widespread or severe damage, injury, or loss of life or property resulting from a natural or human-made cause, including, but not limited to, fire, flood, snowstorm, ice storm, tornado, windstorm, wave action, oil spill, water contamination, utility failure, hazardous peacetime radiological incident, major transportation accident, hazardous materials incident, epidemic, air contamination, blight, drought, infestation, explosion, or hostile military action or paramilitary action, or similar occurrences resulting from terrorist activities, riots, or civil disorders. (f) “Disaster relief forces” means all agencies of state, county, and municipal government, private and volunteer personnel, public officers and employees, and all other persons or groups of persons having duties or responsibilities under this act or pursuant to a lawful order or directive authorized by this act. (g) “District coordinator” means the state police emergency management division district coordinator. (h) “Emergency” means any occasion or instance in which the governor determines state assistance is needed to supplement local efforts and capabilities to save lives, protect property and the public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the state. (i) “Emergency management coordinator” means a person appointed pursuant to section 9 to coordinate emergency management within the county or municipality. Emergency management coordinator includes a civil defense director, civil defense coordinator, emergency services coordinator, emergency program manager, or other person with a similar title and duties. (j) “Local state of emergency” means a proclamation or declaration that activates the response and recovery aspects of any and all applicable local or interjurisdictional emergency operations plans and authorizes the furnishing of aid, assistance, and directives under those plans. (k) “Michigan emergency management plan” means the plan prepared and maintained by the emergency management division of the department and signed by the governor. (l) “Municipality” means a city, village, or township. (m) “Person” means an individual, partnership, corporation, association, governmental entity, or any other entity. (n) “Political subdivision” means a county, municipality, school district, or any other governmental unit, agency, body, board, or commission which is not a state department, board, commission, or agency of state government. (o) “Rule” means a rule promulgated pursuant to the administrative procedures act of 1969, Act No. 306 of the Public Acts of 1969, being sections 24.201 to 24.328 of the Michigan Compiled Laws. (p) “State of disaster” means an executive order or proclamation that activates the disaster response and recovery aspects of the state, local, and interjurisdictional emergency operations plans applicable to the counties or municipalities affected. (q) “State of emergency” means an executive order or proclamation that activates the emergency response and recovery aspects of the state, local, and interjurisdictional emergency operations plans applicable to the counties or municipalities affected.Section 30.403SectionResponsibility of governor; executive orders, proclamations, and directives; declaration, duration, and termination of state of disaster or state of emergency; contents and dissemination of executive order or proclamation.30.403 Responsibility of governor; executive orders, proclamations, and directives; declaration, duration, and termination of state of disaster or state of emergency; contents and dissemination of executive order or proclamation. Sec. 3. (1) The governor is responsible for coping with dangers to this state or the people of this state presented by a disaster or emergency. (2) The governor may issue executive orders, proclamations, and directives having the force and effect of law to implement this act. Except as provided in section 7(2), an executive order, proclamation, or directive may be amended or rescinded by the governor. (3) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of disaster if he or she finds a disaster has occurred or the threat of a disaster exists. The state of disaster shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the disaster has been dealt with to the extent that disaster conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of disaster has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of disaster terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of disaster for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. An executive order or proclamation issued pursuant to this subsection shall indicate the nature of the disaster, the area or areas threatened, the conditions causing the disaster, and the conditions permitting the termination of the state of disaster. An executive order or proclamation shall be disseminated promptly by means calculated to bring its contents to the attention of the general public and shall be promptly filed with the emergency management division of the department and the secretary of state, unless circumstances attendant upon the disaster prevent or impede its prompt filing. (4) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of emergency if he or she finds that an emergency has occurred or that the threat of an emergency exists. The state of emergency shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the emergency has been dealt with to the extent that emergency conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of emergency has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of emergency terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of emergency for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. An executive order or proclamation issued pursuant to this subsection shall indicate the nature of the emergency, the area or areas threatened, the conditions causing the emergency, and the conditions permitting the termination of the state of emergency. An executive order or proclamation shall be disseminated promptly by means calculated to bring its contents to the attention of the general public and shall be promptly filed with the emergency management division of the department and the secretary of state, unless circumstances attendant upon the emergency prevent or