Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'lawyer'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Private Forums - For Paid Members
    • MMMA Members Forum
  • Public Forums
    • Michigan Medical Marihuna Facilities Act
    • Patient Information
    • Caregiver Issues
    • Planet Green Trees Radio
    • General Growing Information and Discussion
    • Medical Research and Cannabis Science
    • Michigan Marijuana News
    • Legal Professionals
    • Health Care Professionals
    • Veterans Forum
    • Local Compassion Clubs
    • Law Enforcement and the War on Drugs
    • General Conversation
    • Political Satire, Pop Culture, and Cannabis History
    • Volunteerism - MMMA Support
    • Industrial Hemp in Michigan
    • Canada Legalization

Blogs

  • Marijuana Ranch's Blog
  • The Quiet Word
  • Patsy Cline's Blog
  • Patsy Cline's Blog
  • TRUTH DRUG
  • TRUTH DRUG
  • truth drug
  • we_make_the_laws' Blog
  • jason_arnold9's Blog
  • jason_arnold9's Blog
  • papa k's Blog
  • TajMahal's Blog
  • Sledge's Blog
  • motownbass' Blog
  • solabeirtan's Blog
  • DaKine's Blog
  • ronm's Blog
  • Mr. Wolf's Blog
  • crazygirl0024898's Blog
  • HerbalHealing's Blog
  • HerbalHealing's Blog
  • Ms Chocolate's Blog
  • ronm's Blog
  • Ian's Blog
  • wolfgama's Blog
  • 420crew's Blog
  • greenleaf's Blog
  • greenleaf's Blog
  • TdaFarmer's Blog
  • LansingAreaCaregiver's Blog
  • LansingAreaCaregiver's Blog
  • Marijuana Ranch's Blog
  • MLM's Blog
  • westmich's Blog
  • tom purcell esq's Blog
  • Grand Rapids
  • greenbuddha's Blog
  • Captian Picard's Blog
  • westernwaynecountycc's Blog
  • bestbud's Blog
  • eddie's Blog
  • Physician/Clinic now accepting new patients
  • Stuff
  • budhabit661's Blog
  • cheeba9's Blog
  • Looking for Clinic or Doctor Closer
  • clarkali's Blog
  • Finster947's Blog
  • RIKKI's Blog
  • Dizzledot's Recipes
  • mayorherb's Blog
  • travelnjudyt's Blog
  • Medicating Social Network's Blog
  • carrierquick's Blog
  • highbanker's Blog
  • tray123420's Blog
  • 420upgirl's Blog
  • robcamm09's Blog
  • Jburns' Blog
  • Nina Backon's Blog
  • dotinthebox's Blog
  • pergamum362's Blog
  • Dr. Rush's Palliative Potions
  • M. Dutch Engle's Blog
  • OrganicMarijuana's Blog
  • Roger's Blog
  • TCdbob's Blog
  • luvindragonflys' Blog
  • 420 Growers Day Dinner
  • tripleripplehydro's Blog
  • Dirt McGirt's Blog
  • Charmie Says
  • cindy48647's Blog
  • jpc5257's Blog
  • honsolow's Blog
  • SICKandTIRED's Blog
  • Bmcqueen's Blog
  • ultrafishboy's Blog
  • Nemosity's Blog
  • PlymouthMMC's Blog
  • Brad's Blog
  • dragonoath's Blog
  • Oregon school teacher announced his intention to embarrass Tea Partiers by attending their rallies
  • Michimarigander's Blog
  • stxchick's Blog
  • Croppled1's Blog
  • Kim Zimmer's Blog
  • aatest's Blog
  • Mari's Blog
  • CataplexyCat
  • Macomb County Caregiver's Blog
  • Bud vanderbutts' Blog
  • dent58's Blog
  • captim06's Blog
  • worldwidepusher's Blog
  • bigoake15's Blog
  • ferris' Blog
  • catmandu's Blog
  • canadain's Blog
  • molasses- yes or no
  • we_suffer's Blog
  • HighDog's Blog
  • savetheworld420's Blog
  • MaryJayne's Blog
  • imthiskid85's Blog
  • voyagerkinson's Blog
  • cgoldsb1's Blog
  • schroth's Blog
  • pipe dream's Blog
  • Adam C's Blog
  • any one know of any patients needing a caregiver?
  • TheFlyingBuddha's Blog
  • ss396tom's Blog
  • awpcsak's Blog
  • first mate's Blog
  • Michigan Certification
  • taffy's Blog
  • fatorangeguy's Blog
  • GrowinginMichigan.com's Blog
  • medicinewoman's Blog
  • TreesAreTheKey's Blog
  • Stories From the Theater of the War on Drugs
  • Kalkaska Compassion's Blog
  • Master's Blog
  • useexcursion's Blog
  • Compassionate Apothecary
  • wringly's Blog
  • bonedaddy4u's Blog
  • Flipt4it's Blog
  • laurieb333's Blog
  • SPYIRIL OUT/46N2's Blog
  • adam.glover's Blog
  • G Bud's Blog
  • u.p.er's Blog
  • burriedalive's Blog
  • natures caregivers Grow Journal
  • nitros_531's Blog
  • St. Clair County Caregiver Seeking Patients
  • lo-tek's Blog
  • Certification center
  • zarr4640's Blog
  • Houndferd's Blog
  • ynot40's Blog
  • ig5862223444's Blog
  • Lost in time's Blog
  • stangaratti's Blog
  • Todd Moser's Blog
  • crabby's Blog
  • Law Abiding Citizen's BLOG
  • msprik's Blog
  • Hazel Park Compassion Center
  • CaliBud Man's Blog
  • Pom Pom's Blog
  • Urban Farmer's Blog
  • GrowGirl's Blog
  • tutman2006's Blog
  • bobandtorey's Blog
  • urlaub420's Blog
  • MaryJ's Blog
  • Midtown Detroit Compassion Club
  • Sojourner's Blog
  • MiAlternativeCare's Blog
  • Murphyslaw's Blog
  • MendelMedication's Blog
  • ram1960's Blog
  • Pencil's Blog
  • wezy2's Blog
  • Green Cross
  • since72's Blog
  • Private Oakland County Club
  • Test Blog
  • FloridityNow Blog
  • Johnny Grower's Blog
  • Marq Med Marihuaha Cntr's Blog
  • itssortalegal10's Blog
  • lovelymaryjane's Blog
  • Meds4real's Blog
  • Harleybo's Blog
  • C.A.'s Blog
  • onthefly's Blog
  • sobeit's Blog
  • lisa24's Blog
  • Findme Buds' Blog
  • jacksun01's Blog
  • guyger's Blog
  • alternativecaresolutions' Blog
  • antoniobridges' Blog
  • bigjoni's Blog
  • MichiganBotanist's Blog
  • NaturalMedication's Blog
  • gpape075's Blog
  • cnccloning's Blog
  • annabellefreemance's Blog
  • hotdogbuds' Blog
  • Clear and Unambiguous' Blog
  • Crazy Grandma
  • zikki223's Blog
  • TOMMY CHONG's Blog
  • Live Together Die Alone
  • Ann Arbor Health Collective.
  • Sheba's Blog
  • kellynsue's Blog
  • I_SMOKE_CHRONICALLY's Blog
  • Medical Marijuana's Blog
  • nerd's Blog
  • perkinsfamily06's Blog
  • The Michiganja Blog
  • Gsxrdank's Blog
  • yahbud777's Blog
  • jereweed's Blog
  • bstar's Blog
  • kashro's Blog
  • GaryGygax's Blog
  • EricSaville's Blog
  • Walled Gardens of MMJ
  • Gratiot County Compassion Club
  • jpitts5127's Blog
  • redsonas Blog
  • bcolema47's Blog
  • OldTimer's Blog
  • CANNABIS SATIVA's Blog
  • Silverdome Expo Oct 29-31st 2010
  • scarylarry's Blog
  • Bob Heflin's Blog
  • Grand Traverse Compassionate Connection
  • medical marihuana victory
  • mike garcia's Blog
  • Cannabis_Caregiver's Blog
  • iksweyl's Blog
  • Mr. Brooks' Blog
  • Tommy217xxx's Blog
  • ogkushmaster's Blog
  • chuck50's Blog
  • YooperPot's Blog
  • theotherguy's Blog
  • Dano's Blog
  • pauls weed's Blog
  • viper5776's Blog
  • rockinlespaul's Blog
  • College Campus
  • rcgrowing's Blog
  • sirhuffsalot's Blog
  • Interesting ethics
  • dakota's Blog
  • NorthernMichiganCC's Blog
  • JeffMAC's Blog
  • ees420smokin's Blog
  • Zachariah's Blog
  • austin130's Blog
  • roomtogrow's Blog
  • mibrains' Blog
  • DreamWarrior67's Blog
  • BlueMoonCaregiving's Blog
  • MacombCountyCaregiver's Blog
  • 420soft's Blog
  • ljay's Blog
  • stickylegal420's Blog
  • domonic04's Blog
  • Free Haunted haunted for everyone..
