Jump to content

KLAW Blog

Members
  • Content Count

    983
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by KLAW Blog

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. MICHIGAN HOUSE BILL NO. 5709 2020-04-30HousePassed; Given Immediate Effect Roll Call # 192 Yeas 62 Nays 38 Excused 0 Not Voting 9To revise the penalties in one of the two laws that authorize a governor to assume extraordinary powers during an emergency, including the statewide “lockdowns” ordered under the 2020 coronavirus epidemic. The current law makes violations “a misdemeanor,” and the bill would add a “civil infraction” provision and specify fines of either $250 for individuals, and up to $5,000 for businesses or other entities. This bill amends the state’s 1945 emergency declarations law; House Bill 5710 amends a 1976 law to make the same change. A bill to amend 1976 PA 390, entitled “Emergency management act,” by amending section 5 (MCL 30.405), as amended by 2006 PA 545. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT: 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 this state and its political subdivisions, and those of the federal government made available to the this 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 this 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 under this section is guilty of a misdemeanorresponsible for a state civil infraction even if that rule, order, or directive states that the violation constitutes a misdemeanor or state civil infraction. An individual who is responsible for a state civil infraction under this section may be ordered to pay a civil fine of not more than $100.00. A person other than an individual who is responsible for a state civil infraction under this section may be ordered to pay a civil fine of not more than $500.00. Sponsor Jason Sheppard (district 56) Categories State financing and management: other; State financing and management: authorities; Crimes: penalties; State financing and management; other; penalties for violations of the emergency management act; modify. Amends sec. 5 of 1976 PA 390 (MCL 30.405). History (House actions in lowercase, Senate actions in UPPERCASE) Date JournalAction4/16/2020HJ 32 Pg. 651introduced by Representative Jason Sheppard4/16/2020HJ 32 Pg. 651read a first time4/16/2020HJ 32 Pg. 651referred to Committee on Government Operations4/24/2020HJ 33 Pg. 679bill electronically reproduced 04/30/20204/30/2020Expected in HJ 36rule suspended4/30/2020Expected in HJ 36motion to discharge committee approved4/30/2020Expected in HJ 36placed on second reading4/30/2020HJ 36 Pg. 698read a second time4/30/2020HJ 36 Pg. 698amended4/30/2020HJ 36 Pg. 698placed on third reading4/30/2020HJ 36 Pg. 698placed on immediate passage4/30/2020Expected in HJ 36read a third time4/30/2020Expected in HJ 36passed; given immediate effect Roll Call # 192 Yeas 62 Nays 38 Excused 0 Not Voting 94/30/2020Expected in HJ 36transmitted The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act HB5709Emergency-Powers-of-Governor-Act-302-of-1945The Governor’s Power Under The Emergency Management Act 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 MICHIGAN HOUSE BILL NO. 5709 appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  9. From the National Governors’ Association Website Overview Governors, all of whom are popularly elected, serve as the chief executive officers of the fifty states and five commonwealths and territories. As state managers, governors are responsible for implementing state laws and overseeing the operation of the state executive branch. As state leaders, governors advance and pursue new and revised policies and programs using a variety of tools, among them executive orders, executive budgets, and legislative proposals and vetoes. Governors carry out their management and leadership responsibilities and objectives with the support and assistance of department and agency heads, many of whom they are empowered to appoint. A majority of governors have the authority to appoint state court judges as well, in most cases from a list of names submitted by a nominations committee. Although governors have many roles and responsibilities in common, the scope of gubernatorial power varies from state to state in accordance with state constitutions, legislation, and tradition, and governors often are ranked by political historians and other observers of state politics according to the number and extent of their powers. Ranking factors may include the following. Qualifications and tenureLegislative—including budget and veto—authorityAppointment sovereigntyAlthough not necessarily a ranking factor, the power to issue executive orders and take emergency actions is a significant gubernatorial responsibility that varies from state to state. Qualifications And Tenure Qualifications States, commonwealths, and territories vary with respect to minimum age, U.S. citizenship, and state residency requirements for gubernatorial candidates and office holders. The minimum age requirement for governors ranges from no formal provision to age 35. The requirement of U.S. citizenship for gubernatorial candidates ranges from no formal provision to 20 years. State residency requirements range from no formal provision to 7 years. Term Limits Gubernatorial terms are four years in every state, commonwealth, and territory but New Hampshire and Vermont, which have two year terms. All governors with the exception of Virginia’s may succeed themselves, although they may be limited to a specific number of consecutive or total terms. For state by state information on gubernatorial qualifications, see “The Governors: Qualifications for Office“(Table 4.2, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). For state by state information on gubernatorial term limits, see NGA’s Current Governors by State, Party, and Terms in Office, and “Constitutional and Statutory Provisions for Number of Consecutive Terms of Elected State Officials” (Table 4.9, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Vacancies/Succession In the event of a vacancy in office, the lieutenant governor is the designated official who succeeds the governor in 49 states and territories (in two of which—Tennessee and West Virginia—the president/speaker of the Senate and lieutenant governor are one and the same). In the remaining 5 states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, officials designated to succeed the governor include the secretary of state and leader of the senate. For state by state information on succession, see “The Governors” (Table 4.1, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). For more information on lieutenant governors and other executive branch officials, see the Appointment Power section below. Impeachment All states except Oregon provide for the impeachment of governors. As in the case of the federal government, the impeachment process starts with the lower body of the legislature and the trial is conducted by the upper body in every state but Alaska—where the process is reversed, and Nebraska, which has a unicameral legislature charged with the full impeachment process. In most cases, impeachment requires a majority of members, while conviction generally requires a two-thirds or other special majority. Should a governor be impeached, the lieutenant governor serves as acting governor in the vast majority of states. For state by state information on impeachment, see “Impeachment Provisions in the States” (Table 4.8, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). For more information on lieutenant governors, see the Appointment Power section below. Legislative Role Governors play two broad roles in relation to state legislatures. First, they may be empowered to call special legislative sessions, provided in most cases that the purpose and agenda for the sessions are set in advance. Second, and more familiarly, governors coordinate and work with state legislatures in: approval of state budgets and appropriations;enactment of state legislation;confirmation of executive and judicial appointments; andlegislative oversight of executive branch functions.Approval Of State Budgets And Appropriations Governors develop and submit annual or biennial budgets for review and approval by the legislature. In a number of states, commonwealths, and territories, governors also have “reduction”—most often referred to as “line-item”—veto power that can be used for the removal of appropriations to which they object. These tools allow governors and their budget staff to play a strong role in establishing priorities for the use of state resources. For state by state information on gubernatorial budget making and line-item veto power, see “The Governors: Powers” (Table 4.4, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Enactment Of Legislation Governors often use State of the State messages to outline their legislative platforms, and many governors prepare specific legislative proposals to be introduced on their behalf. In addition, state departments and agencies may pursue legislative initiatives with gubernatorial approval. Executive branch officials often are called to testify on legislative proposals, and governors and other executive branch leaders will seek to mobilize public opinion and interest groups in favor of or opposition to specific legislative proposals. Governors may use their role as party leaders to encourage support for legislative initiatives, and along with department heads and staff may seek to influence the progress of legislation through regular meetings with legislators and legislative officials. Veto Power All 50 state governors have the power to veto whole legislative measures. In a large majority of states a bill will become law unless it is vetoed by the governor within a specified number of days, which vary among states. In a smaller number of states, bills will die (pocket veto) unless they are formally signed by the governor, also within a specified number of days. Other types of vetoes available to the governors of some states include “line-item” (by which a governor can strike a general item from a piece of legislation), “reduction” (by which a governor can delete a budget item), and “amendatory” (by which a governor can revise legislation). Legislatures may override vetoes, usually by a supermajority vote. For state by state information about veto powers, see “The Governors: Powers” (Table 4.4, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments) and “Enacting Legislation: Veto, Veto Override and Effective Date” (Table 3.16, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Confirmation Of Appointments Many gubernatorial appointments require legislative confirmation. For additional information, see the Appointment Power section below as well as “Selected State Administrative Officials: Methods of Selection” (Table 4.10, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Legislative Oversight Governors interact with their legislatures to help ensure that their priorities, goals, and accomplishments are accurately presented and positively received during oversight hearings and other legislative activities that address and evaluate executive branch implementation of legislatively mandated programs and services. Appointment Power Gubernatorial Appointments – Overview Most governors have broad authority to nominate officials to serve in state executive branch positions—many of whom will be included in the governor’s advisory committee, known as the “cabinet.” Governors may be empowered as well to make appointments to state judgeships. Frequently, these appointments are subject to confirmation by one or both houses of the state legislature. While often pro forma in nature, the confirmation process with respect to executive branch appointments can be used by legislatures to expand their influence on governors and their policies. Accordingly, many governors consult with key legislators before making formal nominations. For state by state information on the methods of selecting state officials, see “Selected State Administrative Officials: Methods of Selection” (Table 4.10, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Boards And Commissions The roles played by boards and commissions vary considerably by state and by program. In some states appointed boards have the primary responsibility for individual programs and agencies and are responsible for the selection of department and agency heads. This is particularly true in the field of education, but boards still retain responsibility for a broad range of other programs in fields such as labor, transportation and health and human services. In many states the members of these boards are named or nominated by the governor. And in many of these cases, board members are subject to confirmation by one or both houses of the legislature. Other boards play more limited regulatory or advisory roles. In most states boards oversee the licensing and regulation of numerous professions and business areas. In other states they advise the governor on areas of importance such as the environment and economic development. While the elimination and/or consolidation of boards and commissions is a common focus of government efficiency and government reorganization initiatives, they still play a prominent role in state government, providing opportunities to address the concerns of special interests and to reward political supporters. Executive Branch Positions Independently Selected A large number of states provide for the independent selection of certain executive branch positions. Most noteworthy among these positions are lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, and treasurer. The position of lieutenant governor exists in the overwhelming majority of states, where the position is most often filled by popular statewide election and jointly with the governor, although in a small number of cases the role of lieutenant governor is assigned by state law to another position in either the executive or legislative branch (e.g., secretary of state or leader of the senate). The positions of secretary of state, attorney general, and treasurer are all subject to statewide popular election in the majority of states, and at least one of the three is elected in most of the remaining states. Governors generally have limited authority in the appointment of state comptrollers and pre and post audit department heads. Governors’ appointment powers are also limited with regard to the heads of state education and higher education agencies. The education department head is independently elected statewide in 14 states and is appointed—independent of gubernatorial approval—by a board or agency head in 20 states and two territories. In most states and territories, the higher education head is appointed by a board independent of gubernatorial approval. A number of states also provide for the statewide election of one or more other department heads, among them public utility regulators and the heads of agriculture, labor, and natural resources departments. As with governors, other statewide elected positions may be subject to age, citizenship, and state residency requirements, as well as term limits. For state by state data on the joint election of governors and lieutenant governors, see “The Governors” (Table 4.1, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). For state by state information on the methods of selecting state officials, see “Selected State Administrative Officials: Methods of Selection” (Table 4.10, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). For state by state information on eligibility requirements for state officials, see “Constitutional and Statutory Provisions for Number of Consecutive Terms of Elected State Officials” (Table 4.9, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Cabinets State cabinets, which serve as advisory councils to the nation’s governors, generally are made up of officials appointed by the governor to head state departments and agencies, and in some cases top-level staff in the governor’s immediate office. In most states the cabinet fulfills two functions: advises the governor on the development of policy; andserves as a vehicle for the governor or senior staff to convey priorities to gubernatorial appointees and address cross-agency issues or concerns.In a number of states, governors have created sub-cabinets to bring together agencies to address issues such as the needs of children. Forty-four states and all of the commonwealths and territories have cabinets and/or sub-cabinets. Cabinets themselves may have their origin in law, tradition, and/or the governor’s discretion. Cabinet membership may be a product of appointment to a specific office or be subject to selection by the governor. Cabinet size, and the frequency of cabinet meetings and formality and extent to which a governor uses his or her cabinet for advice and assistance, varies among the states, commonwealths, and territories. For state by state information on cabinets, see “State Cabinet Systems” (Table 4.6, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Executive Orders The authority for governors to issue executive orders is found in state constitutions and statutes as well as case law, or is implied by the powers assigned to state chief executives. Governors use executive orders—certain of which are subject to legislative review in some states—for a variety of purposes, among them to: trigger emergency powers during natural disasters, energy crises, and other situations requiring immediate attention;create advisory, coordinating, study, or investigative committees or commissions; andaddress management and administrative issues such as regulatory reform, environmental impact, hiring freezes, discrimination, and intergovernmental coordination.For state by state information on the power of governors to issue executive orders, see “Gubernatorial Executive Orders: Authorization, Provisions, Procedures” (Table 4.5, The Book of the States 2019, source: The Council of State Governments). Emergency Powers As chief executive, governors are responsible for ensuring their state is adequately prepared for emergencies and disasters of all types and sizes. Most emergencies and disasters are handled at the local level, and few require a presidential disaster declaration or attract worldwide media attention. Yet governors must be as prepared for day-to-day events—tornadoes, floods, power outages, industrial fires, and hazardous materials spills—as for catastrophes on the scale of Hurricane Katrina or the September 11 terrorist attacks. States focus on four stages of disaster or emergency management: PreparePreventRespondRecoverThese components afford a useful rubric for thinking about the cycle of disasters and emergencies and for organizing recommendations for state action. During an emergency, the governor also plays a key role in communicating with the public during an emergency, providing advice and instructions and maintaining calm and public order. State emergency management laws usually define how a governor may declare and end a state of emergency. In some cases, the necessary response to a disaster is beyond the capacity of state and local governments. A state may petition the President to declare a major disaster. The declaration of a major disaster triggers a variety of federal programs depending on the scope of the disaster and the type of losses experienced. There is much more to explore here 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 GOVERNORS’ POWERS & AUTHORITY appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  10. DeRUITER v TOWNSHIP OF BYRON Chief Justice: Bridget M. McCormack Chief Justice Pro Tem: David F. Viviano Justices: Stephen J. Markman, Brian K. Zahra, Richard H. Bernstein, Elizabeth T. Clement, Megan K. Cavanagh Reporter of Decisions: Kathryn L. Loomis Docket No. 158311. Argued on application for leave to appeal October 3, 2019. Decided April 27, 2020. Syllabus Christie DeRuiter, a registered qualifying medical marijuana patient and a registered primary caregiver to qualifying patients, brought an action in the Kent Circuit Court against Byron Township, alleging that the township’s zoning ordinance which required that a primary caregiver obtain a permit before cultivating medical marijuana and that the caregiver cultivate the marijuana within a dwelling or garage in a residentially zoned area within the township as part of a regulated home occupation at a full-time residence directly conflicted with – and – was therefore preempted by the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (the MMMA), MCL 333.26421 et seq. DeRuiter cultivated marijuana in an enclosed, locked facility at a commercially zoned property she rented in the township; she did not obtain a permit from the township before cultivating the medical marijuana as a primary caregiver. At the township’s direction, DeRuiter’s landlord ordered her to stop cultivating medical marijuana at the property or face legal action. When the township attempted to enforce its zoning ordinance, DeRuiter filed the instant action, seeking a declaratory judgment regarding the ordinance’s legality; the township countersued, seeking a declaration that the ordinance did not conflict with the MMMA. Both parties moved for summary disposition, and the court, Paul J. Sullivan, J., granted summary disposition in favor of DeRuiter, holding that the ordinance directly conflicted with the MMMA and that it was therefore preempted by the act. The Court of Appeals, HOEKSTRA, P.J., and MURPHY and MARKEY, JJ., affirmed the trial court order, concluding that the MMMA preempted defendant’s home-occupation zoning ordinance because the ordinance directly conflicted with the MMMA by prohibiting what the MMMA permitted and because the ordinance improperly imposed regulations and penalties upon persons who engage in the MMMA-compliant medical use of marijuana. 325 Mich App 275 (2018). Byron Township applied for leave to appeal in the Supreme Court, which ordered and heard oral argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. 503 Mich 942 (2019). In a unanimous opinion by Justice BERNSTEIN, the Supreme Court, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, held: Under the conflict-preemption doctrine, the MMMA DOES NOT nullify a municipality’s inherent authority to regulate land use under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MZEA), MCL 125.3101 et seq., as long as (1) the municipality does not prohibit or penalize the cultivation of medical marijuana and (2) the municipality does not impose regulations that are unreasonable inconsistent with regulations established by state law. MCL 333.26424(b)(2) states that primary caregivers and qualifying patients must keep their plants in an enclosed, locked facility in order for those individuals to be entitled to the MMMA protections in MCL 333.26424(a) and (b). Because an enclosed, locked facility may be found in various locations on various types of property, the township’s ordinance limiting where medical marijuana must be cultivated within the locality did not directly conflict with the MMMA’s requirement that marijuana plants be kept in an enclosed, locked facility. The township’s ordinance requiring primary caregivers to obtain a permit and pay a fee before using a building or structure within the township to cultivate medical marijuana also did not directly conflict with the MMMA because the ordinance did not effectively prohibit the medical use of marijuana. Generally, local governments may control and regulate matters of local concern when that power is conferred by the state.However, state law may preempt a local regulation either expressly or by implication. Implied preemption can occur when the state has occupied the entire field of regulation in a certain area (field preemption) or when a local regulation directly conflicts with state law (conflict preemption). A direct conflict exists when the ordinance permits what the statute prohibits or the ordinance prohibits what the statute permits; there is no conflict between state and local law when a locality enacts regulations that are not unreasonable and inconsistent with regulations established by state law so long as the state regulatory scheme does not occupy the field. That is, while a local ordinance is preempted when it bans an activity that is authorized and regulated by state law, a local governmental unit may add to the conditions in a statute as long as the additional requirements do not contradict the requirements set forth in the statute. A court must review both the statute and the local ordinance to determine whether conflict preemption applies. MCL 333.26424(a) and (b) provide that qualifying patients and primary caregivers are immune from arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, including, but not limited to, civil penalty or disciplinary action for the medical use of marijuana in accordance with the MMMA.In turn, MCL 333.26424(b)(2) provides that primary caregivers and qualifying patients must keep their plants in an enclosed, locked facility in order to qualify for the immunity. This requirement sets forth the type of structure marijuana plants must be kept and grown in for a patient or a caregiver to be entitled to the MMMA protections in MCL 333.26424(a) and (b), but the provision does not address where marijuana may be grown. Under Ter Beek v City of Wyoming, 495 Mich 1 (2014), a local ordinance conflicts with the MMMA when the ordinance results in a complete prohibition of the medical use of marijuana; however, The MMMA does not foreclose all local regulation of marijuana. In that regard, the act does not nullify a municipality’s inherent authority to regulate land use under the MZEA as long as (1) the municipality does not prohibit or penalize the cultivation of medical marijuana and (2) the municipality does not impose regulations that are unreasonable and inconsistent with regulations established by state law. Because an enclosed, locked facility may be found in various locations on various types of property, a local regulation limiting where medical marijuana must be cultivated within a locality does not conflict with the statutory requirement that marijuana plants be kept in an enclosed, locked facility. In this case, the township’s ordinance allowed for the medical use of marijuana by a registered primary caregiver but placed limitations on where the caregiver could cultivate marijuana within the township. The ordinance’s geographical restriction added to and complemented the limitations imposed by the MMMA; it did not directly conflict with the MMMA. While the ordinance went further in its regulation than the MMMA, the township appropriately used its authority under the MZEA to craft an ordinance that did not directly conflict with the MMMA’s provision requiring that marijuana be cultivated in an enclosed, locked facility. The township also had authority under the MZEA to require zoning permits and permit fees for the use of buildings and structures within its jurisdiction. The township’s ordinance requiring primary caregivers to obtain a permit and pay a fee before using a building or structure within the township to cultivate medical marijuana did not directly conflict with the MMMA because the ordinance did not effectively prohibit the medical use of marijuana, and DeRuiter did not argue that the requirements for obtaining a permit were so unreasonable as to create a conflict. To the extent that DeRuiter argued that the immunity provisions of the MMMA contributed to a blanket prohibition on local governments regulating the medical use of marijuana with respect to time, place, and manner of such use, that argument sounded in field preemption; but neither the trial court nor the Court of Appeals reached the issue of field preemption, and DeRuiter conceded that her appeal did not concern the issue of field preemption. The Court of Appeals erred by affirming the trial court’s grant of summary disposition in favor of DeRuiter. Reversed and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. See the Syllabus and Michigan Supreme Court Opinion If you are medical marijuana patient or caregiver facing any type of legal action contact attorney Michael Komorn. The Komorn Law firm has a long history of fighting for the rights of medical marijuana patients and caregivers. Visit Our Website KomornLaw.com or Call Our Office 248-357-2550 Recent Posts Michigan Supreme Court Opinion regarding MMMA caregivers and local ordinances EPIDIOLEX® (cannabidiol) Oral Solution Has Been Descheduled And Is No Longer A Controlled Substance The FDA recognizes the opportunities that cannabis and CBD Charlotte Figi, the Colorado girl who inspired the CBD movement, dies following illness suspected to be coronavirus Prosecutor Eric Smith Charged With Conducting Criminal Enterprise The post Michigan Supreme Court Opinion regarding MMMA caregivers and local ordinances appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  11. April 06, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — GW Pharmaceuticals announced today that it had received notification from the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) confirming that EPIDIOLEX® (cannabidiol) is no longer subject to the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This change takes effect immediately. “This notification from DEA fully establishes that EPIDIOLEX, the only CBD medicine approved by FDA, is no longer a controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act,” said Justin Gover, GW’s Chief Executive Officer. “We would like to thank DEA for confirming the non-controlled status of this medicine. Importantly, the descheduling of EPIDIOLEX has the potential to further ease patient access to this important therapy for patients living with Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome and Dravet syndrome, two of the most debilitating forms of epilepsy.” EPIDIOLEX, which was launched in the United States on November 1, 2018 after approval by FDA for the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (LGS) or Dravet syndrome in patients two years of age or older, is the first prescription pharmaceutical formulation of highly purified, plant-derived cannabidiol (CBD), and the first in a new category of anti-epileptic drugs. Following FDA approval, EPIDIOLEX was initially placed in Schedule V of the CSA. Following receipt of this DEA notification, GW has filed a post-approval supplement with FDA to remove Schedule V designation from EPIDIOLEX. DEA’s letter means that all federal controlled-substance restrictions have been removed for EPIDIOLEX. The Company will now begin the process of implementing these changes at the state level and through the EPIDIOLEX distribution network. Once this process is completed in each state, prescriptions for EPIDIOLEX, like other non-controlled medicines, will be valid for one year and can be easily transferred between pharmacies. The descheduling of EPIDIOLEX also enables physicians to prescribe this breakthrough medicine free of the requirements of state prescription drug monitoring programs. Descheduling will enable prescribing free of the previous Schedule V requirements How Much Does It Cost? https://www.drugs.com/price-guide/epidiolex Recent Posts EPIDIOLEX® (cannabidiol) Oral Solution Has Been Descheduled And Is No Longer A Controlled Substance The FDA recognizes the opportunities that cannabis and CBD Charlotte Figi, the Colorado girl who inspired the CBD movement, dies following illness suspected to be coronavirus Prosecutor Eric Smith Charged With Conducting Criminal Enterprise IRS report predicts national rise in cannabis industry tax audits. The post EPIDIOLEX® (cannabidiol) Oral Solution Has Been Descheduled And Is No Longer A Controlled Substance appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  12. There is a significant interest in the development of therapies and other consumer products derived from cannabis and its components, including cannabidiol (CBD). FDA recognizes the potential opportunities that cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds may offer and acknowledges the significant interest in these possibilities. However, FDA is aware that some companies are marketing products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds in ways that violate the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and that may put the health and safety of consumers at risk. The agency is committed to protecting the public health while also taking steps to improve the efficiency of regulatory pathways for the lawful marketing of appropriate cannabis and cannabis-derived products. FDA has a number of resources available that address cannabis and cannabis-derived products, such as CBD, and the agency wants to ensure that consumers and other stakeholders have access to these resources in a centralized location. Consumer Information What You Need to Know (And What We’re Working to Find Out) About Products Containing Cannabis or Cannabis-derived Compounds, Including CBD What You Should Know About Using Cannabis, Including CBD, When Pregnant or Breastfeeding Some Medicines and Driving Don’t Mix FDA Communications FDA Advances Work Related to Cannabidiol Products with Focus on Protecting Public Health, Providing Market Clarity Congressional Testimony: Cannabis Policies for the New Decade Archived VideoExternal Link Disclaimer FDA warns 15 companies for illegally selling various products containing cannabidiol as agency details safety concerns Remarks at the Council for Responsible Nutrition Conference Remarks at the National Industrial Hemp Council 2019 Hemp Business Summit FDA, FTC warn company marketing unapproved cannabidiol products with unsubstantiated claims to treat teething and ear pain in infants, autism, ADHD, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease Congressional Testimony: Hemp Production and the 2018 Farm BillArchived Video FDA is Committed to Sound, Science-based Policy on CBD Remarks at the FDA Public Hearing on Scientific Data and Information about Products Containing Cannabis or Cannabis-Derived Compounds Statement on new steps to advance agency’s continued evaluation of potential regulatory pathways for cannabis-containing and cannabis-derived products Statement on signing of the Agriculture Improvement Act and the agency’s regulation of products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds Statement on the importance of conducting proper research to prove safe and effective medical uses for the active chemicals in marijuana and its components FDA approves first drug comprised of an active ingredient derived from marijuana to treat rare, severe forms of epilepsy Regulatory Resources Information on CBD Data Collection and Submission FDA and Cannabis: Research and Drug Approval Process FDA Regulation of Dietary Supplement & Conventional Food Products Containing Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Compounds Scientific Data and Information about Products Containing Cannabis or Cannabis-Derived Compounds; Public HearingFederal Register Notice Public Hearing Page Public Docket Warning Letters and Test Results for Cannabidiol-Related Products State, Local, Tribal, Territorial (SLTT) Regulatory Officials: FDA is committed to working with our SLTT public health regulatory partners as developments occur in the regulatory landscape. Please contact the Intergovernmental Affairs team with any questions at IGA@fda.hhs.gov. Questions and Answers Below are a number of frequently asked questions and answers on this topic. What are cannabis and marijuana? How does the 2018 Farm Bill define hemp? What does it mean for FDA-regulated products? Has FDA approved any medical products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds such as CBD? Aside from Epidiolex, are there other CBD drug products that are FDA-approved? What about the products I’ve seen in stores or online? Why hasn’t FDA approved more products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds for medical uses? What is FDA’s reaction to states that are allowing cannabis to be sold for medical uses without the FDA’s approval? Has the agency received any adverse event reports associated with cannabis use for medical conditions? Is it legal for me to sell CBD products? Can THC or CBD products be sold as dietary supplements? Is it legal, in interstate commerce, to sell a food (including any animal food or feed) to which THC or CBD has been added? In making the two previous determinations about THC, why did FDA conclude that THC is an active ingredient in a drug product that has been approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act? In making the two previous determinations about CBD, why did FDA determine that substantial clinical investigations have been authorized for and/or instituted, and that the existence of such investigations has been made public? Can hulled hemp seed, hemp seed protein powder, and hemp seed oil be used in human food? What is FDA’s position on cannabis and cannabis-derived ingredients in cosmetics? Will FDA take action against cannabis or cannabis-related products that are in violation of the FD&C Act? Can I import or export cannabis-containing or cannabis-derived products? What is FDA’s role when it comes to the investigation of cannabis and cannabis-derived products for medical use? Does the FDA object to the clinical investigation of cannabis for medical use? How can patients gain access to cannabis or cannabis-derived products for medical use through expanded access? Can patients gain access to cannabis or cannabis-derived products for medical use through Right to Try? Does the FDA have concerns about administering a cannabis product to children? Does the FDA have concerns about administering a cannabis product to pregnant and lactating women? What does the FDA think about making CBD available to children with epilepsy? What should I do if my child eats something containing cannabis? I’ve seen cannabis products being marketed for pets. Are they safe? Can hemp be added to animal food? Can approved human drugs containing CBD or synthetic THC be used extralabel in animals? 