Prosecutor Says Raid On Mmj Club Not A Test Case.

[greenbuddha]

The Ingham County prosecutor says that the court case that will come out of his recent raid on the Green Leaf Club will not in any way define the laws that regulate Michigan's MMJ system.

 

I say he's wrong... any other opinions out there?

 

 

http://www.mapinc.or...10/n406/a07.htm

[Nemosity]

Maybe it could be used to define "How patients or caregivers are supposed to get MM, or MM seeds, or MM genetics." Seeing that they say there were pounds of 'recently delivered' MM. Guess we'll see.

 

 

----Nemo

[Guest Wayne]

Alway's the skeptic when it comes to politician's statements. But wouldn't it be refreshing if in fact differentiation is part of the equation. I have been witness to the wholesale trade making overtures and inroads into the community under the broad umbrella our law provides. I personally have little problem with this if it affords patients access and is done with the utmost discretion, civil disobedience is fine (but if illegal don't get caught)if done carefully. But as one who has great concerns for the possible voter backlash if things appear to get out of hand I would applaud any prosecutor defining what is protected and legal under the law from that which is not. The minute the voters supported us so many immediately engaged in a free for all. Forty years of patience and I don't want to see others run our victory into a brick wall at 100 mph. I'm willing to wait for the facts, let's hope we find ourselves pleasantly surprised by the intent of his word.

 

Be interesting to see the outcome in California given the split in the marijuana industry over legalization.

[Kingdiamond]

If a precedent is set by this trial it will be brought up in other court cases this DA is an idiot for even making that statement everything that happens in a court of law is relevent to other defendants .

[peanutbutter]

I keep wondering how leo knew it was freshly delivered marijuana?

 

What about the person that delivered the marijuana to Rev. Wayne? There's no mention about that person.

 

Was it the police that sold it to him?

[Grow Thread]

I keep wondering how leo knew it was freshly delivered marijuana?

 

What about the person that delivered the marijuana to Rev. Wayne? There's no mention about that person.

 

Was it the police that sold it to him?

 

that was my first thought honestly......... where did it come from? because 100lbs of med grade cannabis is no joke. and no easy task to create either.

 

or was it 100 pounds of mexican brick weed? and if thats the case............. why? when you have quality plants growing right in front of your face, would you be dealing with 100lbs of brick? hmmmmmmmmm.

[Zombiefied]

that was my first thought honestly......... where did it come from? because 100lbs of med grade cannabis is no joke. and no easy task to create either.

 

or was it 100 pounds of mexican brick weed? and if thats the case............. why? when you have quality plants growing right in front of your face, would you be dealing with 100lbs of brick? hmmmmmmmmm.

It was probably 2.5 oz in a 100lb safe.... I wouldnt put it past LEO...

[Grow Thread]

It was probably 2.5 oz in a 100lb safe.... I wouldnt put it past LEO...

 

should have known :lol: :lol:

 

very well could have been. only with LEO.

[Highlander]

If a precedent is set by this trial it will be brought up in other court cases this DA is an idiot for even making that statement everything that happens in a court of law is relevent to other defendants .

 

This simply isn't true. There will not and cannot be any prescedent set by this trial.

 

Whatever happens in a District or Circuit court will have absolutely no impact on or relevance to other cases. Legal precedent is established in the appellate courts and supreme court.

 

And for what it is worth, we don’t have DAs (District Attorneys) in Michigan, we have PAs (Prosecuting Attorneys).

[Scooter]

Correct. Until a case reaches appellate court, no change in the law or the definitions thereof will be made.

[bobandtorey]

i think that is us lets hope it go's good for us how can it not

[dlovas]

The Ingham County prosecutor says that the court case that will come out of his recent raid on the Green Leaf Club will not in any way define the laws that regulate Michigan's MMJ system.

 

I say he's wrong... any other opinions out there?