  • mysticblufox's Blog
  • GREENkZOO's Grow Walkthrough
  • NO MEDICINE
  • allencatkeith's Blog
  • guteman's Blog
  • crazy80girl's Blog
  • master.caregiver's Blog
  • Grandpa's Blog
  • stillhere's Blog
  • Becky's Blog
  • Cuda's Blog
  • 420dean's Blog
  • jaks blog
  • kratom
  • Curiosity of the Cannabis Experience
  • DoctorJAY420's Blog
  • StrangLuv's Blog
  • slacker's Blog
  • Lennox's Blog
  • koko's Blog
  • tbbot2's Blog
  • NatuRxGarden's Blog
  • GREENGLOVE's Blog
  • rodzilla's Blog
  • tanlover's bi-mwm
  • White Knight's Blog
  • satdude84's Blog
  • bluerose's Blog
  • Alan Shore's Blog
  • Smokie's Blog
  • PotMamaDukes' Blog
  • Jennie Lee's Blog
  • jms1173's Blog
  • Out There
  • RavenGreen's Blog
  • Mr.Marley's Blog
  • PurpWidow's Blog
  • Marijuana Patients
  • flintstoner4279's Blog
  • BlueSmoke's Blog
  • ur neighbor's Blog
  • kahalagirl's Blog
  • mommaonamission's Blog
  • 77-Default's Blog
  • Leonard4684's Blog
  • mi-medicalmarijuanasupplies' Blog
  • business' Blog
  • Treecity Health Collective's Blog
  • blaght!'s Blog
  • GOOD_BUDZ's Blog
  • hydo-kyle's Blog
  • Kathryn's Blog
  • Johnny Weed's Blog
  • NewAgeApproach's Blog
  • cocacola's Blog
  • ElComeQK's Blog
  • Rachel72's Blog
  • Unkleb0b's Blog
  • windrunner1's Blog
  • Savagegrace's Blog
  • -Wolverine-'s Blog
  • Hippymama's Blog
  • caringkristin's Blog
  • Newlygrown's Blog
  • The Ground up
  • cherri's Blog
  • goofyfootmom's Blog
  • Grand Rapids- CareTaker
  • greenecollective's Blog
  • dr detroit's Blog
  • mde48088's Blog
  • shadewalker's Blog
  • YouSickPigs' Blog
  • Herb Cannabis' Blog
  • brandokush's Blog
  • tootiefruity's Blog
  • littlewalter's Blog
  • Jimmie_s96's Blog
  • Cannabisken's Blog
  • Valentine's Blog
  • Judge Humiliates and orders to STOP!
  • oldvet's Blog
  • My MMMA Blog
  • growing
  • I'm 17 and have severe back pain, do i qualify?
  • Shebee's Blog
  • zappafanatic's Blog
  • 67Breeze's Blog
  • Kirsten Mia's Blog
  • Webbster's Blog
  • Hoodstock exg.'s Blog
  • roman's
  • StanMckim's Blog
  • humble's Blog
  • Merchant Processing for MMJ
  • NTJ's Musings
  • Write your represenative
  • Geoffrey Laster's Blog
  • southwest_mi's Blog
  • danr's Blog
  • seabass' Blog
  • Luk3's Blog
  • MiSANE's Blog
  • Giving Info
  • caregivers needed
  • Gray Van's Blog
  • jogman's Blog
  • mking's Blog
  • davidag2004's Blog
  • eaglexpress' Blog
  • Smokies Medical Marijuana's Blog
  • karma's Blog
  • Air conditioner
  • petoskeystoned's Blog
  • Caregivers in Hazel Park/ Madison heights area
  • lou's Blog
  • whiskey's Blog
  • Marijuana seeds
  • benjibigbud's Blog
  • demonicangel's Blog
  • lenf's Blog
  • SWMCC Roadside Cleanup
  • maryjanehemp's
  • ToKiN_WhItEGuY's Blog
  • ulc castle ovid's Blog
  • fvlee7744's Blog
  • miraclegrower's Blog
  • have you used?
  • AlternativeSolutionsPlus' Blog
  • Blog
  • themasterMI's Blog
  • bumrush's Blog
  • Richard Micheal Craze
  • Michael Komorn's Blog
  • Detroit Dennis' Blog
  • abbikatherine's Blog
  • woodb55's Blog
  • dogwood's Blog
  • grassman's Blog
  • NEED HELP WITH SUPERCRITICAL EXTRACTOR
  • confused's Blog
  • yooper49908's Blog
  • johnnywestmi's Blog
  • My First Time Growing My Medicine.
  • JAG420's Blog
  • GrowRooms DOMES
  • Daily Bread
  • ryline's Blog
  • King of weed's Blog
  • lemotry's Blog
  • blueberry's Blog
  • The Digital Nomad's Blog
  • eve2011's Blog
  • BishopBob's Blog
  • northerncalifbuds' Blog
  • Home Appraisal
  • DonnaChris' Blog
  • SGL's Blog
  • Shitder B's Words of Wisdom
  • BMG's Blog
  • MMMCG for Professionals' Blog
  • swmndct's Blog
  • Old Joe's Blog
  • mendonesian's Blog
  • kevintomanjr's Blog
  • More software
  • legalcannabisrelief's Blog
  • timireferseed's Blog
  • Sue's Blog
  • GROW WITH TRUE LIVING ORGANICS
  • loraine6204's Blog
  • Pot Millie's Blog
  • A Family Torn by Michigan Medical Marijuana needs help
  • Dr. Bob's Blog
  • Sandy_Eggo's Blog
  • Tazmaniac's Blog
  • Gagetowndog's Blog
  • chuckwick1's Blog
  • Patients Needed
  • medcaregiver69's Blog
  • letter from state showing approval of caregiver status
  • combatvet&caregiver's Blog
  • lumameds' Blog
  • bigstink69's Blog
  • CopperCountryCareGivers' Blog
  • nvinson105's Blog
  • Fat Freddy's Blog
  • Caregiver Needs Patients
  • jim1890's Blog
  • tye08's Blog
  • Q-tipper's Blog
  • Bob's Blog
  • momo's Blog
  • EdwardGlen's Blog
  • Cannab Rx's Blog
  • higginsmike's Blog
  • aduval327's Blog
  • ffvicyca's Blog
  • MacombCareServices' Blog
  • 420Medicated's Blog
  • JBINDICA's Blog
  • NMFSCCOGF's Blog
  • weightloss' Blog
  • LittleBit1015's Blog
  • Growingbudz420's Blog
  • Nana420's Blog
  • GrowGoddess' Blog
  • smohsin586's Blog
  • The Sad Reality
  • feggitaboutit
  • Tokin1's Blog
  • Community Awareness Information
  • Cancer Patient needs Cannibus or Simpson Oil to save his life.
  • Trix's Blog
  • Test Blog catagory
  • Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself
  • MenWhoStareAtPlants - What is the deal with clones?