1. What are cannabis and marijuana? A. Cannabis is a plant of the Cannabaceae family and contains more than eighty biologically active chemical compounds. The most commonly known compounds are delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD). Parts of the Cannabis sativa plant have been controlled under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) since 1970 under the drug class “Marihuana” (commonly referred to as “marijuana”) [21 U.S.C. 802(16)]. “Marihuana” is listed in Schedule I of the CSA due to its high potential for abuse, which is attributable in large part to the psychoactive effects of THC, and the absence of a currently accepted medical use of the plant in the United States. 2. How does the 2018 Farm Bill define hemp? What does it mean for FDA-regulated products? A. At the federal level, the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, Pub. L. 115-334, (the 2018 Farm Bill) was signed into law on Dec. 20, 2018. Among other things, this new law changes certain federal authorities relating to the production and marketing of hemp, defined as “the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.” These changes include removing hemp from the CSA, which means that cannabis plants and derivatives that contain no more than 0.3 percent THC on a dry weight basis are no longer controlled substances under federal law. The 2018 Farm Bill, however, explicitly preserved FDA’s authority to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the FD&C Act and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act). FDA treats products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds as it does any other FDA-regulated products — meaning they’re subject to the same authorities and requirements as FDA-regulated products containing any other substance. This is true regardless of whether the cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds are classified as hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill. 3. Has FDA approved any medical products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds such as CBD? A. To date, the agency has not approved a marketing application for cannabis for the treatment of any disease or condition. FDA has, however, approved one cannabis-derived and three cannabis-related drug products. These approved products are only available with a prescription from a licensed healthcare provider. FDA has approved Epidiolex, which contains a purified form of the drug substance CBD for the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome or Dravet syndrome in patients 2 years of age and older. That means FDA has concluded that this particular drug product is safe and effective for its intended use. The agency also has approved Marinol and Syndros for therapeutic uses in the United States, including for the treatment of anorexia associated with weight loss in AIDS patients. Marinol and Syndros include the active ingredient dronabinol, a synthetic delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) which is considered the psychoactive component of cannabis. Another FDA-approved drug, Cesamet, contains the active ingredient nabilone, which has a chemical structure similar to THC and is synthetically derived. 4. Aside from Epidiolex, are there other CBD drug products that are FDA-approved? What about the products I’ve seen in stores or online? A. No. There are no other FDA-approved drug products that contain CBD. We are aware that some firms are marketing CBD products to treat diseases or for other therapeutic uses , and we have issued several warning letters to such firms. Under the FD&C Act, any product intended to have a therapeutic or medical use, and any product (other than a food) that is intended to affect the structure or function of the body of humans or animals, is a drug. Drugs must generally either receive premarket approval by FDA through the New Drug Application (NDA) process or conform to a “monograph” for a particular drug category, as established by FDA’s Over-the-Counter (OTC) Drug Review. CBD was not an ingredient considered under the OTC drug review. An unapproved new drug cannot be distributed or sold in interstate commerce. FDA continues to be concerned at the proliferation of products asserting to contain CBD that are marketed for therapeutic or medical uses although they have not been approved by FDA. Often such products are sold online and are therefore available throughout the country. Selling unapproved products with unsubstantiated therapeutic claims is not only a violation of the law, but also can put patients at risk, as these products have not been proven to be safe or effective. This deceptive marketing of unproven treatments also raises significant public health concerns, because patients and other consumers may be influenced not to use approved therapies to treat serious and even fatal diseases. Unlike drugs approved by FDA, products that have not been subject to FDA review as part of the drug approval process have not been evaluated as to whether they work, what the proper dosage may be if they do work, how they could interact with other drugs, or whether they have dangerous side effects or other safety concerns. The agency has and will continue to monitor the marketplace and take action as needed to protect the public health against companies illegally selling cannabis and cannabis-derived products that can put consumers at risk and that are being marketed for therapeutic uses for which they are not approved. At the same time, FDA recognizes the potential therapeutic opportunities that cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds could offer and acknowledges the significant interest in these possibilities. FDA continues to believe that the drug approval process represents the best way to help ensure that safe and effective new medicines, including any drugs derived from cannabis, are available to patients in need of appropriate medical therapy. The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is committed to supporting the development of new drugs, including cannabis and cannabis-derived drugs, through the investigational new drug (IND) and drug approval process (see Question #16). 5. Why hasn’t FDA approved more products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds for medical uses? A. FDA is aware that unapproved cannabis or cannabis-derived products are being used for the treatment of a number of medical conditions including, for example, AIDS wasting, epilepsy, neuropathic pain, spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis, and cancer and chemotherapy-induced nausea. To date, FDA has not approved a marketing application for cannabis for the treatment of any disease or condition and thus has not determined that cannabis is safe and effective for any particular disease or condition. The agency has, however, approved one cannabis-derived and three cannabis-related drug products (see Question #2). FDA relies on applicants and scientific investigators to conduct research. The agency’s role, as laid out in the FD&C Act, is to review data submitted to the FDA in an application for approval to ensure that the drug product meets the statutory standards for approval. The study of cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds in clinical trial settings is needed to assess the safety and effectiveness of these substances for the treatment of any disease or condition. FDA’s December 2016 Guidance for Industry: Botanical Drug Development provides specific recommendations on submitting INDs for botanical drug products, such as those derived from cannabis, in support of future marketing applications for these products. The FDA will continue to facilitate the work of companies interested in appropriately bringing safe, effective, and quality products to market, including scientifically-based research concerning the medicinal uses of cannabis. Additional information concerning research on the medical use of cannabis is available from the National Institutes of Health, particularly the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). 6. What is FDA’s reaction to states that are allowing cannabis to be sold for medical uses without the FDA’s approval? A. The FDA is aware that several states have either passed laws that remove state restrictions on the medical use of cannabis and its derivatives or are considering doing so. It is important to conduct medical research into the safety and effectiveness of cannabis products through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials. We welcome the opportunity to talk with states who are considering support for medical research of cannabis and its derivatives, so that we can provide information on Federal and scientific standards. 7. Has the agency received any adverse event reports associated with cannabis use for medical conditions? A. The agency has received reports of adverse events in patients using cannabis or cannabis-derived products to treat medical conditions. The FDA reviews such reports and will continue to monitor adverse event reports for any safety signals, with a focus on serious adverse effects. Information from adverse event reports regarding cannabis use is extremely limited; FDA primarily receives adverse event reports for approved products. General information on the potential adverse effects of using cannabis and its constituents can come from clinical trials that have been published, as well as from spontaneously reported adverse events sent to the FDA. Additional information about the safety and effectiveness of cannabis and its constituents is needed. Clinical trials of cannabis conducted under an IND application could collect this important information as a part of the drug development process. 8. Is it legal for me to sell CBD products? A. It depends, among other things, on the intended use of the product and how it is labeled and marketed. Even if a CBD product meets the definition of “hemp” under the 2018 Farm Bill (see Question #2), it still must comply with all other applicable laws, including the FD&C Act. The below questions and answers explain some of the ways that specific parts of the FD&C Act can affect the legality of CBD products. We are aware that state and local authorities are fielding numerous questions about the legality of CBD. There is ongoing communication with state and local officials to answer questions about requirements under the FD&C Act, to better understand the landscape at the state level, and to otherwise engage with state/local regulatory partners. 9. Can THC or CBD products be sold as dietary supplements? A. No. Based on available evidence, FDA has concluded that THC and CBD products are excluded from the dietary supplement definition under section 201(ff)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(ff)(3)(B)]. Under that provision, if a substance (such as THC or CBD) is an active ingredient in a drug product that has been approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 355], or has been authorized for investigation as a new drug for which substantial clinical investigations have been instituted and for which the existence of such investigations has been made public, then products containing that substance are excluded from the definition of a dietary supplement. FDA considers a substance to be “authorized for investigation as a new drug” if it is the subject of an Investigational New Drug application (IND) that has gone into effect. Under FDA’s regulations (21 CFR 312.2), unless a clinical investigation meets the limited criteria in that regulation, an IND is required for all clinical investigations of products that are subject to section 505 of the FD&C Act. There is an exception to section 201(ff)(3)(B) if the substance was “marketed as” a dietary supplement or as a conventional food before the drug was approved or before the new drug investigations were authorized, as applicable. However, based on available evidence, FDA has concluded that this is not the case for THC or CBD. FDA is not aware of any evidence that would call into question its current conclusions that THC and CBD products are excluded from the dietary supplement definition under section 201(ff)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act. Interested parties may present the agency with any evidence that they think has bearing on this issue. Our continuing review of information that has been submitted thus far has not caused us to change our conclusions. When a substance is excluded from the dietary supplement definition under section 201(ff)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act, the exclusion applies unless FDA, in the agency’s discretion, has issued a regulation, after notice and comment, finding that the article would be lawful under the FD&C Act. To date, no such regulation has been issued for any substance. Ingredients that are derived from parts of the cannabis plant that do not contain THC or CBD might fall outside the scope of this exclusion, and therefore might be able to be marketed as dietary supplements. However, all products marketed as dietary supplements must comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing dietary supplement products. For example, manufacturers and distributors who wish to market dietary supplements that contain “new dietary ingredients” (i.e., dietary ingredients that were not marketed in the United States in a dietary supplement before October 15, 1994) generally must notify FDA about these ingredients (see section 413(d) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 350b(d)]). Generally, the notification must include information demonstrating that a dietary supplement containing the new dietary ingredient will reasonably be expected to be safe under the conditions of use recommended or suggested in the labeling. A dietary supplement is adulterated if it contains a new dietary ingredient for which there is inadequate information to provide reasonable assurance that the ingredient does not present a significant or unreasonable risk of illness or injury (see section 402(f)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. 342(f)(1)(B)]). Numerous other legal requirements apply to dietary supplement products, including requirements relating to Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs) and labeling. Information about these requirements, and about FDA requirements across all product areas, can be found on FDA’s website. 