impede its prompt filing. History: 1976, Act 390, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1976 ;– Am. 1990, Act 50, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1990 ;– Am. 2002, Act 132, Eff. May 1, 2002Section 30.404SectionEffect of executive order or proclamation of state of disaster or state of emergency; federal assistance; reciprocal aid agreement or compact; appropriation.30.404 Effect of executive order or proclamation of state of disaster or state of emergency; federal assistance; reciprocal aid agreement or compact; appropriation. Sec. 4. (1) An executive order or proclamation of a state of disaster or a state of emergency shall serve to authorize the deployment and use of any forces to which the plan or plans apply and the use or distribution of supplies, equipment, materials, or facilities assembled or stockpiled pursuant to this act. (2) Upon declaring a state of disaster or a state of emergency, the governor may seek and accept assistance, either financial or otherwise, from the federal government, pursuant to federal law or regulation. (3) The governor may, with the approval of the state administrative board, enter into a reciprocal aid agreement or compact with another state, the federal government, or a neighboring state or province of a foreign country. A reciprocal aid agreement shall be limited to the furnishing or exchange of food, clothing, medicine, and other supplies; engineering services; emergency housing; police services; the services of the national guard when not mobilized for federal service or state defense force as authorized by the Michigan military act, Act No. 150 of the Public Acts of 1967, as amended, being sections 32.501 to 32.851 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and subject to federal limitations on the crossing of national boundaries by organized military forces; health, medical, and related services; fire fighting, rescue, transportation, and construction services and equipment; personnel necessary to provide or conduct these services; and other necessary equipment, facilities, and services. A reciprocal aid agreement shall specify terms for the reimbursement of costs and expenses and conditions necessary for activating the agreement. The legislature shall appropriate funds to implement a reciprocal aid agreement. History: 1976, Act 390, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1976 ;– Am. 1990, Act 50, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1990Section 30.405SectionAdditional powers of governor; prohibition; disobeying or interfering with rule, order, or directive as misdemeanor.30.405 Additional powers of governor; prohibition; disobeying or interfering with rule, order, or directive as misdemeanor. Sec. 5. (1) In addition to the general authority granted to the governor by this act, the governor may, upon the declaration of a state of disaster or a state of emergency do 1 or more of the following (a) Suspend a regulatory statute, order, or rule prescribing the procedures for conduct of state business, when strict compliance with the statute, order, or rule would prevent, hinder, or delay necessary action in coping with the disaster or emergency. This power does not extend to the suspension of criminal process and procedures. (b) Utilize the available resources of the state and its political subdivisions, and those of the federal government made available to the state, as are reasonably necessary to cope with the disaster or emergency. (c) Transfer the direction, personnel, or functions of state departments, agencies, or units thereof for the purpose of performing or facilitating emergency management. (d) Subject to appropriate compensation, as authorized by the legislature, commandeer or utilize private property necessary to cope with the disaster or emergency. (e) Direct and compel the evacuation of all or part of the population from a stricken or threatened area within the state if necessary for the preservation of life or other mitigation, response, or recovery activities. (f) Prescribe routes, modes, and destination of transportation in connection with an evacuation. (g) Control ingress and egress to and from a stricken or threatened area, removal of persons within the area, and the occupancy of premises within the area. (h) Suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation of alcoholic beverages, explosives, and combustibles. (i) Provide for the availability and use of temporary emergency housing. (j) Direct all other actions which are necessary and appropriate under the circumstances. (2) Subsection (1) does not authorize the seizure, taking, or confiscation of lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition. (3) A person who willfully disobeys or interferes with the implementation of a rule, order, or directive issued by the governor pursuant to this section is guilty of a misdemeanor. History: 1976, Act 390, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1976 ;– Am. 1990, Act 50, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1990 ;– Am. 2006, Act 545, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 2006Section 30.406SectionObligation of person within state; compensation for services or property; record; claims; exceptions.30.406 Obligation of person within state; compensation for services or property; record; claims; exceptions. Sec. 6. (1) All persons within this state shall conduct themselves and manage their affairs and property in ways that will reasonably assist and will not unreasonably detract from the ability of the state and the public to cope with the effects of a disaster or an emergency. This obligation includes appropriate personal service and the use or restriction of the use of property in time of a disaster or an emergency. This act neither increases nor decreases these obligations but recognizes their existence under the state constitution of 1963, the statutes, and the common law. Compensation for services or for the taking or use of property shall be paid only if obligations recognized herein are exceeded in a particular case and only if the claimant has not volunteered his or her services or property without compensation. (2) Personal services may not be compensated by the state, or a subdivision or agency of the state, except