  • Phyllis54's Blog
  • klastein's Blog
  • Healthcare
  • CEEPOPPE's Blog
  • 1lluminated1's Blog
  • Wayne State University Study 'Is marijuana medical"
  • LilDC8301DC's Blog
  • Depression for medical card
  • peanutbutter's Blog
  • Asha Catnip's Blog
  • MerIin's Blog
  • luckylee714's Blog
  • fredof335's Blog
  • lothar6996's Blog
  • Plan B Wellness Center's Blog
  • Compassion Chronicles' Blog
  • troyboyny7's Blog
  • beemerman's Blog
  • kev's Blog
  • Michael Komorn's Wordpress Blog
  • Krystenah's Blog
  • Inforamation about Steroids
  • Grow With Induction
  • Dr. Dali's Daily Prescription
  • Cancerpatientsson's Blog
  • holman2000's Blog
  • Wellminded's Blog
  • tricomesmaster12's Blog
  • the WIDOW MAKER
  • apley2004's Blog
  • spottedwolff's Blog
  • kushonline52's Blog
  • cgurnee's Blog
  • Poshhhh's Blog
  • Mr. Greenjeans' Blog
  • CrystalZ2014's Blog
  • Doubling Down
  • skeeter's Blog
  • Drchopper74's Blog
  • in vivo's Blog
  • sparklingbud's Blog
  • nfitzy's Blog
  • Sbillisitz's Blog
  • inhousealien's Blog
  • bustedinclintontwsp's Blog
  • needadoctorasap's Blog
  • g&g's Blog
  • sbtk2012's Blog
  • Leading iPhone Apps Development Companies in New York
  • Marijuana, Vaporizer, Health
  • www.fastweeds.com
  • kennethrobert's Blog
  • MMJforAmerica's Blog
  • MoonAndStarz's Blog
  • Lifting the Fog
  • S_Caldwell's Blog
  • deerslayerdeb's Blog
  • SirLongSmoke's Blog
  • Joel's Blog
  • Weed Girl Blog
  • jamescw75's Blog
  • druid's Blog
  • pscobrat30's Blog
  • jerry burch's Blog
  • twigglestix's Blog
  • wholesaler's Blog
  • newtogrowing's Blog
  • HydroRep's Blog
  • jamesv's Blog
  • Seeking help - possible cancer diagnosis
  • free marijuana
  • Atmos Orbit Vaporizer
  • neista chris' Blog
  • gomezhopes' Blog
  • Seeking Honest Caregiver in Iron River
  • Blogog
  • mz.beyourself's Blog
  • tbone8861's Blog
  • topherbassist00's Blog
  • ortiz's Blog
  • micheal anthony's Blog
  • vvilliambb's Blog
  • PratimaMakanji's Blog
  • eddyshawn's Blog
  • Shooter Radner's Blog
  • vorp1956's Blog
  • craig gibson's Blog
  • dalrob's Blog
  • c2002002's Blog
  • chemistcolted's Blog
  • GOOD MEDICAL marijuana/weeds,hemp oil,Hash oils/ chocolate
  • MedStudent101's Blog
  • Doctors
  • Sativant
  • lawrencejerold3's Blog
  • JohnHarnson's Blog
  • HomeTown Hydro's Blog
  • GreenLads1
  • Colton's Legal Corner
  • david x's Blog
  • james45's Blog
  • Marijuana from A-Z
  • World Cannabis News
  • Dana Nessel for AG 2018 Campaign Blog
  • jerry
  • LC Solutions MI Accounting Blog
  • MMMA Video Blog
  • Komorn Law - News
  • Planet Green Trees Blog
  • Government Stuff
  • Police Entrapment Using Fraudulent MMP Cards
  • Uncle Jesse's 2 Cents

Product Groups

  • Advertisements
  • Memberships
  • Apparel
    • Tee Shirts
    • Sweatshirts
  • Books
  • Classes

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 8 results

  1. Michael Komorn has worked tirelessly for his clients at Komorn Law PLLC to return property seized and forfeited to the police. The items and property seized often has absolutely no medical marijuana (or any crime at all) connection whatsoever. Just looking at the list of things seized, none of it makes sense. 4 wheeler? Gas generator? 401k retirement account? Cars purchased 20 years ago and restored. Ladders, children's birthday money taken out of their Hallmark birthday cards. iphones, ipads, computers, cash, gold rings, guns. The police will take anything of value that they can in any medical marijuana case. As an expert in civil asset forfeiture, Michael Komorn and Komorn Law PLLC attorney Jeff Frazier educate other lawyers on the steps and pitfalls of forfeiture cases on ICLE. Michael Komorn and Jeff Frazier discuss with Rachael Sedlacek about the procedural requirements in a civil asset forfeiture case. Criminal defense can often involve recovering property seized by the police. Civil asset forfeiture cases require navigation of unique procedural rules and complex negotiations. LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users.When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. Rep. Lucido says bill would prevent police from seizing innocent people's stuff Kim Russell 11:28 PM, Jan 30, 2018 LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users. When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. “It allows law enforcement and benefits everybody, to remove the profit motive from drug dealing,” said Robert Stevenson, the Executive Director of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. Police say they only seize stuff they truly believe is connected to crimes. Often people are never charged with a crime or their belongings are kept after charges are dropped. “I did not get bound over by the judge but they still have my stuff,” said Ginnifer Hency as she testified before state lawmakers in 2015. She said she has multiple sclerosis and is a medical marijuana patient. She said even after a judge cleared her of any crime, the prosecutor fought to keep her valuables. Lawmakers changed the law to raise the burden of proof, but people are still voicing complaints. “I felt robbed, like a highway robbery,” said John Hamann of what happened to him and his dad Ron Hamann. The Hamanns say they believe it is about making money for law enforcement. When medical marijuana became legal, they applied for cards to be caregivers and patients. “I thought everything was legal,” said Ron. “Everything you are supposed to do. I followed all the weights, all the counts and everything like that, but it doesn’t matter. They take everything and say gotcha,” said John. They say almost three years ago police seized all their valuables. They say about two years later, only when they came close to winning their belongings back, were they charged with manufacturing marijuana. To them, it felt like a shakedown. “WCPO’s longstanding office protocol is that any civil forfeiture case and the associated criminal cases are kept separate. In other words WCPO has a fire wall in place..The civil and criminal cases are completely independent from one another,” said Maria Miller of the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office in a statement. The prosecutor’s office says the Hamann's face the charges because it is alleged that they had over 20 pounds of marijuana and 69 marijuana plants. Komorn, their attorney says that doesn’t make sense as a legal allegation. Ron had a patient card and proof he was a caregiver for two patients. He was allowed to possess 36 plants. John had a patient card and was a caregiver for 4 patients. He was allowed to possess 60 plants. As for the weight, Komorn says pictures submitted as evidence show the marijuana weighed was unusable in that it was wet and included stalks thrown in the garbage. Komorn says only usable marijuana is supposed to count in weight limitations. The Hamanns say what was seized has nothing to do with marijuana. They say police seized their 401Ks, which they contributed to through their jobs at a home remodeling company. Police told them they could because the money was from drugs. “I don’t understand it at all. It is on my paystub. It shows where my money comes from. It is all legal,” said John Hamann. “All the money is traceable from his job into his 401k,” said Rep. Peter Lucido (R-36th District). “There is no logic or reason for the police to do what they are doing. But they have the right to do it under state law.” Representative Peter Lucido has introduced House Bill 4158. He says police all too often seize property from the innocent.Taking a look at the numbers. The state’s asset forfeiture report says in 2016 police seized more than 15 million dollars in property. In about ten percent of those cases no one was charged. He wants the law changed, so that police would only be able to keep your stuff if there is a conviction, forcing police to at least charge people in order to keep their belongings. “They have a right to seize it and put it into an evidence locker, but if they don’t charge the person, what did the person do wrong under the law?” asks Lucido. “It does put people in a tough spot. It puts a person in a tough spot if those proceeds are from illegal activity,” said Stevenson. Law enforcement leaders, like Stevenson, say If someone wants to get their stuff back, all they have to do is answer the questions investigators have. It has the potential to be a powerful tool in the fight against crime. “One of the things you have to do in a civil case, which you do not have to do in a criminal case, is you have to answer questions,” said Stevenson. Michael Komorn argues that it hurts justice. He says he takes on clients who can’t afford his services, because their assets are seized. “The idea that the government just takes it, and the idea that by possessing it it becomes theirs, and the burden shifts to the owner of it to prove that the property is not guilty or that they got it legally, goes against the grain of what people expect from our legal system,” said Komorn. John and Ron Hamman says they believe they will be found not guilty - but in the meantime are being punished. Rep. Lucido will have the chance to make his case that this law needs to be changed during a hearing in Lansing on February 6. https://www.wxyz.com/news/rep-lucido-says-bill-would-prevent-police-from-seizing-innocent-peoples-stuff http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman Read more about criminal asset forfeiture and civil asset forfeiture on my blog. http://komornlaw.com/does-freezing-defendants-untainted-assets-violate-right-to-counsel-of-choice/ http://komornlaw.com/how-a-sex-toy-put-spotlight-on-michigan-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws-targeted-for-reform/ http://komornlaw.com/civil-asset-forfeiture-guilty-until-proven-innocent/ http://komornlaw.com/editorial-court-puts-limit-on-police-stealing/ http://komornlaw.com/feds-using-forfeiture-to-their-advantage/ http://komornlaw.com/mich-cops-seized-24m-in-2014-in-drug-cases/ http://komornlaw.com/house-speaker-michigan-must-reform-asset-forfeiture/ http://komornlaw.com/court-pot-as-tip-no-reason-for-police-to-seize-car/ http://komornlaw.com/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman-fox-2/ http://komornlaw.com/police-ransack-charges-dropped/ http://komornlaw.com/2015-michigan-state-police-asset-forfeiture-report-final/ Meet Some Law Enforcement Officers Who Support Forfeiture Reform Michigan Legislature should strengthen property rights By JARRETT SKORUP | Feb. 14, 2018 | Follow Jarrett Skorup on Twitter While many interest groups representing law enforcement employees oppose reforming civil asset forfeiture to require a criminal conviction before the state can take ownership of a person’s property, some law enforcement officers support the changes. In the Traverse City Record-Eagle, reporter Kyle Kaminski gets comments from a variety of law enforcement officials about forfeiture generally and about a bill that would reform how it's used in Michigan. Here are the responses: “It would be easier for us and more fair to those who are having their property forfeited to have a criminal conviction,” said Grand Traverse County Undersheriff Nate Alger. “Our system is based on being innocent until proven guilty.” … Attorney General Bill Schuette this week said conviction before [forfeiture] is a “good principle” to maintain. … County Prosecutor Bob Cooney noted most local forfeiture cases include a criminal conviction but said current laws force them to continue. “I wish the state would better fund narcotics teams and not incentivize them in any way to go after forfeiture dollars,” Cooney said. “At the same time, those laws were set up to take away profits from those selling illegal drugs. That’s the idea.” … “I’m a little concerned that by tying them to a criminal conviction, it’s going to bring me people who try to barter their way out of things,” Kalkaska County Prosecutor Mike Perreault said. “I could also see the argument then that we’re only prosecuting people to take their stuff.” Benzie County Sheriff Ted Schendel said “common sense” dictates police first need to prove someone guilty of a crime. “I know forfeiture is a huge asset, especially for drug enforcement teams. There’s never enough money to fund those things,” Schendel said. “But I like to err on the side of the people and the Constitution.” The law enforcement officials are joined by others in their field who support the conviction requirement. House Bill 4158 would do the following: Require a criminal conviction, or plea agreement, prior to any forfeiture taking place for assets under $50,000. Allow for exemptions for people who die, are deported or abandon their property. This properly balances protecting innocent people’s property rights with enabling law enforcement to forfeit property that was either obtained with proceeds from illegal activity or used for illegal purposes. http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/meet-some-law-enforcement-officers-who-support-forfeiture-reform
  2. Simple as 1,2,3 - Will be the new policy for the MMMA forums So much ado has been made at our attempt to provide a reasonable policy for posting on the forums. Much debate has been had amongst the moderator staff and on the forums amongst our members. As is often the case and even more so on the Internet, communication and semantics are critical when trying to develop a consistent but clear policy regarding the Act that can be enforced easily and without issue. The unambiguous policy to date has created some confusion when its intent was just the opposite. Additionally and without merit many of the moderators have been under attack for attempting to enforce a policy that is designed only to protect patients from arrest, prosecution or penalty. The reference to Nazis is offensive and reflects an absolute lack of knowledge of history, common sense, and humanity. The comparison of anything the moderators do on this site to the devastation the Nazis did in world history is blatant ignorance. Let it be stated now, and made very clear that the MMMA does not believe that the proper interpretation of the law would prohibit any of the behavior that may fall into the so called ambiguous zone. The MMMA believes that the Act should be interpreted liberally, and with the sole purpose of protecting patients and caregivers. Further the MMMA does not believe that dispensaries, farmers markets, any registered caregiver transfers to any registered patient or patient to patient transfers are unlawful. In fact the MMMA believes and acknowledges that all of these acts and behaviors are critical and essential for the medical cannabis community to survive and flourish. Why then would the MMMA attempt to create a policy that purports to limit this behavior? The answer is simple, we are not! What are we trying to do then? The MMMA is simply trying to provide advice and direction for patients and caregivers to avoid arrest, and be forced to defend themselves in court. It is that simple. Perhaps as simple as 1, 2, 3. Simple as 1, 2, 3 will be the new policy for the MMMA forums. The behavior of patients and caregivers will be and should be assessed by a ranking of risk and liability scored by Level 1 risk, Level 2 risk, and Level 3 risk. Ask yourself the following question: is there a consistent and unequivocal interpretation of the behavior by patients and caregivers that LEO would agree is lawful? Said another way, would the behavior in question result in an arrest if you asked all LEO statewide? The focus here is not what the MMMA wants; the focus here is not what the MMMA believes the proper interpretation of the act should be. The focus here is not what LEO in your local community says is lawful. Instead the operative question is how do all Leo state wide interpret the act and what do they believe is unlawful behavior? Is there a consistent and unequivocal interpretation of the behavior by patients and caregivers that LEO would agree is lawful? If the answer is yes you are in a Level 1 Risk category and should be protected against arrest, prosecution, or any penalty. All other behavior outside of this definition falls into Level 2 and 3 risk categories. Level 2 and 3 behavior is not unlawful per se, but is behavior that may subject you to a higher risk or liability of arrest. The key here is that the MMMA is not calling this behavior unlawful. The Level 2 and 3 behavior however is behavior which may not without equivocation protect you from arrest, prosecution, or any penalty, although the MMMA believes it should. Those seeking information and guidance from our site need to know that your protections do not include immunity from arrest. Instead your protections will come via the affirmative defense set out in section 8 of the Act. For those that are not aware, the Act is set up with 2 different levels of protection. There is a section 4 protection which is immunity from arrest prosecution or any penalty. Immunity means that after interacting with LEO, you are released without incident, no arrest takes place, medicine, money, and property is not confiscated. You are not handed an "intent to forfeit" document that requires you to post bond for your property. Immunity means you go home; you kiss your significant other on the lips when you get home and you thank the stars above that you are sleeping in your own bed instead of the concrete floor of the local county jail. Then there is a section 8 protection, which is an affirmative defense. These protections are as real and as important as the protections of section 4, but they occur in a completely different environment that is important to distinguish. The section 8 affirmative defense will take place in Court, before a Judge at an evidentiary hearing (first). This game will start with you waking up from the concrete floor of the county jail. It will include eating bologna sandwiches for breakfast, the mustard jar will have something that looks like an infection growing on of the top. It will have been at least 24 hours since you spoke to your family (72 hours is the maximum), and the return to your normal life will not yet begin until you post bond, get your car out of the lot, which will cost you at least $1000. Then you will have approximately 15 days to post bond on the forfeiture case. This amount is usually 10% of the total value of the property seized. Consider the forfeiture matter a second case, one that will put the burden on you to establish that the items sought to be forfeited were acquired through lawfully earned funds. Lawfully earned funds could be a definition that is in controversy in your forfeiture case. After the arraignment in your criminal case, usually done by video while you remain in the jail cell, you will be on bond. The conditions will likely include no use of medical cannabis while on bond. You will have to hire an attorney or rely upon the experience of the local court appointed attorney's knowledge of the MMMA. After many months of your case pending and when you find yourself at your evidentiary hearing for your section 8 defense much ado will be made about your bona fide relationship with your certifying doctor. "Is my doctor willing to come to court?" is a good question to ask yourself when engaging in Level 2 and 3 behaviors. Remember if your doctor is not your treating physician, in some jurisdictions you may fail to establish the first prong of section 8. Although the MMMA believes this is wrong, this is how it has played out in many jurisdictions. Awareness of these distinctions is all that is being sought by the MMMA. The point here is that the different levels of protection between section 4 and section 8 are significant; with the most important factor being one protects you from arrest (Section 4) while the other (Section 8) protects you from conviction in court. The previous policy and guidance provided on the forums for our members has merely embraced a policy to avoid arrest, or Level 1 risk behavior. Moving forward the key factor that will and should be expressed will be to point out and make known what behavior falls into the category that is a Level 1 risk that protects you from arrest, prosecution and any penalty versus what behavior is a Level 2 or 3 risk that offers its protections pursuant to section 8 in court. No one at the MMMA wants to be responsible for advising behavior that results in a patient or caregiver being arrested. Likewise no one at the MMMA believes patients or caregivers should be arrested. But we are living in a time when the Peoples' law has yet to be implemented as it was intended. There remain many different interpretations throughout the state that are not consistent or absolutely clear, to the extent that all LEO would agree. For example see the twisted interpretation of Court of Appeals cases from the "Legal Updates at the Michigan State Police," website regarding medical marihuana.