10. Is it legal, in interstate commerce, to sell a food (including any animal food or feed) to which THC or CBD has been added? A. No. Under section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 331(ll)], it is prohibited to introduce or deliver for introduction into interstate commerce any food (including any animal food or feed) to which has been added a substance which is an active ingredient in a drug product that has been approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 355], or a drug for which substantial clinical investigations have been instituted and for which the existence of such investigations has been made public. There are exceptions, including when the drug was marketed in food before the drug was approved or before the substantial clinical investigations involving the drug had been instituted or, in the case of animal feed, that the drug is a new animal drug approved for use in feed and used according to the approved labeling. However, based on available evidence, FDA has concluded that none of these is the case for THC or CBD. FDA has therefore concluded that it is a prohibited act to introduce or deliver for introduction into interstate commerce any food (including any animal food or feed) to which THC or CBD has been added. FDA is not aware of any evidence that would call into question these conclusions. Interested parties may present the agency with any evidence that they think has bearing on this issue. Our continuing review of information that has been submitted thus far has not caused us to change our conclusions. When this statutory prohibition applies to a substance, it prohibits the introduction into interstate commerce of any food to which the substance has been added unless FDA, in the agency’s discretion, has issued a regulation approving the use of the substance in the food (section 301(ll)(2) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 331(ll)(2)]). To date, no such regulation has been issued for any substance. Ingredients that are derived from parts of the cannabis plant that do not contain THC or CBD might fall outside the scope of 301(ll), and therefore might be able to be added to food. For example, as discussed in Question #12, certain hemp seed ingredients can be legally marketed in human food. However, all food ingredients must comply with all applicable laws and regulations. For example, by statute, any substance intentionally added to food is a food additive, and therefore subject to premarket review and approval by FDA, unless the substance is generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by qualified experts under the conditions of its intended use, or the use of the substance is otherwise excepted from the definition of a food additive (sections 201(s) and 409 of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 321(s) and 348]). Aside from the three hemp seed ingredients mentioned in Question #12, no other cannabis or cannabis-derived ingredients have been the subject of a food additive petition, an evaluated GRAS notification, or have otherwise been approved for use in food by FDA. Food companies that wish to use cannabis or cannabis-derived ingredients in their foods are subject to the relevant laws and regulations that govern all food products, including those that relate to the food additive and GRAS processes. 11. In making the two previous determinations about THC, why did FDA conclude that THC is an active ingredient in a drug product that has been approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act? In making the two previous determinations about CBD, why did FDA determine that substantial clinical investigations have been authorized for and/or instituted, and that the existence of such investigations has been made public? A. THC (dronabinol) is the active ingredient in the approved drug products, Marinol capsules (and generics) and Syndros oral solution. CBD is the active ingredient in the approved drug product, Epidiolex. The existence of substantial clinical investigations regarding THC and CBD have been made public. For example, two such substantial clinical investigations include GW Pharmaceuticals’ investigations regarding Sativex. (See Sativex Commences US Phase II/III Clinical Trial in Cancer PainExternal Link Disclaimer ) 12. Can hulled hemp seed, hemp seed protein powder, and hemp seed oil be used in human food? A. In December 2018, FDA completed its evaluation of three generally recognized as safe (GRAS) notices for the following hemp seed-derived food ingredients: hulled hemp seed, hemp seed protein powder, and hemp seed oil. FDA had no questions regarding the company’s conclusion that the use of such products as described in the notices is safe. Therefore, these products can be legally marketed in human foods for the uses described in the notices, provided they comply with all other requirements. These GRAS notices related only to the use of these ingredients in human food. To date, FDA has not received any GRAS notices for the use of hemp-derived ingredients in animal food (see Question #25). Hemp seeds are the seeds of the Cannabis sativa plant. The seeds of the plant do not naturally contain THC or CBD. The hemp seed-derived ingredients that are the subject of these GRAS notices contain only trace amounts of THC and CBD, which the seeds may pick up during harvesting and processing when they are in contact with other parts of the plant. Consumption of these hemp seed-derived ingredients is not capable of making consumers “high.” The GRAS conclusions can apply to ingredients for human food marketed by other companies, if they are manufactured in a way that is consistent with the notices and they meet the listed specifications. Some of the intended uses for these ingredients include adding them as source of protein, carbohydrates, oil, and other nutrients to beverages (juices, smoothies, protein drinks, plant-based alternatives to dairy products), soups, dips, spreads, sauces, dressings, plant-based alternatives to meat products, desserts, baked goods, cereals, snacks and nutrition bars. Products that contain any of these hemp seed-derived ingredients must declare them by name on the ingredient list. These GRAS conclusions do not affect the FDA’s position on the addition of CBD and THC to food. 13. What is FDA’s position on cannabis and cannabis-derived ingredients in cosmetics? A. A cosmetic is defined in 201(i) as “(1) articles intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body or any part thereof for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance, and (2) articles intended for use as a component of any such articles; except that such term shall not include soap.” Under the FD&C Act, cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to premarket approval by FDA, except for most color additives. Certain cosmetic ingredients are prohibited or restricted by regulation, but currently that is not the case for any cannabis or cannabis-derived ingredients. Ingredients not specifically addressed by regulation must nonetheless comply with all applicable requirements, and no ingredient – including a cannabis or cannabis-derived ingredient – can be used in a cosmetic if it causes the product to be adulterated or misbranded in any way. A cosmetic generally is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to users under the conditions of use prescribed in the labeling, or under such conditions of use as are customary or usual (section 601(a) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 361(a)]). If a product is intended to affect the structure or function of the body, or to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat or prevent disease, it is a drug, or possibly both a cosmetic and a drug, even if it affects the appearance. (See Question #3 for more information about drugs.) FDA can take action if it has information that an ingredient or cosmetic product is unsafe to consumers. Consumers can report adverse events associated with cosmetic products via the FDA’s MedWatch reporting system, either online or by phone at 1-800-FDA-1088, or by contacting your nearest FDA district office consumer complaint coordinator. For more information, please see the FDA’s webpage on how to report a cosmetic-related complaint. 14. Will FDA take action against cannabis or cannabis-related products that are in violation of the FD&C Act? A. The FDA has sent warning letters in the past to companies illegally selling CBD products that claimed to prevent, diagnose, treat, or cure serious diseases, such as cancer. Some of these products were in further violation of the FD&C Act because they were marketed as dietary supplements or because they involved the addition of CBD to food. When a product is in violation of the FD&C Act, FDA considers many factors in deciding whether or not to initiate an enforcement action. Those factors include, among other things, agency resources and the threat to the public health. FDA also may consult with its federal and state partners in making decisions about whether to initiate a federal enforcement action. 15. Can I import or export cannabis-containing or cannabis-derived products? A. General information about the import/export of drug products regulated by FDA can be found online here. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the controlled substance laws and regulations in the U.S. and, as such, should be consulted with respect to any regulations/requirements they may have regarding the import or export of products containing cannabis. Please see here for information about importing or exporting food ingredients. Regarding imports, if it appears that an article is adulterated, misbranded, in violation of section 505 of the FD&C Act, or prohibited from introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce under section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act, such article will be refused admission (see section 801(a)(3) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 381(a)(3)]). Research and Expanded Access 16. What is FDA’s role when it comes to the investigation of cannabis and cannabis-derived products for medical use? A. To conduct clinical research that can lead to an approved new drug, including research using materials from plants such as cannabis, researchers need to work with the FDA and submit an IND application to the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). The IND application process gives researchers a path to follow that includes regular interactions with the FDA to support efficient drug development while protecting the patients who are enrolled in the trials. For research for use as an animal drug product, researchers would establish an investigational new animal drug (INAD) file with the Center for Veterinary Medicine to conduct their research, rather than an IND with CDER. As discussed above (see Question #2), the 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp from the CSA. This change may streamline the process for researchers to study cannabis and its derivatives, including CBD, that fall under the definition of hemp, which could speed the development of new drugs. Conducting clinical research using cannabis-related substances that are scheduled by the DEA often involves interactions with several federal agencies. This includes: a registration administered by the DEA; obtaining the cannabis for research from NIDA, within the National Institutes of Health, or another DEA-registered source; and review by the FDA of the IND or INAD application and research protocol. Additionally: For a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA, DEA provides researchers with investigator and protocol registrations and has Schedule I-level security requirements at the site cannabis will be studied. NIDA provides research-grade cannabis for scientific study. The agency is responsible for overseeing the cultivation of cannabis for medical research and has contracted with the University of Mississippi to grow cannabis for research at a secure facility. Cannabis of varying potencies and compositions is available. DEA also may allow additional growers to register with the DEA to produce and distribute cannabis for research purposes. Researchers work with the FDA and submit an IND application to the appropriate division in the Office of New Drugs in CDER depending on the therapeutic indication. Based on the results obtained in studies conducted at the IND stage, sponsors may submit a marketing application for formal approval of the drug. 17. Does the FDA object to the clinical investigation of cannabis for medical use? A. No. The FDA believes that scientifically valid research conducted under an IND application is the best way to determine what patients could benefit from the use of drugs derived from cannabis. The FDA supports the conduct of that research by: Providing information on the process needed to conduct clinical research using cannabis. Providing information on the specific requirements needed to develop a drug that is derived from a plant such as cannabis. In December 2016, the FDA updated its Guidance for Industry: Botanical Drug Development, which provides sponsors with guidance on submitting IND applications for botanical drug products. Providing specific support for investigators interested in conducting clinical research using cannabis and its constituents as a part of the IND process through meetings and regular interactions throughout the drug development process. Providing general support to investigators to help them understand and follow the procedures to conduct clinical research through the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research’s Small Business and Industry Assistance group. 18. How can patients gain access to cannabis or cannabis-derived products for medical use through expanded access? A. Expanded access is a potential pathway for a patient with a serious or life-threatening disease or condition to try an investigational medical product (drug, biologic, or medical device) for treatment outside of clinical trials when there are no comparable or satisfactory therapies available. Manufacturers may be able to make investigational drugs available to individual patients in certain circumstances through expanded access, as described in the FD&C Act and implementing regulations. 19. Can patients gain access to cannabis or cannabis-derived products for medical use through Right to Try? A. Information for patients on Right to Try (RTT) is available on our website. RTT is designed to facilitate access to certain investigational drugs through direct interactions between patients, their physicians and drug sponsors – FDA is not involved in these decisions. Sponsors developing drugs for life-threatening conditions are responsible for determining whether to make their products available to patients who qualify for access under RTT. If you are interested in RTT, you should discuss this pathway with your licensed physician. Companies who develop drugs and biologics, also known as sponsors, can provide information about whether their drug/biologic is considered an eligible investigational drug under RTT and if they are able to provide the drug/biologic under the RTT Act. Children and Pregnant/Lactating Women 20. Does the FDA have concerns about administering a cannabis product to children? A. We understand that parents are trying to find treatments for their children’s medical conditions. However, the use of untested drugs can have unpredictable and unintended consequences. Caregivers and patients can be confident that FDA-approved drugs have been carefully evaluated for safety, efficacy, and quality, and are monitored by the FDA once they are on the market. The FDA continues to support sound, scientifically-based research into the medicinal uses of drug products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds, and will continue to work with companies interested in bringing safe, effective, and quality products to market. With the exception of Epidiolex, Marinol, and Syndros, no product containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds (either plant-based or synthetic) has been approved as safe and effective for use in any patient population, whether pediatric or adult. 21. Does the FDA have concerns about administering a cannabis product to pregnant and lactating women? A. The FDA is aware that there are potential adverse health effects with use of cannabis products containing THC in pregnant or lactating women. Published scientific literature reports potential adverse effects of cannabis use in pregnant women, including fetal growth restriction, low birth weight, preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and stillbirth. [1, 2, 3] Based on published animal research, there are also concerns that use of cannabis during pregnancy may negatively impact fetal brain development. [4, 5, 6 ] The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that women who are pregnant or contemplating pregnancy should be encouraged to discontinue cannabis use. In addition, ACOG notes that there are insufficient data to evaluate the effects of cannabis use on breastfed infants; therefore, cannabis use is discouraged when breastfeeding. [7] Pregnant and lactating women should talk with a health care provider about the potential adverse health effects of cannabis use. 22. What does the FDA think about making CBD available to children with epilepsy? A. The FDA has approved Epidiolex, which contains a purified form of the drug substance CBD, for the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome or Dravet syndrome in patients 2 years of age and older. That means the FDA has concluded that this particular drug product is safe and effective for its intended use. Controlled clinical trials testing the safety and efficacy of a drug, along with careful review through the FDA’s drug approval process, is the most appropriate way to bring cannabis-derived treatments to patients. Because of the adequate and well-controlled clinical studies that supported this approval, and the assurance of manufacturing quality standards, prescribers can have confidence in the drug’s uniform strength and consistent delivery that support appropriate dosing needed for treating patients with these complex and serious epilepsy syndromes. 