 

 

http://www.mapinc.or...10/n406/a07.htm

Sounds like a Reverse buy..where they bust someone then turn that person lose to set up a buy and then bust the purchaser in the act. Classic messed up way for LEO to get a locked down case. this guy has some serious charges against him. They don't pull out a task force on that as- unless they get it de;livered to them on a silver platter to kill it in court. he got set up...can't you all see this....!! PLain as night and day....somebody got popped thenj snitched to avoid time or a felony and they set this poor guy up. It's all soo sad.....a plant is still illegal.

[Kingdiamond]

This simply isn't true. There will not and cannot be any prescedent set by this trial.

 

Whatever happens in a District or Circuit court will have absolutely no impact on or relevance to other cases. Legal precedent is established in the appellate courts and supreme court.

 

And for what it is worth, we don’t have DAs (District Attorneys) in Michigan, we have PAs (Prosecuting Attorneys).

darn all that money spent on law school didnt help me a bit....

[peanutbutter]

This simply isn't true. There will not and cannot be any prescedent set by this trial.

 

Whatever happens in a District or Circuit court will have absolutely no impact on or relevance to other cases. Legal precedent is established in the appellate courts and supreme court.

 

And for what it is worth, we don’t have DAs (District Attorneys) in Michigan, we have PAs (Prosecuting Attorneys).

 

That sounds like judges are not allowed to look at other judges work. I think that they can if they wish to.

 

This case can not set legally binding chains on any other cases .. correct.

Saying "no impact" would require the judge to have blinders on 24/7.

 

We're still working with perceptions. What people think they know about the law. Perceptions about the law can, and do, change.

[Highlander]

That sounds like judges are not allowed to look at other judges work. I think that they can if they wish to.

 

This case can not set legally binding chains on any other cases .. correct.

Saying "no impact" would require the judge to have blinders on 24/7.

 

We're still working with perceptions. What people think they know about the law. Perceptions about the law can, and do, change.

 

 

 

Yes, perceptions mean nearly everything…and consider that with this matter, the perception of legality of the operation of a dispensary/medicating facility/social club is of great significance.

 

Maybe the PA said that this case isn’t about setting precedent for a number of reasons. A dispensary owner in Lansing (same county I believe) recently said that he didn’t think the PA/LEOs had the guts to bust him…that if they did and he won in court, then the pathway to dispensaries would be blown wide open.

 

I don’t know the Rev. Maybe he was a good/reformed guy and got past his past crimes (rape, kidnapping, burglary). I don’t think prison reforms people, and I think most people convicted of similar crimes are beyond hope. So I tend not to believe he was an upstanding fellow, but I could be wrong.

 

So the Rev. got caught up in a reverse buy with a confidential informant….and the cops came and took the “bad guy” to jail but left plants and meds and the doors to the club open…..This creates the perception that LEO and the PA don’t believe that a dispensary is illegal…doesn’t it?

 

I don’t see the Rev.’s arrest as the beginning of a test case.

 

What we need to focus on is that what we the public saw…a place where patients can get meds, etc. …. isn’t/wasn’t the target of law enforcement…..that LEO waded through the situation, took the “bad guy away” and generally left the rest of the situation alone. I think MJ should be legal for all adults – but right now it isn’t. The perception the public has about those of us who are legal (and the growing tide of acceptance) will be formed by our reactions to these busts/situations. …..We won’t gain much support of the non-believers if every time there is a MJ bust of any sort we throw up our arms and cry “foul” and holler twice as loud if the guy busted claims a medical cover….

 

We don’t want the public perception of us to be tainted by the public perception of a convicted kidnapper/burgler/rapist…and if we throw arbitrary support to these sorts of people, we will lose in the court of public opinion….again, if the REV is a good guy, I’m sorry. I don’t want this to be a test case. Would we want the first dispensary test case to ride on the shoulders of someone with this sort of criminal background? I think this is a case that we should consider distancing ourselves from.

 

Test cases should be with defendants who are otherwise squeaky clean….