pursuant to statute, local law, or ordinance. (3) Compensation for property shall be paid only if the property is taken or otherwise used in coping with a disaster or emergency and its use or destruction is ordered by the governor or the director. A record of all property taken or otherwise used under this act shall be made and promptly transmitted to the office of the governor. (4) A person claiming compensation for the use, damage, loss, or destruction of property under this act shall file a claim with the emergency management division of the department in the form and manner prescribed by the division. (5) If a claimant refuses to accept the amount of compensation offered by the state, a claim may be filed in the state court of claims which court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine the amount of compensation due the owner. (6) This section does not apply to or authorize compensation for either of the following: (a) The destruction or damaging of standing timber or other property to provide a firebreak. (b) The release of waters or the breach of impoundments to reduce pressure or other danger from actual or threatened flood.Section 30.407SectionPowers and duties of director.Section 30.407aSectionEmergency management division; establishment; purpose; employees; emergency management plan; grants; powers of division; definition.Section 30.408SectionEmergency management coordinator; employment or appointment; duties; annexes to emergency management plan; cooperation of state agencies.Section 30.409SectionEmergency management coordinator; appointment; duties; eligibility.Section 30.410SectionPowers of county and municipality; mutual aid or reciprocal aid agreements or compacts; assistance of emergency management coordinator.Section 30.411SectionPowers and duties of personnel of disaster relief forces; liability for personal injury or property damage; right to benefits or compensation; disaster relief workers; immunity; liability and legal obligation of persons owning or controlling real estate or other premises used for shelter; “gross negligence” defined.Section 30.411aSectionDisaster or emergency relief assistance provided by state employee; unpaid leave of absence; leave of absence with pay; conditions; limitation.Section 30.412SectionDisaster or emergency occurring in county or municipality; procedure; ordinances or rules.Section 30.413SectionRepealed. 1990, Act 50, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1990.Section 30.414SectionAssessment of disaster or emergency; findings and recommendations; notice; temporary assistance; action by governor.Section 30.415SectionRepealed. 2002, Act 132, Eff. May 1, 2002.Section 30.416SectionDeclaration of emergency or major disaster by president; federal grants; agreement pledging state’s share.Section 30.417SectionConstruction of act.Section 30.418SectionDisaster and emergency contingency fund; creation; administration; accounting; appropriation; carrying forward unexpended and unencumbered funds; expenditures; reimbursement; declaration; investment.Section 30.419SectionDisaster and emergency contingency fund; expenditures when federal assistance unavailable; application for grant; resolution; rules.Section 30.420SectionRepeal of MCL 30.221 to 30.233.Section 30.421SectionHeightened state of alert; cause; powers of governor; violation as misdemeanor; penalty; civil action; definitions.30.421 Heightened state of alert; cause; powers of governor; violation as misdemeanor; penalty; civil action; definitions. Sec. 21. (1) If good cause exists to believe that terrorists or members of a terrorist organization are within this state or that acts of terrorism may be committed in this state or against a vital resource, the governor may by executive order or proclamation declare a heightened state of alert and subsequently exercise the authority provided in section 3(2) and section 5(1)(b), (c), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j) in an effort to safeguard the interests of this state or a vital resource, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism, or to facilitate the apprehension of terrorists or members of a terrorist organization and those acting in concert with them. However, in exercising the authority under section 5(1)(h), the governor shall not suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation of alcoholic beverages under this section. Within 7 days after declaring a heightened state of alert, the governor shall notify the majority leader and minority leader of the senate and the speaker and minority leader of the house of representatives of the declaration. The governor may utilize the services, facilities, and resources available under this act under a declared state of disaster or emergency. The exercise of those powers shall be consistent with the provisions of the state constitution of 1963 and the federal constitution and may continue until the heightened state of alert is no longer in effect. The heightened state of alert shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the heightened state of alert has been dealt with to the extent that the heightened state of alert conditions no longer exist, or until the heightened state of alert has been in effect for 60 days. After 60 days, the governor shall terminate the heightened state of alert, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the heightened state of alert for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature. (2) A person shall not willfully disobey or interfere with the implementation of a rule, order, or directive issued by the governor under this section. A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $100.00, or both. Notwithstanding any provision in this section, a prosecuting agency shall not prosecute any person or seize any property for conduct presumptively protected by the first amendment to the constitution of the United States in a manner that violates any constitutional provision. (3) The attorney general or a prosecuting attorney may bring a civil action for damages or equitable relief to enforce the provisions of this act and the orders, rules, or regulations made in conformity with this act. (4) As used in this section: (a) “Act of terrorism” and “terrorist” mean those terms