** Please note that the MMMA disagrees with these interpretations, but would be acting neglectful if we did not point out these simple facts for our community. We are not taking responsibility for how LEO currently thinks, we disagree with it and have been and will continue to try to change how they think. In the meantime, we are simply reporting it for the benefit and protection of the medical cannabis community. ** http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._99_390580_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._96_382986_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._91_370314_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._89_362839_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._78_276204_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._69_259822_7.pdf Soon a day will come when we can all laugh about this but in the interim our community and those that post on the MMMA forums and our membership needs to be made aware and be informed. More importantly they need to act with knowledge, caution, and understanding the various levels of risk associated with the behavior they choose to engage in. With that being said what once was called the unambiguous compliance policy, or behavior that would conform to those principals has been morphed into what will now be described as Level 1 risk behavior. Strict compliance with section 4 of the act is what will be advised to all who care to listen, as the type of behavior that has the lowest degree of risk of arrest. Everything else is Level 2 or 3 risk. That is to say if an encounter with law enforcement occurs the level of risk of being arrested, and being forced to defend yourself in court is higher. Is Level 2 and 3 risk behavior lawful? I personally think so, but who cares what I think. The analysis here is what we know of how LEO sees it collectively throughout the state. It may not be that way in your jurisdiction and it may be that way for a very good reason, but until all LEO acknowledge it as so, that behavior is just simply of higher risk. Please notice that nowhere in any of this analysis is the word unlawful or illegal used we are simply pointing out that there may be a higher risk of a negative outcome. So please understand, that no one at the MMMA wants to impede the success of the medical cannabis community growing and thriving, we just want those that care to listen to understand the difference of how the Act is being interpreted by LEO,the courts, and the impact it is having on patients and caregivers. Knowledge of these distinctions will make for a better understanding of how the lines have been drawn temporarily by the courts and law enforcement, and give our community proper notice of the risks that they may be taking when engaging in the medical use of cannabis. In closing I hope this helps clear up some of the confusion created earlier, and we all look forward to your input and an educated discussion which evolves this community. Thank you for your support and understanding. Michael Komorn President of the MMMA
  3. Raines: Sheriffs critical to state rights “The county sheriff as the last line of defense against an overreaching federal government” “An effective way to protect that sovereignty, he said, is the Second Amendment. You can’t do that if you’re disarmed by a government that should be protecting your rights — not taking them away,” said Mack, who is the author of “The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope.” http://www.lansingst..._source=message Raines: Sheriffs critical to state rights Officer says right to bear arms in jeopardy CHARLOTTE — Eaton County Sheriff Mike Raines is part of a burgeoning nationwide movement that sees the county sheriff as the last line of defense against an overreaching federal government. The sheriff has the power to stand in the way and can help restore the U.S. Constitution as the “supreme law of the land,” supporters of the movement say. At least 160 sheriffs from around the country are believed to be supporters. Raines said it would be his duty to turn away a federal agent from the county — including an Internal Revenue Service auditor — if the agency was “overstepping (its) bounds.” “A lot of people think they’re losing their rights,” Raines said in a recent interview. “If we can get back those rights, one county at a time, it would be better for all the people in the U.S.” Raines was among nearly 100 sheriffs from across the country who earlier this year attended the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association’s first-ever convention in Las Vegas. A second convention, also in Las Vegas, is scheduled to begin today. Raines said he is not able to go. Organizers expect about 75 sheriffs who weren’t at the first convention to attend. There are more than 3,000 sheriffs in the U.S. One particular right Raines and other “constitutional sheriffs” focus on is the right to bear arms. They believe it’s in jeopardy. Read more: Primary Michigan statutes governing the office of sheriff “Get on the news, and you’ll find there’s always been a threat to take Second Amendment rights away,” Raines said. “There’s always been a threat out there.” He wasn’t specific, but said he’s heard about legislation that would take away Second Amendment rights. The constitutional sheriffs association’s founder, Richard Mack, was sheriff in Graham County, Ariz., more than a decade ago. He now writes books and travels the country, talking about his belief that an “out-of-control” federal government has left the country on the brink of destruction. Mack worries about federal agents going door-to-door, confiscating guns. He says farmers who produce raw milk have faced federal charges. — He calls the Environmental Protection Agency “the number-one job killer” because of its regulatory power. State sovereignty Mack, who believes a sheriff’s authority is so great that he or she doesn’t have to obey the president, said state sovereignty is the movement’s main focus. An effective way to protect that sovereignty, he said, is the Second Amendment. “You can’t do that if you’re disarmed by a government that should be protecting your rights — not taking them away,” said Mack, who is the author of “The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope.” He added: “Who’s going to enforce state sovereignty? Not the federal government. It has to be local officials, who have the courage to stand against the incursions of the federal government.” Mack said the movement is not subversive, and it’s not a violent protest. In fact, he said, having constitutional sheriffs is “a way to make sure it doesn’t get violent.” Raines, who is running for a third term this November against retired Ingham County sheriff’s Detective Lt. Tom Reich, is one of two sheriffs in Michigan known to be a part of the movement. The other is Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf. Leaf, who like Raines is a Republican, will attend this week’s convention in Las Vegas. He also went to the first. One of his goals, Leaf said, is to continue learning about what a sheriff’s duty and authority is. “If you don’t use the authority that is granted to you,” he said, “you are, in a sense, taking it away from the public.” This week’s convention, which begins today and ends Tuesday, features presentations on state sovereignty, the Bill of Rights as well a keynote speech by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Arpaio gained notoriety for his practice of housing some county jail inmates in an outdoor “tent city” in the desert. He also conducted an investigation into President Barack Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate, announcing this year that he’d determined it was fraudulent. Mack said he admires Arpaio for being a strong sheriff. 'Guardians' group A few years ago, Raines formed a citizens group, called the Guardians of the Constitution, made up mostly of citizens who hold licenses to carry concealed pistols. Raines called the group, which he said now has about 275 members, a “self-sustaining, non-law-enforcement, citizens group.” They meet monthly to discuss a range of issues, including concerns about the constitutionality of various legislation. They can help legislators make good decisions, Raines said, and pass “good, viable laws.” Many are concealed pistol license holders, he acknowledged. The fact that they have the gun licenses, Raines said, means they have been vetted by state and federal authorities and are eligible to serve in one of his agency’s volunteer deputy groups, such as the all-terrain vehicle or horse-riding divisions. The Guardians of the Constitution, he said, is like a clearinghouse for people who want to move into one of the volunteer deputy groups, which require volunteers to have concealed pistol permits. The group’s proposed mission statement, which is posted on the website for the sheriff’s office, says, in part: “We believe Sheriff Raines is an innovative and progressive sheriff with a heart for people and for the Constitution. ... A free society shall not be shackled by the bonds of tyranny, and shall have the right to keep and bear arms.” Raines said his main motivation is protecting all the rights of his constituents, particularly the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. “And if anybody is against that, they’re against protecting the rights of the individual,” he said, adding: “The citizens of the county and all across the country should be happy they have elected sheriffs, because they have the power to be a check and balance.” Michael A. Komorn Attorney and Counselor Law Office of Michael A. Komorn 3000 Town Center, Suite, 1800 Southfield, MI 48075 800-656-3557 (Toll Free) 248-351-2200 (Office) 248-357-2550 (Phone) 248-351-2211 (Fax) Email: michael@komornlaw.com Website: www.komornlaw.com Check out our Radio show: http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees CALL IN NUMBER: (347) 326-9626 Live Every Thursday 8-10:00p.m. PLANET GREENTREES w/ Attorney Michael Komorn The most relevant radio talk show for the Michigan Medical Marijuana Community. PERIOD.