23. What should I do if my child eats something containing cannabis? A. With the exception of products such as the hemp seed ingredients discussed in Question #12, which have been evaluated for safety, it is important to protect children from accidental ingestion of cannabis and cannabis-containing products. FDA recommends that these products are kept out of reach of children to reduce the risk of accidental ingestion. If the parent or caregiver has a reasonable suspicion that the child accidentally ingested products containing cannabis, the child should be taken to a physician or emergency department, especially if the child acts in an unusual way or is/feels sick. Pets and other Animals 24. I’ve seen cannabis products being marketed for pets. Are they safe? A. FDA is aware of some cannabis products being marketed as animal health products. We want to stress that FDA has not approved cannabis for any use in animals, and the agency cannot ensure the safety or effectiveness of these products. For these reasons, FDA cautions pet-owners against the use of such products and recommends that you talk with your veterinarian about appropriate treatment options for your pet. Signs that your pet may be suffering adverse effects from ingesting cannabis may include lethargy, depression, heavy drooling, vomiting, agitation, tremors, and convulsions. If you have concerns that your pet is suffering adverse effects from ingesting cannabis or any substance containing cannabis, consult your veterinarian, local animal emergency hospital or an animal poison control center immediately. While the agency is aware of reports of pets consuming various forms of cannabis, to date, FDA has not directly received any reports of adverse events associated with animals given cannabis products. However, adverse events from accidental ingestion are well-documented in scientific literature. If you feel your animal has suffered from ingesting cannabis, we encourage you to report the adverse event to the FDA. Please visit Reporting Information about Animal Drugs and Devices to learn more about how to report an adverse event related to an animal drug or for how to report an adverse event or problem with a pet food. 25. Can hemp be added to animal food? A. All ingredients in animal food must be the subject of an approved food additive petition or generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for their intended use in the intended species. If an animal food contains an ingredient that is not the subject of an approved food additive petition or GRAS for its intended use in the intended species, that animal food would be adulterated under section 402(a)(2)(C)(i) of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. § 342(a)(2)(C)(i)]. In coordination with state feed control officials, CVM also recognizes ingredients listed in the Official Publication (OP) of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) as being acceptable for use in animal food. At this time, there are no approved food additive petitions or ingredient definitions listed in the AAFCO OP for any substances derived from hemp, and we are unaware of any GRAS conclusions regarding the use of any substances derived from hemp in animal food. Learn more about animal food ingredient submissions here. With respect to products labeled to contain “hemp” that may also contain THC or CBD, as mentioned above it is a prohibited act under section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act to introduce or deliver for introduction into interstate commerce any animal food to which THC or CBD has been added. 26. Can approved human drugs containing CBD or synthetic THC be used extralabel in animals? A. The Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (AMDUCA), permits veterinarians to prescribe extralabel uses of approved human and animal drugs for animals under certain conditions. Extralabel use must comply with all the provisions of AMDUCA and its implementing regulation at 21 CFR § 530. Among other limitations, these provisions allow extralabel use of a drug only on the lawful order of a licensed veterinarian in the context of a valid veterinarian-client-patient relationship and only in circumstances when the health of an animal is threatened or suffering, or death may result from failure to treat. In addition, under 21 CFR 530.20, extralabel use of an approved human drug in a food-producing animal is not permitted if an animal drug approved for use in food-producing animals can be used in an extralabel manner for the use. In addition, under 21 CFR 530.20(b)(2), if scientific information on the human food safety aspect of the use of the approved human drug in food-producing animals is not available, the veterinarian must take appropriate measures to ensure that the animal and its food products will not enter the human food supply. For more information on extralabel use of FDA approved drugs in animals, see Extralabel Use of FDA Approved Drugs In Animals. [1] Gray, et al. Identifying Prenatal Cannabis Exposure and Effects of Concurrent Tobacco Exposure on Neonatal Growth. Clinical Chemistry. 2010; 56(9): 1442-1450. [2] Gunn, et al. Prenatal Exposure to cannabis and maternal and child health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2016; 6:e009986. [3] Hayatbakhsh, et al. Birth Outcomes associated with cannabis use before and during pregnancy. Pediatric Research. 2012; 71 (2): 215-219. [4] Silva, et al. Prenatal tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) alters cognitive function and amphetamine response from weaning to adulthood in the rat. Neurotoxicol and Teratol 2012; 34(1): 63-71. [5] Trezza, et al. Effects of perinatal exposure to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on the emotional reactivity of the offspring: a longitudinal behavioral study in Wistar rats. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2008; 198(4): 529-537. [6] Campolongo, et al. Perinatal exposure to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol causes enduring cognitive deficits associated with alteration of cortical gene expression and neurotransmission in rats. Addict Biol 2007; 12(3-4): 485–495. [7] ACOG Committee Opinion: Marijuana Use During Pregnancy and LactationExternal Link Disclaimer Content current as of: 03/11/2020 The post The FDA recognizes the opportunities that cannabis and CBD appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  13. Charlotte Figi, (13 years old) the Colorado Springs girl who launched a movement that led to sweeping changes in marijuana laws across the globe, has died from complications possibly related to coronavirus. She was 13. Charlotte’s death was announced by a family friend Tuesday night on the Facebook page of her mother, Paige Figi. “Charlotte is no longer suffering. She is seizure-free forever. Thank you so much for all of your love,” read the post, which also asked the public to respect Figi’s family’s privacy. According to the Colorado Sun Paige Figi had posted in recent weeks on Facebook about a serious illness that sickened all the members of her family with fever, coughing and breathing difficulties and sent Charlotte to the hospital. In an update Wednesday to the Facebook post announcing Charlotte’s death, Paige Figi said the family did not initially meet the criteria for testing for COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, so they self-treated at home, as instructed. Charlotte’s symptoms worsened, and she was admitted to the hospital on April 3, where she was tested for COVID-19. The test result came back negative — though the coronavirus test has been beset with false negatives. Figi wrote that Charlotte was treated on a floor designated for COVID-19 patients, “using all of the medical protocols set in place.” She was discharged from the hospital on Sunday, after her condition seemed to improve. She suffered a seizure Tuesday morning resulting in respiratory failure and cardiac arrest, however, and she was taken back to the hospital, where she was treated “as a likely COVID-19 case.” Figi said seizures commonly occur along with illnesses in children like Charlotte with Dravet syndrome. Read the Rest Here The post Charlotte Figi, the Colorado girl who inspired the CBD movement, dies following illness suspected to be coronavirus appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  14. A recently released report from a branch of the U.S. Treasury Department states the Internal Revenue Service is preparing to launch an increase in marijuana industry audits nationwide, However, it also offers a possible way for marijuana companies to skirt federal taxes. The IRS is closely monitoring the marijuana industry and intends to target companies that have failed to pay their full federal tax obligations.The agency has plans to enforce the collection of those taxes. The report – written by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) – found there are likely hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes owed by the marijuana industry under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, which prohibits standard business deductions by companies that traffic in federally illegal drugs, including marijuana. 26 U.S. Code § 280E.Expenditures in connection with the illegal sale of drugs No deduction or credit shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business (or the activities which comprise such trade or business) consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted. Definition of Controlled Substance Schedules Drugs and other substances that are considered controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) are divided into five schedules. An updated and complete list of the schedules is published annually in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) §§1308.11 through 1308.15. Substances are placed in their respective schedules based on whether they have a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, their relative abuse potential, and likelihood of causing dependence when abused. Some examples of the drugs in each schedule are listed below. Schedule I Controlled Substances Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (“Ecstasy”). Schedule II/IIN Controlled Substances (2/2N) Substances in this schedule have a high potential for abuse which may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence. Examples of Schedule II narcotics include: hydromorphone (Dilaudid®), methadone (Dolophine®), meperidine (Demerol®), oxycodone (OxyContin®, Percocet®), and fentanyl (Sublimaze®, Duragesic®). Other Schedule II narcotics include: morphine, opium, codeine, and hydrocodone. Examples of Schedule IIN stimulants include: amphetamine (Dexedrine®, Adderall®), methamphetamine (Desoxyn®), and methylphenidate (Ritalin®). Other Schedule II substances include: amobarbital, glutethimide, and pentobarbital. Farmington Hills, MI-based Attorney Michael Komorn who has represented the medical marijuana businesses and recreational cannabis licensing and legal defense stated “Here they come like we knew they would… so now is the time to prepare.” U.S. Treasury Department states the Internal Revenue Service Report See Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service Memorandum regarding 280E Recent Posts IRS report predicts national rise in cannabis industry tax audits. HASH BASH GOES DIGITAL AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK Executive Order 2020-21 – Don’t Come Around Here No More Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer orders everyone to stay at home Marijuana dispensaries are ‘essential’ and stay open during “pandemic” The post IRS report predicts national rise in cannabis industry tax audits. appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  15. The picture tells it all. We will miss this moment in 2020 due to a worldwide pandemic. ANN ARBOR, MI — The Hash Bash marijuana rally that was supposed to happen this Saturday in Ann Arbor is postponed until fall, but organizers are still planning a digital version. Instead of thousands of cannabis enthusiasts gathering on the University of Michigan Diag to smoke and hear various speakers talk about the marijuana movement, they’ll gather on the web as the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic continues The official digital Hash Bash streams live starting at high noon Saturday, April 4, organizers announced in a news release, encouraging those who want to catch the action to tune in at PlanetGreenTreesTV.com or HypedUpLiveSessions.com. “This broadcast is in recognition of Mr. Hash Bash Adam Brook who emceed the event for 20 years and in gratitude and dedication to the legendary John Sinclair who got it all started 49 years ago!” the news release states. The speakers list includes cannabis breeder DJ Short, High Times editor Danny Danko, former Detroit Red Wings player Darren McCarty, Michigan cannabis attorney Matt Abel, state Sen. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, state Rep. Yousef Rabhi, D-Ann Arbor, and many others. Read The Rest Here By Ryan Stanton | ryanstanton@mlive.com Recent Posts HASH BASH GOES DIGITAL AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK Executive Order 2020-21 – Don’t Come Around Here No More Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer orders everyone to stay at home Marijuana dispensaries are ‘essential’ and stay open during “pandemic” Komorn Law and First Natural Wellness regarding telemedicine for medical marijuana The post HASH BASH GOES DIGITAL AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  16. I DECREE – DON”T COME AROUND HERE NO MORE Listen While You Read RIP TP Executive Order 2020-21 (COVID-19) EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 2020-21 Temporary requirement to suspend activities that are not necessary to sustain or protect life The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is a respiratory disease that can result in serious illness or death. It is caused by a new strain of coronavirus not previously identified in humans and easily spread from person to person. Older adults and those with chronic health conditions are at particular risk, and there is an increased risk of rapid spread of COVID-19 among persons in close proximity to one another. There is currently no approved vaccine or antiviral treatment for this disease. On March 10, 2020, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services identified the first two presumptive-positive cases of COVID-19 in Michigan. On that same day, I issued Executive Order 2020-4. This order declared a state of emergency across the state of Michigan under section 1 of article 5 of the Michigan Constitution of 1963, the Emergency Management Act, 1976 PA 390, as amended, MCL 30.401-.421, and the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945, 1945 PA 302, as amended, MCL 10.31-.33. The Emergency Management Act vests the governor with broad powers and duties to “cop[e] with dangers to this state or the people of this state presented by a disaster or emergency,” which the governor may implement through “executive orders, proclamations, and directives having the force and effect of law.” MCL 30.403(1)-(2). Similarly, the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945, provides that, after declaring a state of emergency, “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.” MCL 10.31(1). To suppress the spread of COVID-19, to prevent the state’s health care system from being overwhelmed, to allow time for the production of critical test kits, ventilators, and personal protective equipment, and to avoid needless deaths, it is reasonable and necessary to direct residents to remain at home or in their place of residence to the maximum extent feasible. This order takes effect on March 24, 2020 at 12:01 am, and continues through April 13, 2020 at 11:59 pm. Acting under the Michigan Constitution of 1963 and Michigan law, I order the following: This order must be construed broadly to prohibit in-person work that is not necessary to sustain or protect life.Subject to the exceptions in section 7, all individuals currently living within the State of Michigan are ordered to stay at home or at their place of residence. Subject to the same exceptions, all public and private gatherings of any number of people occurring among persons not part of a single household are prohibited.All individuals who leave their home or place of residence must adhere to social distancing measures recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including remaining at least six feet from people from outside the individual’s household to the extent feasible under the circumstances.No person or entity shall operate a business or conduct operations that require workers to leave their homes or places of residence except to the extent that those workers are necessary to sustain or protect life or to conduct minimum basic operations.For purposes of this order, workers who are necessary to sustain or protect life are defined as “critical infrastructure workers,” as described in sections 8 and 9.For purposes of this order, workers who are necessary to conduct minimum basic operations are those whose in-person presence is strictly necessary to allow the business or operation to maintain the value of inventory and equipment, care for animals, ensure security, process transactions (including payroll and employee benefits), or facilitate the ability of other workers to work remotely. Businesses and operations must determine which of their workers are necessary to conduct minimum basic operations and inform such workers of that designation. Businesses and operations must make such designations in writing, whether by electronic message, public website, or other appropriate means. Such designations, however, may be made orally until March 31, 2020 at 11:59 pm. Businesses and operations that employ critical infrastructure workers may continue in-person operations, subject to the following conditions:Consistent with sections 8 and 9, businesses and operations must determine which of their workers are critical infrastructure workers and inform such workers of that designation. Businesses and operations must make such designations in writing, whether by electronic message, public website, or other appropriate means. Such designations, however, may be made orally until March 31, 2020 at 11:59 pm. Businesses and operations need not designate:Workers in health care and public health.Workers