as defined in section 543b of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.543b. (b) “Terrorist organization” means that term as defined in section 543c of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.543c. (c) “Vital resource” means a public or private building, facility, property, function, or location, the protection of which is considered necessary to the public health, safety, and welfare and which the governor has designated, in writing, as a vital resource of this state. History: Add. 2002, Act 132, Eff. May 1, 2002Executive Orders What is an Executive Order?What is an Executive Order? The Michigan Constitution of 1963 vests the executive power of the state in the Governor. That power can be exercised formally by executive order. Executive orders may reorganize agencies within the executive branch of state government, reassign functions among executive branch agencies, create temporary agencies, establish an advisory body, commission, or task force, proclaim or end an emergency, or reduce expenditures authorized by appropriations. Once signed by the Governor, executive orders are filed with the Secretary of State, where the orders are sealed and retained by the Office of the Great Seal. Executive Order 2019-01 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-02Executive Order 2019-03Executive Order 2019-04 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-05Executive Order 2019-06Executive Order 2019-07Executive Order 2019-08Executive Order 2019-09Executive Order 2019-10Executive Order 2019-11 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-12 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-13Executive Order 2019-14Executive Order 2019-15Executive Order 2019-16Executive Order 2019-17 – Declaration of State of EmergencyExecutive Order 2019-18Executive Order 2019-19Executive Order 2020-01Executive Order 2020-04 – Declaration of State of Emergency (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-05 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-06 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-07 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-08 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-09 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-10 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-11 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-12 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-13 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-14 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-15 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-16 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-17 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-18 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-19 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-20 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-21 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-22 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-23 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-24 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-25 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-26 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-27 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-28 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-29 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-30 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-31 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-32 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-33 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-34 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-35 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-36 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-37 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-38 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-39 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-40 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-41 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-42 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-43 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-44 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-45 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-46 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-47 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-48 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-49 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-50 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-51 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-52 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-53 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-54 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-55 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-56 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-57 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-58 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-59 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-60 (COVID-19) – RescindedExecutive Order 2020-61 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-62 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-63 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-64 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-65 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-66 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-67 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-68 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-69 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-70 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-71 (COVID-19)Executive Order 2020-72 (COVID-19)current to 5-3-20 (Check for new ones here) SUBMIT AND OBEY…Unless you have some fight in you… Then call our office for a legal defense case evaluation 248-357-2550 Recent Posts THE EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR Act 302 of 1945 The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act MICHIGAN HOUSE BILL NO. 5709 Executive Order 2020-70 (COVID-19) US Supreme Court votes remotely to deny voters right to vote remotely The post The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
×
×
  • Create New...