  4. Most Statewide Marijuana Initiatives Lead Solidly In Polls by Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director September 14, 2012 Four of the six statewide marijuana initiatives appearing on the November 2012 ballot <http://norml.org/about/smoke-the-vote> are solidly favored among likely voters. Voters in six states – Arkansas, Colorado, Massachusetts, Montana, Oregon, and Washington – will be deciding on marijuana-specific ballot measures this November. In Massachusetts, voters will decide on Question 3 <http://norml.org/news/2012/07/12/massachusetts-measure-to-legalize-state-sanctioned-distribution-of-medical-cannabis-approved-for-november-ballot> , a statewide proposal that seeks to allow for the physician-recommended possession and state-licensed distribution of cannabis for therapeutic purposes. Arkansas voters will decide <http://norml.org/news/2012/08/30/arkansas-medical-marijuana-act-qualifies-for-november-ballot> on a similar measure, the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Act of 2012 <http://arcompassion.org/news/2011/04/arkansas-medical-marijuana-act-language> . Montana voters will decide on Initiative Referendum 124 <http://norml.org/news/2011/10/06/montana-voters-will-decide-in-2012-on-statewide-medical-cannabis-measure> , which is a referendum on Senate Bill 423 <http://norml.org/news/2011/05/19/montana-restrictive-medical-marijuana-revisions-become-law> – a 2011 measure that seeks to restrict the state’s 2004, voter approved medical cannabis law. Colorado voters will decide on Amendment 64 <http://norml.org/news/2012/03/01/measure-seeking-to-regulate-cannabis-like-alcohol-qualifies-for-2012-colorado-ballot> , which immediately allows for the legal possession of up to one ounce of marijuana and/or the cultivation of up to six cannabis plants by those persons age 21 and over. Longer-term, the measure seeks to establish regulations governing the commercial production and distribution of marijuana by licensed retailers. Oregon voters will decide <http://norml.org/news/2012/07/19/oregon-cannabis-tax-act-qualifies-for-november-ballot> on Measure 80, the Oregon Cannabis Tax Act <http://octa2012.org/oregon-cannabis-tax-act-legislation/> , which provides for the state-licensed production and retail sale of cannabis to adults. The measure does not impose state-licensing or taxation requirements upon those who wish to cultivate cannabis for non-commercial purposes. Finally, in Washington, voters will decide on Initiative 502 <http://norml.org/news/2012/02/02/washington-marijuana-regulation-measure-certified-for-2012-ballot> , which seeks to regulate the production and sale of limited amounts of marijuana for adults. The measure also removes criminal penalties specific to the adult possession of up to one ounce of cannabis for personal use. According to the most recently available polling, several of these measures hold firm leads among likely voters. In Colorado, 47 percent of respondents say that they are backing <http://blog.norml.org/2012/09/04/colorados-marijuana-initiative-amendment-64-still-leading-inpolls/> Amendment 64, according to a September Public Policy poll <http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/09/marijuana-amendment-leads-in-colorado.html#more> of 1,001 likely voters. Thirty-eight percent of likely voters said that they opposed the measure and 15 percent were undecided. In Massachusetts, a majority of likely voters support Question 3. A Public Policy Polling survey released in August reported <http://www.telegram.com/article/20120911/NEWS109119873/1052> that 58 percent of respondents favor the measure versus only 27 percent who oppose it. In Montana, most voters do not support enacting limits on the state’s medical marijuana law, according to a just-published poll <http://www.theweedblog.com/montana-de-facto-medicalmarijuana-repeal-bill-ir-124-faces-an-uphill-battle/> of 656 likely voters. And in Washington, nearly six out of ten voters say they intend to decide in favor of I-502, according to a Survey USA poll <http://blog.norml.org/2012/09/12/new-poll-washingtonsmarijuana-legalization-initiative-i-502-holds-huge-lead/> released this week. Fifty-seven percent of respondents said that they will vote ‘yes’ on the measure, versus only 34 percent who said they would vote ‘no.’ Nine percent remain undecided. In Oregon, a July poll <http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/07/oregon-divided-on-gay-marriage.html> not specific to the initiative conducted by Public Policy Polling reported that only 43 percent of Oregonians believed that cannabis use should be legal, versus 46 percent who endorsed it remaining illegal. No recent polling is available in Arkansas.
  5. The Right & the Drug War – From the American Conservative Conservatives are the last prohibitionists, but that’s changing. By Anthony Gregory • September 12, 2012 http://www.theameric...t-the-drug-war/ Pat Robertson began publicly criticizing the drug war in December 2010, and he has become more vocal since. Unlike the vague critiques often heard from prominent figures—even Barack Obama has called the drug war a failure—Robertson’s insights have been precise, and consistent, and deeply-rooted. “We here in America make up 5 percent of the world’s population, but we make up 25 percent of jailed prisoners,” he noted in March, appearing genuinely moved by the issue. “I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat … alcohol,” he told the New York Times. Beyond the practical argument, Robertson sees the moral dimension: “I believe in working with the hearts of people, and not locking them up.” In light of his key role in the religious right, Robertson’s comments take on special significance. The man speaks to a particular strain of social conservatives, not straying from their rhetorical comfort zone even as he champions drug legalization for principled reasons. He even blames the left for a burgeoning police state: “Every time the liberals pass a bill—I don’t care what it involves—they stick criminal sanctions on it.” Should “theocons” adopt a more tolerant view on drugs, it would shake the entire right-wing on the issue. They would be the last prominent faction to demonstrate skepticism. The American right has long had its share of drug-war critics. William F. Buckley articulately defended legalization on a half-hour PBS special in 1996. George Will has often explained the unintended consequences of prohibition, although he still falls short of calling for decriminalization. Barry Goldwater expressed skepticism toward the criminal-justice approach. Neocons have either not cared much about drugs and other domestic matters or have sometimes embraced drug decriminalization as a nod to their social liberal side. Fusionist and libertarian-leaning conservatives have tended toward decriminalization. Right-wing talk radio, the information source for millions, has also featured many voices skeptical of drug laws, from the sensationalist Michael Savage to Jeffersonians like Mike Church. The common-sense center-right has often decried the futility of marijuana prohibition in particular. Missing in the conservative approach to the issue has been an understanding of the grave threats prohibition poses to the social institutions that cultural conservatives, including the Christian right, hold dear. If Robertson foreshadows a coming shift in the Silent Majority’s sentiments, this void will finally be filled. Despite the prominent critics among their ranks, everyday conservatives have consistently revealed themselves in polls as more hostile to decriminalization than liberals and moderates. A socially conservative turnaround on the issue would change everything. Just as many moralists who championed temperance turned against alcohol prohibition after seeing the social destruction it unleashed in the 1920s, today’s social conservatives could play a defining role in ending drug prohibition. The drug war embodies secular leviathan like few other government efforts. The federal anti-drug crusade began with Woodrow Wilson’s signing of the Harrison Narcotics Act in 1914, escalated with Franklin Roosevelt’s signing of the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937, and tyrannically expanded to cover previously legal psychedelics and other substances during Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. Bill Clinton increased marijuana arrests and drug task force spending, greatly accelerating the Reagan-Bush drug war. Under Obama, the policies have once again enjoyed a boost: his 2009 stimulus bill included major hikes in drug enforcement spending that had dwindled under George W. Bush. If alcohol prohibition qualified as the progressives’ greatest domestic triumph in the early 20th century, drug prohibition has achieved even more as a usurpation of traditional morality and the social order. Constitutionalism, states’ rights, subsidiarity, community norms, traditional medicine, family authority, and the role of the church have all been violently pushed aside to wage an impossibly ambitious national project to control people in the most intimate of ways. For years, the federal DARE program encouraged children to rat out their parents for minor drug offenses, an intrusion into family life all too reminiscent of Soviet Russia. Prohibition-fueled gang warfare has not only inflicted violence upon the social fabric; the crime wave has also served as a rationale to weaken the very civil liberties that conservatives most cherish—particularly Second Amendment rights. Bloodshed on city streets attributed to the 1920s liquor trade spawned the National Firearms Act of 1934. Congress specifically targeted drug users in its Gun Control Act of 1968. The 1990 Crime Control Act focused on creating drug-free school zones, but semi-automatic rifles also came under its ambit. Even the 1993 Waco standoff, rationalized by the Clinton Justice Department as an anti-assault-weapons operation, started with search warrants dubiously directed at finding a meth lab. In the 1980s drugs had served as the excuse to carve out exceptions to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act forbidding military involvement in domestic law enforcement. The radicalized grassroots patriots in the post-Cold War 1990s who saw national police power as a threat to their liberty, their guns, and their families should have recognized America’s drug laws as a principal culprit. Today drug money finances not just domestic gangs but foreign thugs as well. In the last decade many