who perform necessary government activities, as described in section 6.Workers and volunteers described in section 9(d).In-person activities that are not necessary to sustain or protect life must be suspended until normal operations resume.Businesses and operations maintaining in-person activities must adopt social distancing practices and other mitigation measures to protect workers and patrons. Those practices and measures include, but are not limited to:Restricting the number of workers present on premises to no more than is strictly necessary to perform the business’s or operation’s critical infrastructure functions.Promoting remote work to the fullest extent possible.Keeping workers and patrons who are on premises at least six feet from one another to the maximum extent possible, including for customers who are standing in line.Increasing standards of facility cleaning and disinfection to limit worker and patron exposure to COVID-19, as well as adopting protocols to clean and disinfect in the event of a positive COVID-19 case in the workplace.Adopting policies to prevent workers from entering the premises if they display respiratory symptoms or have had contact with a person who is known or suspected to have COVID-19.Any other social distancing practices and mitigation measures recommended by the Centers for Disease Control.All in-person government activities at whatever level (state, county, or local) that are not necessary to sustain or protect life, or to supporting those businesses and operations that are necessary to sustain or protect life, are suspended.For purposes of this order, necessary government activities include activities performed by critical infrastructure workers, including workers in law enforcement, public safety, and first responders.Such activities also include, but are not limited to, public transit, trash pick-up and disposal, activities necessary to manage and oversee elections, operations necessary to enable transactions that support the work of a business’s or operation’s critical infrastructure workers, and the maintenance of safe and sanitary public parks so as to allow for outdoor recreation.For purposes of this order, necessary government activities include minimum basic operations, as described in section 4(b). Workers performing such activities need not be designated.Any in-person government activities must be performed consistently with the social distancing practices and other mitigation measures to protect workers and patrons described in section 5(c).Exceptions. Individuals may leave their home or place of residence, and travel as necessary: To engage in outdoor activity, including walking, hiking, running, cycling, or any other recreational activity consistent with remaining at least six feet from people from outside the individual’s household.To perform their jobs as critical infrastructure workers after being so designated by their employers. (Critical infrastructure workers who need not be designated under section 5(a) may leave their home for work without a designation.)To conduct minimum basic operations, as described in section 4(b), after being designated to perform such work by their employers.To perform necessary government activities, as described in section 6.To perform tasks that are necessary to their health and safety, or to the health and safety of their family or household members (including pets). Individuals may, for example, leave the home or place of residence to secure medication or to seek medical or dental care that is necessary to address a medical emergency or to preserve the health and safety of a household or family member (including procedures that, in accordance with a duly implemented nonessential procedures postponement plan, have not been postponed).To obtain necessary services or supplies for themselves, their family or household members, and their vehicles. Individuals must secure such services or supplies via delivery to the maximum extent possible. As needed, however, individuals may leave the home or place of residence to purchase groceries, take-out food, gasoline, needed medical supplies, and any other products necessary to maintain the safety, sanitation, and basic operation of their residences.To care for a family member or a family member’s pet in another household.To care for minors, dependents, the elderly, persons with disabilities, or other vulnerable persons.To visit an individual under the care of a health care facility, residential care facility, or congregate care facility, to the extent otherwise permitted.To attend legal proceedings or hearings for essential or emergency purposes as ordered by a court.To work or volunteer for businesses or operations (including both and religious and secular nonprofit organizations) that provide food, shelter, and other necessities of life for economically disadvantaged or otherwise needy individuals, individuals who need assistance as a result of this emergency, and people with disabilities.Individuals may also travel: To return to a home or place of residence from outside this state. To leave this state for a home or residence elsewhere. To travel between two residences in this state. As required by law enforcement or a court order, including the transportation of children pursuant to a custody agreement. For purposes of this order, critical infrastructure workers are those workers described by the Director of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in his guidance of March 19, 2020 on the COVID-19 response (available here). Such workers include some workers in each of the following sectors: Health care and public health.Law enforcement, public safety, and first responders.Food and agriculture.Energy.Water and wastewater.Transportation and logistics.Public works.Communications and information technology, including news media.Other community-based government operations and essential functions.Critical manufacturing.Hazardous materials.Financial services.Chemical supply chains and safety.Defense industrial base.For purposes of this order, critical infrastructure workers also include:Child care workers (including workers at disaster relief child care centers), but only to the extent necessary to serve the children or dependents of critical infrastructure workers as defined in this order. This category includes individuals (whether licensed or not) who have arranged to care for the children or dependents of critical infrastructure workers.Workers at designated suppliers and distribution centers, as described below.A business or operation that employs critical infrastructure workers may designate suppliers, distribution centers, or service providers whose continued operation is necessary to enable, support, or facilitate the work of its critical infrastructure workers.Such suppliers, distribution centers, or service providers may designate workers as critical infrastructure workers only to the extent those workers are necessary to enable, support, or facilitate the work of the original operation’s or business’s critical infrastructure workers.Designated suppliers, distribution centers, and service providers may in turn designate additional suppliers, distribution centers, and service providers whose continued operation is necessary to enable, support, or facilitate the work of their critical infrastructure workers.Such additional suppliers, distribution centers, and service providers may designate workers as critical infrastructure workers only to the extent that those workers are necessary to enable, support, or facilitate the work of the critical infrastructure workers at the supplier, distribution center, or service provider that has designated them.Businesses, operations, suppliers, distribution centers, and service providers must make all designations in writing to the entities they are designating, whether by electronic message, public website, or other appropriate means. Such designations may be made orally until March 31, 2020 at 11:59 pm.Businesses, operations, suppliers, distribution centers, and service providers that abuse their designation authority shall be subject to sanctions to the fullest extent of the law.Workers in the insurance industry, but only to the extent that their work cannot be done by telephone or remotely.Workers and volunteers for businesses or operations (including both and religious and secular nonprofit organizations) that provide food, shelter, and other necessities of life for economically disadvantaged or otherwise needy individuals, individuals who need assistance as a result of this emergency, and people with disabilities.Workers who perform critical labor union functions, including those who administer health and welfare funds and those who monitor the well-being and safety of union members who are critical infrastructure workers, provided that any administration or monitoring should be done by telephone or remotely where possible.Nothing in this order should be taken to supersede another executive order or directive that is in effect, except to the extent this order imposes more stringent limitations on in-person work, activities, and interactions. Consistent with prior guidance, a place of religious worship, when used for religious worship, is not subject to penalty under section 14.Nothing in this order should be taken to interfere with or infringe on the powers of the legislative and judicial branches to perform their constitutional duties or exercise their authority.This order takes effect on March 24, 2020 at 12:01 am, and continues through April 13, 2020 at 11:59 pm.The governor will evaluate the continuing need for this order prior to its expiration. In determining whether to maintain, intensify, or relax its restrictions, she will consider, among other things, (1) data on COVID-19 infections and the disease’s rate of spread; (2) whether sufficient medical personnel, hospital beds, and ventilators exist to meet anticipated medical need; (3) the availability of personal protective equipment for the health-care workforce; (4) the state’s capacity to test for COVID-19 cases and isolate infected people; and (5) economic conditions in the state.Consistent with MCL 10.33 and MCL 30.405(3), a willful violation of this order is a misdemeanor.Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of Michigan. RELATED CONTENT Executive Order 2020-20 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-17 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-19 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-18 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-16 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-15 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-14 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-13 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-11 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-12 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-09 (COVID-19) – Rescinded Executive Order 2020-10 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-08 (COVID-19) – Rescinded Executive Order 2020-07 (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-06 (COVID-19) – Rescinded Executive Order 2020-05 (COVID-19) – Rescinded Executive Order 2020-04 – Declaration of State of Emergency (COVID-19) Executive Order 2020-01 Executive Order 2019-19 Executive Order 2019-18 RIP TP The post Executive Order 2020-21 – Don’t Come Around Here No More appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  17. With California residents being asked to stay at home to prevent the spread of the coronavirus and all “non-essential businesses and areas” being closed down, officials in Los Angeles are making sure that marijuana is still available to the public. Marijuana dispensaries are being deemed as “essential businesses,” as they are allowed to remain open under the state’s “Safer at Home” order. Los Angeles has “cannabis dispensaries with a medicinal cannabis license” listed under “essential infrastructure” or “healthcare operations” that are exempt from closing. California Gov. Gavin Newsom made the announcement on Thursday night, asking nearly 40 million residents in the state to stay at home to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. “There’s a mutuality, and there’s a recognition of our interdependence, that requires of this moment that we direct a statewide order for people to stay at home,” Newsom said. There are approximately 995 cases in California, including “presumptive positive” cases and 19 deaths. The US has more than 13,634 cases with at least 196 deaths (and rising daily). The Department states cannabis is an essential medicine. The Department adds,”Dispensaries can continue to operate as essential businesses during this time, while practicing social distancing and other public health recommendations.” The post Marijuana dispensaries are ‘essential’ and stay open during “pandemic” appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  18. Statement from First Natural Wellness, in conjunction with Komorn Law regarding telemedicine for medical marijuana ANN ARBOR, Mich., March 19, 2020 /PRNewswire/ Michigan medical marijuana physicians, attorneys, patients, and their caregivers called on Governor Gretchen Whitmer to provide urgent and swift action via an executive order to allow certifying physicians the emergency capabilities to certify patients via telemedicine. In times of need, communities stand together to defend the weak. Komorn Law, First Natural Wellness, and the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA) is comprised of stakeholders and citizens who are urging Governor Whitmer to take the COVID-19 pandemic seriously by allowing physicians to provide telemedicine consultations for patients who need medical cannabis therapy. The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (“MMMA”) provides immunities for physicians to recommend medical cannabis, and immunities for patients to engage in the medical use of marijuana. The MMMA, as with other expectations of licensed physicians in Michigan, requires that a bona fide relationship exist between the physician and the patient. In April of 2012 (2012 PA 2012 512) the Legislature in Michigan by a Super Majority vote amended the MMMA (2012 Public Act 512) to specifically define the term “bona fide physician-patient relationship.” The amendment to the MMMA created and defined the term “Bona Fide” as follows: (a) “Bona fide physician-patient relationship” means a treatment or counseling relationship between a physician and patient in which all of the following are present: (1) The physician has reviewed the patient’s relevant medical records and completed a full assessment of the patient’s medical history and current medical condition, including a relevant, in-person, medical evaluation of the patient. Patient-Caregiver-Coalition (see details at end of article) Said another way, only physicians who interact with medical marijuana patients are required to meet in person and or are precluded from those interactions occurring via telemedicine. Legislators who lobbied for this face-to-face requirement in the law were simultaneously approving telemedicine visits for insurance reimbursements for almost every other medical visit except medical marijuana consultations. Many of the 300,000 Medical cannabis patients are the sickest patients in the State. They have some of the most severe conditions for physicians to evaluate, including Cancer, HIV/AIDS, Hep C, Arthritis, and Glaucoma just to name part of the qualifying conditions list. These are the sickest people in the state, and current law mandates that these patients interact with their physicians in person. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the State of Emergency our Governor declared for the State of Michigan, we are demanding that our state officials address this issue. This enormous population of medical marijuana patients and their physicians are currently being overlooked and ignored. Putting aside the unexplained stigma excluding medical marijuana patients and doctors from telemedicine, the existing policy is subjecting an enormous population of sick patients and their physicians to a dangerous and irrational policy, arguably which should never have existed. Now is the time to urge Governor Gretchen Whitmer to protect all of our citizens, including patients and physicians. Please call Governor Whitmer’s office at 517-373-3400 or 517-335-7858 and urge her to let physicians provide medical marijuana certifications via telemedicine services immediately. Contacts: Michael Komorn, Komorn Law www.KomornLaw.com 248-357-2550 First Natural Wellness, Michigan’s Most Trusted Medical Marijuana Certifications www.FirstNaturalWellness.com 866-649-9034 MMMA, Michigan Medical Marijuana Association www.MichiganMedicalMarijuana.org Source PR Newswire: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/statement-from-first-natural-wellness-in-conjunction-with-komorn-law-regarding-telemedicine-for-medical-marijuana-301026680.html JOIN THE CAREGIVER – PATIENT COALITION. Komorn Law and the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association have been at the forefront of the legal battles and in the trenches fighting fo patient, caregiver and physician rights since 2008. We are still fighting at this very moment to keep the caregiver system working while others are tryin to end it. So get on the lit to be notified as soon as the “pandemic” is over. SIGN UP HERE TO BE NOTIFIED OF EVENTS OR HAPPENINGS. The post Komorn Law and First Natural Wellness regarding telemedicine for medical marijuana appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  19. ANN ARBOR, MI – There are mixed messages about whether Ann Arbor’s Hash Bash will happen this year. Thousands in the cannabis community have gathered throughout the city on the first Saturday of every April since 1972. And, while a Hash Bash social media message has announced this year’s April 2 celebration will be postponed because it can’t get a permit, “Mr. Hash Bash” plans to smoke it up anyway. “You can’t cancel Hash Bash,” said Adam L. Brook, who calls himself by the moniker. “I just got off the phone with the Legendary John Sinclair, who will be joining me and others at what Hash Bash was always intended to be…a protest and smoke-in.” Activist and poet John Sinclair among first to purchase legal recreational marijuana in Michigan, 50 years after his historic arrest Sinclair, who has protested for marijuana usage for the last five decades, served two years of a 10-year prison sentence between 1969-71 for possession of marijuana that he was accused of giving to an undercover Detroit cop. His case was overturned by the Michigan Supreme Court, and he said he has smoked marijuana everyday since. The University of Michigan student group that organizes Hash Bash will not get a permit for the event, as the university has disallowed all events of at least 100 people due to the threat of the spread of coronavirus. “It is with a heavy heart that we must postpone the 49th Hash Bash,” said Nick Zettell, founding board member of MI Legalize. “To protect the health and safety of our participants, we will not be gathering on the Diag this April. But Brook, Sinclair and the toking traditionalists will still gather by the University of Michigan Diag at “high noon” on April 2, Brook said. (actually 4/4/20) Read the rest of the story here The post ‘You can’t cancel Hash Bash’, says organizer after event is postponed appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  20. March 2, 2020 – Today, the Marijuana Regulatory Agency (MRA) announced a phase-out process for the transfer of marijuana and marijuana products into the regulated market from caregivers. The phase-out process begins immediately and ends on September 30, 2020 with a final termination of all external marijuana transfers. During the ongoing transition to a regulated market, the MRA has been committed to maintaining patient access to medical marijuana by allowing certain licensed facilities to continue to source product from caregivers without it resulting in disciplinary action against their licenses. Now, nearly 200 grower licenses and more than 25 processor licenses have been issued in the medical marijuana market. As more licenses have been issued and more plants grown and processed, the marijuana product produced by licensed facilities has resulted in an increase in the supply of medical marijuana to patients. “We have always put patients first when we make decisions regarding medical marijuana,” said MRA Executive Director Andrew Brisbo. “This phase out process is an important next step in implementing the will of Michigan voters and making sure that patients continue to have access to their medicine.” Licensed businesses will have nearly seven months to make the necessary plans to continue to maintain a sufficient supply of medical marijuana in Michigan. During this time, the MRA will work closely with licensees to build relationships and provide outreach and assistance during this transition period. Phase One – Growers and Processors The MRA gave notice in December, that – beginning on March 1, 2020 – growers and processors who obtain marijuana plants, concentrates, vape cartridges, or infused products from caregivers would be subject to disciplinary action. Phase One of the phase-out process begins immediately and runs through May 31, 2020. During phase one, growers and processors licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. Phase Two – Growers Phase two begins on June 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2020. During phase two, growers licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. During phase two, the total weight of marijuana flower that growers obtain from caregivers must be less than or equal to the total weight of marijuana flower that the licensee harvested (both wet and dry) between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 plus the projected harvest weight (dry) of all plants that are in the flowering process on May 31, 2020. Phase Two – Processors Phase two begins on June 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2020. During phase two, processors licensed under the MMFLA who obtain marijuana flower – defined as bud, shake, and trim only – directly from a caregiver who produced the flower will not be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA under certain conditions. During phase two, the total weight of marijuana flower that processors obtain from caregivers must be less than or equal to 50% of the total weight of marijuana flower the licensee obtained from caregivers between the dates of March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020. The marijuana flower obtained from caregivers must be processed and may not be sold or transferred as marijuana flower. End of Phase Out Process The phase out process for caregiver product ends on September 30, 2020. A licensee who accepts an external transfer after September 30, 2020 will be subject to disciplinary action by the MRA. SIGN UP JOIN THE CAREGIVER-PATIENT COALITION TO SAVE THE CURRENT SYSTEM HERE The post Marijuana Regulatory Agency Announces Elimination of Caregiver Product appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  21. Here’s a list of news articles related to Michigan State Police datamaster investigation into inaccurate settings by a contractor which may have lead to false readings for DUI checks. If you feel like your datamaster breathalyzer test was done on a faulty machine or was false and would like to hire an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call Our Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com Michigan State Police finds flaw in breath alcohol testing, suspends contractIt’s pretty bad,’ — Unknown breathalyzer flaw could impact MSP drunk driving casesMSP Statement on Temporarily Suspending Use of Datamaster DMT in Wake of Criminal Investigation into Contractor MalfeasanceDefense attorneys say drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug testsWhat to expect after Michigan State Police discover problems with breathalyzersMichigan State Police investigate potential fraud with breathalyzer testingDefense attorney says drivers should refuse Michigan’s new roadside drug testsDefense Attorneys suggest MSP May Have A Conflict of Interest Over Breathalyzer InvestigationMichigan State Police investigating ‘potential fraud’ committed by breathalyzer supplierMichigan State Police launch an investigation into breathalyzer test resultsMichigan police trade breath for blood during breathalyzer fraud probeDUI convictions across Metro Detroit could be impacted by breathalyzer flawMichigan State Police director testifies about investigation into breathalyzersUpdate on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program12 drunken-driving cases dismissedDUI Tests May Be Thrown Out over Bad Breathalyzer MaintenanceMichigan State Police Uncovers Breathalyzer FraudHalf of Michigan’s questionably calibrated breathalyzer machines returned to serviceDashcam footage shows lawmaker crash, fail sobriety tests during ‘super drunk’ driving arrestWayne County judge charged with domestic assault also dealing with drunken driving caseMichigan’s alcohol breath test devices are back amid probeMichigan’s unreliable breathalyzers back in service with little explanationIntoximeters, Breathalyzer Giant Accused of Fraud, Won’t Come Clean About Booze TestsBreath Test Program and Training Information The post MSP Datamaster Breathalyzer Issue News Links appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  22. 02.27.2020 Convicted Felon Sentenced to More Than Seven Years for Possessing a Firearm 02.27.2020 Berkeley County Man Admits to Wire Fraud Involving Hearts2Heros Organization 02.27.2020 Camden, New Jersey Man Pleads Guilty in Methamphetamine Conspiracy 02.27.2020 South Carolina Man Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison for the Kidnapping and Sexual Assault of an Alabama Woman 02.27.2020 Suburban Man Sentenced to More Than 12 Years in Prison for Amassing Child Pornography Collection 02.27.2020 Union County Man Arrested for Mortgage Fraud and Defrauding the Orange Public Library 02.27.2020 Local Man Sentenced for Role in West End Drug Case 02.27.2020 Member of Lightfoot Drug Trafficking Organization Pleads Guilty to Distributing Large Quantities of Cocaine 02.27.2020 Plant City Man Sentenced to Seven Years for Possessing Firearm and Ammunition 02.27.2020 Branford Man Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Nonprofit Employer and Individuals 02.27.2020 Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh Sentenced to Three Years in Federal Prison for Fraud Conspiracy and Tax Charges 02.27.2020 Long-Haul Trucker Indicted for Kidnapping and Child Pornography Crimes 02.27.2020 Former Harrisburg Businessman Sentenced to 37 Months’ Imprisonment for Defrauding College Faculty Union 02.27.2020 Apex Entrepreneur Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Water Remediation Investors and to Aggravated Identity Theft 02.27.2020 Gettysburg Man Charged with Receipt and Distribution of Child Pornography 02.27.2020 Chambersburg Man Sentenced to 10 Years’ Imprisonment for Sex and Drug Trafficking 02.27.2020 Former Prisoner Transport Officer Charged for Abusing Detainees in His Care and Threatening Them with Retaliation if They Reported His Abuse 02.27.2020 Federal Judge Sentences Asheville Man to Life in Prison for Co-Worker’s Murder 02.27.2020 Bronx Man Sentenced to 35 Years in Prison for Narcotics and Firearms Charges 02.27.2020 Bakersfield Attorney Indicted for Scheme to Defraud Her Clients 02.27.2020 Chinese National Sentenced for Stealing Trade Secrets Worth $1 Billion 02.27.2020 Former Senior Iraqi Military Officer During the Saddam Hussein Regime Has Been Sentenced and Denaturalized 02.27.2020 FBI Seeks the Public’s Help Locating Gang-Related Fugitives 02.27.2020 Georgia Woman Pleads Guilty to Providing Local Gang Members with Illegal Guns 02.27.2020 Niagara Falls Man Pleads Guilty for His Role in Drug Conspiracy 02.27.2020 West Saint Paul Man Pleads Guilty to Armed Robberies of Several Twin Cities Restaurants and Gas Stations 02.27.2020 Paterson Police Sergeant Charged with Conspiracy to Violate Civil Rights and Filing False Police Report 02.27.2020 Baltimore Drug Dealer Pleads Guilty to Discharging a Firearm in Furtherance of Drug Trafficking, Resulting in Death 02.27.2020 Bowling Green Attorney Pleads Guilty to Laundering Over $700,000 of Illegal Proceeds 02.27.2020 Federal Inmate Sentenced to Additional Prison Time for Using a Contraband Cell Phone to Post Videos to Facebook 02.27.2020 Former CFO of Naugatuck Company Charged with Fraud Offenses 02.27.2020 Former Kivalina Teacher Arrested and Charged for Child Exploitation Crimes 02.26.2020 Diamond Man Sentenced for Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Appleton City Man Sentenced for Child Pornography 02.26.2020 ATF Operation Leads to Multiple Arrests, Recovery of 82 Firearms 02.26.2020 Maryland Man Pleads Guilty to Carjacking 02.26.2020 Hartford Man Pleads Guilty to Fentanyl and Crack Distribution Offenses 02.26.2020 Columbia Gas Agrees to Plead Guilty in Connection with September 2018 Gas Explosions in Merrimack Valley 02.26.2020 Mortgage Short Sale Negotiator Sentenced for Defrauding Mortgage Lenders 02.26.2020 Nashville Man Facing Federal Carjacking and Firearms Charges 02.26.2020 Arrests in Four States of Racially Motivated Violent Extremists Targeting Journalists and Activists 02.26.2020 Twenty-Four People in Milwaukee Charged with Heroin and Cocaine Trafficking and Firearms Offenses 02.26.2020 Former Veterans Affairs Official Sentenced to 18 Months in Federal Prison for Role in Bribery Scheme to Rig Federal Contracts 02.26.2020 Brooklyn Man Arrested for Making Race-Based Threats of Violence 02.26.2020 Philadelphia Felon Living in Butler, Pennsylvania, Pleads Guilty to Drug and Firearms Violations 02.26.2020 Arrest of José E. López-Piñeiro 02.26.2020 FBI Media Alert: Albuquerque FBI Division Accepting Applications for Summer Teen Academy 02.26.2020 Owner of Bend-Based Microbrewery Equipment Company Indicted on Fraud Charges 02.26.2020 Post Falls Women Sentenced to 10 Years for Murder-for-Hire Plot 02.26.2020 Former Atomwaffen Division Leader Arrested for Swatting Conspiracy 02.26.2020 Jackson Man Arrested Locally for Murder and Released on Bond Pleads Guilty Under Project EJECT to Illegally Possessing a Gun 02.26.2020 Former South Carolina Department of Corrections Officer Sentenced to Federal Prison for Stabbing Inmate 02.26.2020 Physician Charged for Alleged Role in an Over $120 Million Health Care Fraud and Money Laundering Conspiracy Involving Sponsorship of Ultimate Fighting Championship Hall of Famers 02.26.2020 Leader of Coles County Methamphetamine Trafficking Network Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison 02.26.2020 Three Bloomington Men Indicted on Charges of Child Sex Trafficking, Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Brockton Man Sentenced for Federal Firearm and Drug Offenses 02.26.2020 Fitchburg Woman Sentenced to 60 Months for Drug Trafficking 02.26.2020 Marion County Man Admits to Fleeing from Law Enforcement 02.26.2020 Harvey Psychiatrist Sentenced in Scheme to Defraud Medicare by Soliciting and Receiving Kickback Payments for Medically Unnecessary Home Health Referrals 02.26.2020 MS-13 Members Plead Guilty to Violent 2018 Attack 02.26.2020 Madisonville Pharmacist Charged with Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud 02.26.2020 Gang Member Sentenced to More Than Seven Years in Federal Prison for Fentanyl and Crack Offenses 02.26.2020 Boulder Man Pleads Guilty to Possession of Child Pornography 02.26.2020 Holyoke Resident Pleads Guilty to Heroin Distribution 02.26.2020 Springdale Man Sentenced to 20 Years in Federal Prison for Bank Robbery 02.26.2020 Two Los Angeles Pharmacy Owners Sentenced for Multi-Million-Dollar Scheme That Billed Medicare, Cigna $11.8 Million in Fraudulent Medication Claims 02.26.2020 Former Executive Director of Nonprofit is Sentenced for Illegally Diverting Charity Funds to Unnamed State Senator and Convicted Lobbyist 02.26.2020 Former Employee of Twin Cities Nonprofit Pleads Guilty to Charity Fraud Conspiracy 02.26.2020 Jury Convicts Local Man in Multiple Robberies 02.26.2020 Washington Woman Sentenced for Role in Methamphetamine Trafficking Ring 02.26.2020 Indictment: Honduran Citizen Attacked Immigration Officers 02.25.2020 Ocean County Man Charged with Online Enticement of a Minor and Possession of Child Pornography 02.25.2020 Westbrook Man Pleads Guilty to Child Sexual Exploitation Offense 02.25.2020 Member of New Haven Drug Ring Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison 02.25.2020 Latin Dragon Nation Member Sentenced to 18 Years in Prison Following a Conviction for Racketeering Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Former Hopi Reservation Ranger Sentenced in Arizona on Sexual Assault Charges and Destruction of Evidence 02.25.2020 Judge Sentences Rochester, Pennsylvania Man to Five Years in Prison for Texting Images Depicting the Sexual Exploitation of Minors 02.25.2020 Indiana Man Found Guilty of Kidnapping a Child in Calumet City 02.25.2020 New York Man Admits Role in Wire Fraud Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Lexington Businessman Convicted of Obstructing Justice 02.25.2020 Oregon FBI Tech Tuesday: Building a Digital Defense with Your Communications 02.25.2020 Kansas City Man Sentenced for Stolen Vehicle Conspiracy, Illegal Firearm 02.25.2020 Antioch Woman Sentenced to Federal Prison for Embezzlement 02.25.2020 Jackson Man Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison Under Project EJECT for Illegally Possessing a Firearm 02.25.2020 Madison County Man Indicted for Offenses Involving Sexually Explicit Images of Minors 02.25.2020 Bell County Man Sentenced to 121 Months for Methamphetamine Trafficking 02.25.2020 Portland Tax Return Preparer Sentenced to Prison for Preparing False Returns 02.25.2020 John Brown Named Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch 02.25.2020 Vicksburg Man Pleads Guilty to Bank Robbery 02.25.2020 South Philadelphia Drug Delivery Service Operators, Known as the ‘Friends,’ Convicted at Trial on All Counts 02.25.2020 Johnstown Crack Dealer Sentenced to Nearly Four Years in Prison 02.25.2020 Dubois Man Sentenced for Possessing of Child Pornography 02.25.2020 Erie Woman Pleads Guilty in Scheme That Used Homeless to Cash Stolen Checks 02.25.2020 Project Parkersburg Update: Final Four Defendants Plead Guilty to Role in Drug Trafficking Conspiracy 02.25.2020 Former Wilkinsburg Man Sentenced to Prison for Possessing Images and Videos Showing the Sexual Exploitation of Children 02.25.2020 Northern District of Texas Round-Up February 25 02.25.2020 Jury Convicts California Man of Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine 02.25.2020 Cincinnati City Council President Charged with Honest Services Wire Fraud, Bribery, Attempted Extortion 02.25.2020 Parent Sentenced in College Admissions Case 02.25.2020 Southwick Man Sentenced for Sending Threatening Letters and White Powder to Federal Agencies in Springfield The post Bored? Read Some FBI Files appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  23. MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program This morning Michigan State Police (MSP) Director Col. Joe Gasper provided testimony before the state’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee on the findings to-date of the department’s investigation into issues with the state’s Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments. As of 7 a.m., discrepancies have been identified involving eight instruments at the following locations: Instrument Location Period of Time in Question Number of Breath Tests Possible Criminal Act Alpena County Sheriff’s Department 11/14/19 – 1/9/20 8 Yes Beverly Hills Police Department 1/22/19 – 6/21/19 9 Yes Detroit Detention Center 10/10/19 – 10/13/19 6 No Montcalm County Sheriff’s Department 8/23/19 – 8/26/19 1 No Niles Law Enforcement Center 1/15/19 – 2/18/19 7 No Pittsfield Township Police Department 12/20/18 – 8/7/19 5 Yes Tecumseh Police Department 2/15/19 – 6/28/19 12 Yes Van Buren County Sheriff’s Department 11/21/19 – 12/9/19 4 No As irregularities are identified, notification is made to the affected prosecutor regarding impacted breath tests. Prosecutors will review each case on a case-by-case basis to determine what actions to take. On Jan. 13, 2020, the MSP took all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments in the state out of service until they could be inspected and verified by MSP personnel. As of 7 a.m. this morning, 37 of 203 instruments have been returned to service following verification by MSP personnel that the instruments are properly calibrated. MSP personnel are re-certifying the most frequently used instruments and those in areas with limited access to obtaining blood samples first, with hopes of returning all instruments to service by the end of February. A criminal investigation by MSP into potential fraud committed by contract employees of Datamaster vendor, Intoximeters, is ongoing. The below timeline of events was also shared with the committee today. Timeline of Events: September 1, 2018 – Effective date of three-year maintenance contract with Intoximeters Inc. Contract is $1.26 million; requires vendor’s three technicians to conduct 120-day certifications of all instruments, perform service calls and routine maintenance, and provide court testimony on the service and maintenance of the instruments. The technicians whose work is in question were hired in September and November of 2018. January 2019 – With the intent to bring the state’s evidentiary breath alcohol testing program into alignment with forensic laboratory standards and work toward national accreditation, the MSP created a new position, Breath Alcohol Technical Leader, within the Forensic Science Division. The accreditation process was expected to take at least 18 months. April 2019 – MSP put additional workflow requirements in place with the vendor to ensure compliance with state law and administrative rules and move toward accreditation. It was after these additional controls were put in place that the MSP began to notice noncompliance by the vendor’s technicians. August 9, 2019 – After identifying repeated failures by the technicians to meet contractual requirements and the inability to perform the mandated tasks of maintaining and certifying the Datamaster instruments, the MSP asked DTMB Central Procurement to issue a letter to Intoximeters outlining grounds for breach of contract and requesting a corrective action plan. Examples of improper actions include: Not performing timely 120-day certifications in 60 instances. Incorrect recording of important elements during instrument checks; these include dry gas lot numbers and expiration dates, which can create issues in court when the lot numbers recorded by the technicians are wrong, or do not exist. Sharing instrument passwords with jail staff. August 21, 2019 – MSP received a corrective action plan from Intoximeters that outlined their action plan to correct the contractual failures. August 23, 2019 – An Intoximeters technician committed a serious error that resulted in the dismissal of an OWI case in Montcalm County. On August 23, 2019, the technician went to the Montcalm County Jail and signed the Datamaster Maintenance Log. The technician did not notify the MSP nor Intoximeters of this visit and did not submit any paperwork regarding the reason for his visit. Later that day, an MSP sergeant arrested an individual for OWI and utilized that instrument for evidential testing. MSP was first made aware of this technician’s August 23rd visit by the Montcalm County Prosecutor’s Office on November 15, 2019. The technician and Intoximeters were both unable to explain this visit, casting doubt on the reliability of any tests conducted on August 23, 2019 through August 26, 2019 when an accuracy check was performed by the technician. This lack of documentation resulted in the dismissal of this OWI case.October 10, 2019 – Another serious error occurred that resulted in the dismissal of evidence in six cases in Wayne County. On this date, a technician arrived at the Detroit Detention Center to perform a 120-day certification. The instrument failed testing, but the technician did not notice the failure. Consequently, he left the instrument in service until October 13, 2019. During this 3-day period, the instrument was used for six OWI evidential breath tests. Because the instrument was not properly serviced and was left in service, these six cases did not have reliable breath evidence. The MSP sent a notice to the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, which decided to dismiss the evidence in these cases. Following discovery of this error, MSP requested removal of the technician responsible, with removal and replacement to occur no later than January 15, 2020. This never occurred due to the MSP actions taken on January 7 to issue the stop work order. December 2019 – MSP began the process of establishing a unit within the Forensic Science Division to oversee the state’s breath alcohol testing program. The unit will be comprised of three equipment technician positions to maintain and certify the state’s breath alcohol testing equipment. January 2, 2020 – During a routine audit of documents submitted by the vendor for the prior two-week period, an irregularity is noticed on an instrument at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Department. The MSP immediately requested the original documents from the technician. January 6, 2020 – MSP confirmed the irregularity was the result of the technician fabricating the paperwork for a required test that was not performed on the instrument. A criminal investigation is opened by the MSP into possible forgery of a public document. This investigation is ongoing.January 7, 2020 – With potential criminal acts committed by an Intoximeters technician, the MSP issues a stop work order with the vendor and secures all equipment and paperwork from the three technicians. January 10, 2020 – MSP finalizes an emergency plan to immediately bring all maintenance responsibilities for the state’s 203 instruments in-house, and notification is made to police and prosecutors of the stop work order and MSP’s new responsibilities. January 13, 2020- MSP personnel continued through the weekend to review records from the technicians yielding additional discrepancies involving a second technician and three more impacted instruments (Beverly Hills PD, Pittsfield Township PD, and Tecumseh PD), in which it is suspected that instrument calibration tests were again fabricated. With this new information, MSP removes all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments from service until they can be inspected and verified by MSP personnel to ensure they are properly calibrated. MSP recommends to police agencies that they utilize blood draws rather than Contact: Shanon Banner 517-284-3222 Jan. 16, 2020 The post MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  24. MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program This morning Michigan State Police (MSP) Director Col. Joe Gasper provided testimony before the state’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee on the findings to-date of the department’s investigation into issues with the state’s Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments. As of 7 a.m., discrepancies have been identified involving eight instruments at the following locations: Instrument Location Period of Time in Question Number of Breath Tests Possible Criminal Act Alpena County Sheriff’s Department 11/14/19 – 1/9/20 8 Yes Beverly Hills Police Department 1/22/19 – 6/21/19 9 Yes Detroit Detention Center 10/10/19 – 10/13/19 6 No Montcalm County Sheriff’s Department 8/23/19 – 8/26/19 1 No Niles Law Enforcement Center 1/15/19 – 2/18/19 7 No Pittsfield Township Police Department 12/20/18 – 8/7/19 5 Yes Tecumseh Police Department 2/15/19 – 6/28/19 12 Yes Van Buren County Sheriff’s Department 11/21/19 – 12/9/19 4 No As irregularities are identified, notification is made to the affected prosecutor regarding impacted breath tests. Prosecutors will review each case on a case-by-case basis to determine what actions to take. On Jan. 13, 2020, the MSP took all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments in the state out of service until they could be inspected and verified by MSP personnel. As of 7 a.m. this morning, 37 of 203 instruments have been returned to service following verification by MSP personnel that the instruments are properly calibrated. MSP personnel are re-certifying the most frequently used instruments and those in areas with limited access to obtaining blood samples first, with hopes of returning all instruments to service by the end of February. A criminal investigation by MSP into potential fraud committed by contract employees of Datamaster vendor, Intoximeters, is ongoing. The below timeline of events was also shared with the committee today. Timeline of Events: September 1, 2018 – Effective date of three-year maintenance contract with Intoximeters Inc. Contract is $1.26 million; requires vendor’s three technicians to conduct 120-day certifications of all instruments, perform service calls and routine maintenance, and provide court testimony on the service and maintenance of the instruments. The technicians whose work is in question were hired in September and November of 2018. January 2019 – With the intent to bring the state’s evidentiary breath alcohol testing program into alignment with forensic laboratory standards and work toward national accreditation, the MSP created a new position, Breath Alcohol Technical Leader, within the Forensic Science Division. The accreditation process was expected to take at least 18 months. April 2019 – MSP put additional workflow requirements in place with the vendor to ensure compliance with state law and administrative rules and move toward accreditation. It was after these additional controls were put in place that the MSP began to notice noncompliance by the vendor’s technicians. August 9, 2019 – After identifying repeated failures by the technicians to meet contractual requirements and the inability to perform the mandated tasks of maintaining and certifying the Datamaster instruments, the MSP asked DTMB Central Procurement to issue a letter to Intoximeters outlining grounds for breach of contract and requesting a corrective action plan. Examples of improper actions include: Not performing timely 120-day certifications in 60 instances. Incorrect recording of important elements during instrument checks; these include dry gas lot numbers and expiration dates, which can create issues in court when the lot numbers recorded by the technicians are wrong, or do not exist. Sharing instrument passwords with jail staff. August 21, 2019 – MSP received a corrective action plan from Intoximeters that outlined their action plan to correct the contractual failures. August 23, 2019 – An Intoximeters technician committed a serious error that resulted in the dismissal of an OWI case in Montcalm County. On August 23, 2019, the technician went to the Montcalm County Jail and signed the Datamaster Maintenance Log. The technician did not notify the MSP nor Intoximeters of this visit and did not submit any paperwork regarding the reason for his visit. Later that day, an MSP sergeant arrested an individual for OWI and utilized that instrument for evidential testing. MSP was first made aware of this technician’s August 23rd visit by the Montcalm County Prosecutor’s Office on November 15, 2019. The technician and Intoximeters were both unable to explain this visit, casting doubt on the reliability of any tests conducted on August 23, 2019 through August 26, 2019 when an accuracy check was performed by the technician. This lack of documentation resulted in the dismissal of this OWI case.October 10, 2019 – Another serious error occurred that resulted in the dismissal of evidence in six cases in Wayne County. On this date, a technician arrived at the Detroit Detention Center to perform a 120-day certification. The instrument failed testing, but the technician did not notice the failure. Consequently, he left the instrument in service until October 13, 2019. During this 3-day period, the instrument was used for six OWI evidential breath tests. Because the instrument was not properly serviced and was left in service, these six cases did not have reliable breath evidence. The MSP sent a notice to the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, which decided to dismiss the evidence in these cases. Following discovery of this error, MSP requested removal of the technician responsible, with removal and replacement to occur no later than January 15, 2020. This never occurred due to the MSP actions taken on January 7 to issue the stop work order. December 2019 – MSP began the process of establishing a unit within the Forensic Science Division to oversee the state’s breath alcohol testing program. The unit will be comprised of three equipment technician positions to maintain and certify the state’s breath alcohol testing equipment. January 2, 2020 – During a routine audit of documents submitted by the vendor for the prior two-week period, an irregularity is noticed on an instrument at the Alpena County Sheriff’s Department. The MSP immediately requested the original documents from the technician. January 6, 2020 – MSP confirmed the irregularity was the result of the technician fabricating the paperwork for a required test that was not performed on the instrument. A criminal investigation is opened by the MSP into possible forgery of a public document. This investigation is ongoing.January 7, 2020 – With potential criminal acts committed by an Intoximeters technician, the MSP issues a stop work order with the vendor and secures all equipment and paperwork from the three technicians. January 10, 2020 – MSP finalizes an emergency plan to immediately bring all maintenance responsibilities for the state’s 203 instruments in-house, and notification is made to police and prosecutors of the stop work order and MSP’s new responsibilities. January 13, 2020- MSP personnel continued through the weekend to review records from the technicians yielding additional discrepancies involving a second technician and three more impacted instruments (Beverly Hills PD, Pittsfield Township PD, and Tecumseh PD), in which it is suspected that instrument calibration tests were again fabricated. With this new information, MSP removes all 203 Datamaster DMT evidential breath alcohol testing instruments from service until they can be inspected and verified by MSP personnel to ensure they are properly calibrated. MSP recommends to police agencies that they utilize blood draws rather than Contact: Shanon Banner 517-284-3222 Jan. 16, 2020 The post MSP Update on State’s Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing Program appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
  25. LANSING, MI — Michigan courts and police continue to work within a gray created by state marijuana legalization that contradicts federal law. Not only are lines blurred by conflicting jurisdictional laws, and complicated by the division of the state’s medical and recreational statutes, but Michigan courts operate, in part, based on precedents established under the now-faulty premise that marijuana is illegal. A court ruling could help to tidy things up a bit. The Court of Appeals in an opinion published Feb. 13, 2020 ruled that, while police must have more evidence than simply the scent of marijuana to justify a warrant-less vehicle search, lying or deceiving police may change that. In November 2018, Trooper Allan Park of the Michigan State Police stopped medical marijuana caregiver Thomas Moorman at a gas station in the Upper Peninsula’s Alger County for speeding. Park claimed he smelled “a strong odor of fresh marijuana emanating from the vehicle, which indicated to him that there was a ‘good quantity’ of marijuana in the vehicle,” the Court of Appeals said in their ruling. Moorman said he had no marijuana but as questioning persisted, he admitted that he harvested some marijuana earlier in the day. He also told the trooper he was a registered medical marijuana caregiver with five assigned patients, the Court of Appeals said. The court ruled. ” … We conclude that defendant’s behavior (denying the presence of marijuana) was inconsistent with being in lawful possession of marijuana … This behavior, in conjunction with the odor of marijuana, gave rise to probable cause … The court did not address how possession of recreational marijuana might impact an officer’s right to conduct a vehicle search. Read More @Mlive. Case Law Reference People v Williams, 472 Mich 308, 315; 696 NW2d 636 (2005). “nder the automobile exception, the police may search a motor vehicle without the necessity of first obtaining a warrant if probable cause to support the search exists.” Kazmierczak, 461 Mich at 418-419. In Kazmierczak, this Court held that “the smell of marijuana alone by a person qualified to know the odor may establish probable cause to search a motor vehicle, pursuant to the motor vehicle exception to the warrant requirement.” Kazmierczak, 461 Mich at 413. The post Michigan medical marijuana law does not protect liars court of appeals says appeared first on Komorn Law. View the full article
×
×
  • Create New...