reporters have commented on how opium profits have enriched the Taliban—a nearly unavoidable result of America’s drug policies, which keep narcotics highly profitable. But today the most conspicuous violent foreign threat comes from Mexico. The cartels, whose killing spree has taken tens of thousands of lives in just the last couple years, have shattered the peace on the border and become the subject of the Obama administration’s most notorious scandal. Some conservatives have wondered aloud whether the “Fast and Furious” program of arming Mexican drug gangs was intended to create an excuse to crack down on American gun ownership. Regardless of the ATF’s intentions, the drug violence has indeed served as a rationale to restrict American liberties, including the right to bear arms. But very little of this would be possible if these cartels could not fund themselves with the amplified profits that drug prohibition produces. (No wonder all of the conservative movement’s heroes of economic science—Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, and Milton Friedman—were unambiguous in opposing the drug war, on practical as well as moral grounds.) Recent polls indicate that a slight majority of Americans is now open to legalizing marijuana. Somewhat surprisingly, residents of liberal California are less likely than the nation at large to support the idea, according to a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll, although Democrats and voters in the lefty Bay Area favor decriminalization in far higher numbers than Republicans and the rest of the state. Conservatives are still the main ideological barrier to drug liberalization. But the tide may be turning. At a Republican primary debate in South Carolina last May, Ron Paul likened the freedom to use drugs to the freedom to worship according to one’s faith, a radical insight about the liberty of conscience usually heard mainly from proud proponents of psycho-pharmacological experimentation. Moderator Chris Wallace asked the Texas congressman whether using heroin was simply an “an exercise of liberty.” Paul responded with a rhetorical question: “How many people here would use heroin if it were legal?” He mocked the very idea of paternalistic prohibition: “Oh yeah, I need the government to take care of me. I don’t want to use heroin, so I need these laws.” The audience erupted in laughter and enthusiastic applause. Many of Paul’s supporters sat in the crowd, but more important was the lack of booing from the more conventionally conservative attendees. In this Republican audience in a right-leaning state, some of the most radical arguments for heroin legalization fared surprisingly well. Even if today’s conservatives do not buy into all the reasons to end prohibition, they no longer find them as dangerous or worthy of ridicule as in years past. Also in May, a survey conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research found that 67 percent of Republicans wanted to see an end to federal medical-marijuana raids. President Obama’s policies are not only out of touch with his liberal base, they are far more draconian than what most conservatives want. On the issue of national power, this is not a completely new development on the right. Citing states’ rights, George W. Bush suggested he would put a stop to the raids in 1999. After becoming president, he stepped them up instead, but not nearly as much as Obama has done. According to Americans for Safe Access, the Obama Justice Department conducted 170 SWAT-style raids of medical-marijuana dispensaries between October 2009 and Spring 2012. Given his campaign promises to the contrary, Obama has “gone from first to worst,” according to Marijuana Policy Project Executive Director Rob Kampia. “There’s no question that Obama is the worst president on medical marijuana.” The federalism argument against the raids has always seemed more appealing to conservatives than liberals. In 2005, the Supreme Court upheld the marijuana raids in Gonzales v. Raich in the name of preserving an expansive federal commerce power. Antonin Scalia joined the majority, but Clarence Thomas, Sandra Day O’Connor, and William Rehnquist dissented. Justice Thomas, the court’s most conservative member, issued the most stirring rebuke, which he grounded in a restrictive reading of Commerce Clause power: “If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress’ Article I powers—as expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clause—have no meaningful limits.” Tellingly, the Supreme Court’s opinion upholding Obamacare this summer cited the precedents of Raich many times. Dissenting conservatives on the court attempted to find a distinction between the two rulings, but many commentators noted the corner into which Scalia in particular had painted himself, viewing federal power as nearly unlimited concerning medical marijuana but restrained on health insurance. Thomas was right in Raich that a federal police power that can supersede state marijuana laws, bust down someone’s door, and jail him for growing a plant for personal use, faces no effective limits and is the very face of tyranny. The liberals who endorsed unmitigated federal power on Obamacare as well as on medical marijuana were being completely consistent. The logic of the drug war is the logic of the New Deal, national supremacy, and everything conservatives profess to hate about Obama-style governance. Drug laws expose the tension within the conservative movement: devoted to localism and nationalism, freedom and law and order, today’s conservatives, if they are to mount a meaningful resistance to the unrestrained bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., must choose between their conflicting values. Many on the Tea Party right have come to regard the Bush-created Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as clumsy and despotic. They cling proudly to their guns and religion. They worry about their privacy in the face of a relentlessly growing central state. But it was the drug war that first shredded the Bill of Rights in modern times. Public opinion has gradually been turning against the militarized Just Say No approach. Meanwhile, special interests like the tobacco and law-enforcement lobbies continue to put pressure on politicians to maintain the status quo. Democrats do not have the political will or capital to push for major changes. Perhaps Republican leaders—unafraid of accusations of being soft on crime, emboldened by a conservative movement increasingly skeptical of unlimited police power—are the ones most likely to lead the charge toward liberalization. This prospect leaves much to be desired, but for the first time in many years perhaps there is some hope on the horizon, and from an unexpected direction. Michael A. Komorn Attorney and Counselor Law Office of Michael A. Komorn 3000 Town Center, Suite, 1800 Southfield, MI 48075 800-656-3557 (Toll Free) 248-351-2200 (Office) 248-357-2550 (Phone) 248-351-2211 (Fax) Email: michael@komornlaw.com Website: www.komornlaw.com Check out our Radio show: http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees CALL IN NUMBER: (347) 326-9626 Live Every Thursday 8-10:00p.m. PLANET GREENTREES w/ Attorney Michael Komorn
  6. "With 850,00 arrests a year, keeping marihuana illegal is a big business." The Top Five Special Interest Groups Lobbying To Keep Marihuana Illegal http://www.republicr...-lobby-illegal/ Last year, over 850,000 people in America were arrested for marijuana-related crimes. Despite public opinion, the medical community, and human rights experts all moving in favor of relaxing marijuana prohibition laws, little has changed in terms of policy. There have been many great books and articles detailing the history of the drug war. Part of America’s fixation with keeping the leafy green plant illegal is rooted in cultural and political clashes from the past. However, we at Republic Report think it’s worth showing that there are entrenched interest groups that are spending large sums of money to keep our broken drug laws on the books: 1.) Police Unions: Police departments across the country have become dependent on federal drug war grants to finance their budget. In March, we published a story revealing that a police union lobbyist in California coordinated the effort to defeat Prop 19, a ballot measure in 2010 to legalize marijuana, while helping his police department clients collect tens of millions in federal marijuana-eradication grants. And it’s not just in California. Federal lobbying disclosures show that other police union lobbyists have pushed for stiffer penalties for marijuana-related crimes nationwide. 2.) Private Prisons Corporations: Private prison corporations make millions by incarcerating people who have been imprisoned for drug crimes, including marijuana. As Republic Report’s Matt Stoller noted last year, Corrections Corporation of America, one of the largest for-profit prison companies, revealed in a regulatory filing that continuing the drug war is part in parcel to their business strategy. Prison companies have spent millions bankrolling pro-drug war politicians and have used secretive front groups, like the American Legislative Exchange Council, to pass harsh sentencing requirements for drug crimes. 3.) Alcohol and Beer Companies: Fearing competition for the dollars Americans spend on leisure, alcohol and tobacco interests have lobbied to keep marijuana out of reach. For instance, the California Beer & Beverage Distributors contributed campaign contributions to a committee set up to prevent marijuana from being legalized and taxed. 4.) Pharmaceutical Corporations: Like the sin industries listed above, pharmaceutical interests would like to keep marijuana illegal so American don’t have the option of cheap medical alternatives to their products. Howard Wooldridge, a retired police officer who now lobbies the government to relax marijuana prohibition laws, told Republic Report that next to police unions, the “second biggest opponent on Capitol Hill is big PhRMA” because marijuana can replace “everything from Advil to Vicodin and other expensive pills.” 5.) Prison Guard Unions: Prison guard unions have a vested interest in keeping people behind bars just like for-profit prison companies. In 2008, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association spent a whopping $1 million to defeat a measure that would have “reduced sentences and parole times for nonviolent drug offenders while emphasizing drug treatment over prison.”
  7. NYPD critics offer free app to track 'stop and frisk' By Perry Chiaramonte <http://www.foxnews.com/archive/author/perry-chiaramonte/index.html> Published June 06, 2012 FoxNews.com Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/06/new-york-civil-liberties-union-creates-smartphone-app-that-collects-stop-and/?test=latestnews#ixzz1xDHgsQIO'>http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/06/new-york-civil-liberties-union-creates-smartphone-app-that-collects-stop-and/?test=latestnews#ixzz1xDHgsQIO Video at http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/06/new-york-civil-liberties-union-creates-smartphone-app-that-collects-stop-and/?test=latestnews Critics of the New York Police Department's controversial stop-and-frisk policy say their new smartphone application will allow residents to monitor and document cops employing the tactic, but police officials say the device itself could be a threat to people's privacy. “Stop and Frisk Watch” was released for Android phones on Wednesday, and the New York Civil Liberties Union says the free application “will empower New Yorkers to monitor police activity and hold the NYPD accountable for unlawful stop-and-frisk encounters and other police misconduct.” “It may not be the smartest thing to pull something out of your pocket during a tense situation." - NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne “The NYPD’s own data shows that the overwhelming majority of people subjected to stop-and-frisk are black or Latino, and innocent of any wrongdoing," NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman said in a written statement. "Our app will allow people to go beyond the data to document how each unjustified stop further corrodes trust between communities and law enforcement.” The app has three primary functions, the ability to record video and then fill out an “incident report” about what was witnessed, a "listen" function, which sends the user alerts from other app users telling them of incidents in the area and a "report" option that allows users to report a police incident even if they did not record it. The application also provides a section that tells the user their rights when stopped by a police officer. NYPD officials say this time, it is the NYCLU that could be intruding on people's rights. “The main problem with this app is privacy regarding the information sent,” NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne said to FoxNews.com. “They [NYCLU] have acknowledged that the app collects the data. What will be done with that information? Will it be sold? Are they aggregating personal information? They can’t guarantee the privacy of the info.” Browne also expressed the potential dangers posed by someone using the app during a stop or someone in the vicinity of police activity. “It may not be the smartest thing to pull something out of your pocket during a tense situation,” he said. The app is recommended only for use by witnesses, not those who are actually being stopped, said NYCLU officials. "The NYCLU will use the videos we get to put a face on the humiliating experience of a police street stop, not create a database. The department should be familiar with the First Amendment – in our society, people have a clear right to document police activity in public places," Lieberman said in a statement to FoxNews.com. The issue of stop-and-frisk, in which police can briefly detain people long enough to ask them what they are doing and ensure they are not carrying weapons, has been the center of heated debate in New York. Opponents claim that the practice is ineffective, while Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly maintain that it has been successful in keeping illegal guns off the city’s streets. Recently, however, Bloomberg has eased his stance, admitting that the policy may not have cut down on shootings. The app was developed by Brooklyn-based artist and software developer Jason Van Anden, who previously created an app during the height of the Occupy Wall Street movement called, “I’m getting arrested.” A version of the app for the iPhone is expected to be released in July. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/06/new-york-civil-liberties-union-creates-smartphone-app-that-collects-stop-and/?test=latestnews#ixzz1xDHU25qx
  8. Michael Komorn

    A Judge’s Plea For Pot

    A Judge’s Plea for Pot http://www.nytimes.com/ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/opinion/a-judges-plea-for-medical-marijuana.html A Judge’s Plea for Pot By GUSTIN L. REICHBACH THREE and a half years ago, on my 62nd birthday, doctors discovered a mass on my pancreas. It turned out to be Stage 3 pancreatic cancer. I was told I would be dead in four to six months. Today I am in that rare coterie of people who have survived this long with the disease. But I did not foresee that after having dedicated myself for 40 years to a life of the law, including more than two decades as a New York State judge, my quest for ameliorative and palliative care would lead me to marijuana. My survival has demanded an enormous price, including months of chemotherapy, radiation hell and brutal surgery. For about a year, my cancer disappeared, only to return. About a month ago, I started a new and even more debilitating course of treatment. Every other week, after receiving an IV booster of chemotherapy drugs that takes three hours, I wear a pump that slowly injects more of the drugs over the next 48 hours. Nausea and pain are constant companions. One struggles to eat enough to stave off the dramatic weight loss that is part of this disease. Eating, one of the great pleasures of life, has now become a daily battle, with each forkful a small victory. Every drug prescribed to treat one problem leads to one or two more drugs to offset its side effects. Pain medication leads to loss of appetite and constipation. Anti-nausea medication raises glucose levels, a serious problem for me with my pancreas so compromised. Sleep, which might bring respite from the miseries of the day, becomes increasingly elusive. Inhaled marijuana is the only medicine that gives me some relief from nausea, stimulates my appetite, and makes it easier to fall asleep. The oral synthetic substitute, Marinol, prescribed by my doctors, was useless. Rather than watch the agony of my suffering, friends have chosen, at some personal risk, to provide the substance. I find a few puffs of marijuana before dinner gives me ammunition in the battle to eat. A few more puffs at bedtime permits desperately needed sleep. This is not a law-and-order issue; it is a medical and a human rights issue. Being treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, I am receiving the absolute gold standard of medical care. But doctors cannot be expected to do what the law prohibits, even when they know it is in the best interests of their patients. When palliative care is understood as a fundamental human and medical right, marijuana for medical use should be beyond controversy. Sixteen states already permit the legitimate clinical use of marijuana, including our neighbor New Jersey, and Connecticut is on the cusp of becoming No. 17. The New York State Legislature is now debating a bill to recognize marijuana as an effective and legitimate medicinal substance and establish a lawful framework for its use. The Assembly has passed such bills before, but they went nowhere in the State Senate. This year I hope that the outcome will be different. Cancer is a nonpartisan disease, so ubiquitous that it’s impossible to imagine that there are legislators whose families have not also been touched by this scourge. It is to help all who have been affected by cancer, and those who will come after, that I now speak. Given my position as a sitting judge still hearing cases, well-meaning friends question the wisdom of my coming out on this issue. But I recognize that fellow cancer sufferers may be unable, for a host of reasons, to give voice to our plight. It is another heartbreaking aporia in the world of cancer that the one drug that gives relief without deleterious side effects remains classified as a narcotic with no medicinal value. Because criminalizing an effective medical technique affects the fair administration of justice, I feel obliged to speak out as both a judge and a cancer patient suffering with a fatal disease. I implore the governor and the Legislature of New York, always considered a leader among states, to join the forward and humane thinking of 16 other states and pass the medical marijuana bill this year. Medical science has not yet found a cure, but it is barbaric to deny us access to one substance that has proved to ameliorate our suffering. Gustin L. Reichbach is a justice of the State Supreme Court in Brooklyn.
×