[greenbuddha]

Yes, perceptions mean nearly everything…and consider that with this matter, the perception of legality of the operation of a dispensary/medicating facility/social club is of great significance.

 

Maybe the PA said that this case isn’t about setting precedent for a number of reasons. A dispensary owner in Lansing (same county I believe) recently said that he didn’t think the PA/LEOs had the guts to bust him…that if they did and he won in court, then the pathway to dispensaries would be blown wide open.

 

I don’t know the Rev. Maybe he was a good/reformed guy and got past his past crimes (rape, kidnapping, burglary). I don’t think prison reforms people, and I think most people convicted of similar crimes are beyond hope. So I tend not to believe he was an upstanding fellow, but I could be wrong.

 

So the Rev. got caught up in a reverse buy with a confidential informant….and the cops came and took the “bad guy” to jail but left plants and meds and the doors to the club open…..This creates the perception that LEO and the PA don’t believe that a dispensary is illegal…doesn’t it?

 

I don’t see the Rev.’s arrest as the beginning of a test case.

 

What we need to focus on is that what we the public saw…a place where patients can get meds, etc. …. isn’t/wasn’t the target of law enforcement…..that LEO waded through the situation, took the “bad guy away” and generally left the rest of the situation alone. I think MJ should be legal for all adults – but right now it isn’t. The perception the public has about those of us who are legal (and the growing tide of acceptance) will be formed by our reactions to these busts/situations. …..We won’t gain much support of the non-believers if every time there is a MJ bust of any sort we throw up our arms and cry “foul” and holler twice as loud if the guy busted claims a medical cover….

 

We don’t want the public perception of us to be tainted by the public perception of a convicted kidnapper/burgler/rapist…and if we throw arbitrary support to these sorts of people, we will lose in the court of public opinion….again, if the REV is a good guy, I’m sorry. I don’t want this to be a test case. Would we want the first dispensary test case to ride on the shoulders of someone with this sort of criminal background? I think this is a case that we should consider distancing ourselves from.

 

Test cases should be with defendants who are otherwise squeaky clean….

 

 

Highlander, you seem to know things surrounding this case and the Rev that others of us don't know... care to expound?

[Kingpinn]

That sounds like judges are not allowed to look at other judges work. I think that they can if they wish to.

 

This case can not set legally binding chains on any other cases .. correct.

Saying "no impact" would require the judge to have blinders on 24/7.

 

We're still working with perceptions. What people think they know about the law. Perceptions about the law can, and do, change.

 

In my case the Circuit Judge put the case on hold for 10 days so he could read over the law and talk to other judges on the matter and get their opinion

[Scooter]

The reverend is a good man, and he has made mistakes in his past. I spoke to him briefly, and his intent was good but risky, so yes, I distanced myself from him and his endeavor. But, he should not be a pariah to be thrown to the wolves. This arrest is most likely a scare tactic. They will pile the charges on him to get him to plead to a lesser charge(s). That is what they did to me, attacking both me and my family, so don't be surprised if he gets a large reduction in charges. It doesn't neccesarily mean he "worked" for them. I sure didn't.

 

Most judges don't want to be on the front lines with cases like this; careers could be destroyed. And most of them don't look too far out of their jurisdiction regarding how they handle cases. In fact, most if not all are looking to the higher courts to render a case verdict. Judges are people ( well,most of them! ), and CMOA is always a priority.

[bobandtorey]

This simply isn't true. There will not and cannot be any prescedent set by this trial.

 

Whatever happens in a District or Circuit court will have absolutely no impact on or relevance to other cases. Legal precedent is established in the appellate courts and supreme court.

 

And for what it is worth, we don’t have DAs (District Attorneys) in Michigan, we have PAs (Prosecuting Attorneys).

 

and you Sir are right and we are doing just that well they are(PA) we don't have any Money so lets see they the (PA) get paid for what they do and we Pay

[jacklash69]

If a precedent is set by this trial it will be brought up in other court cases this DA is an idiot for even making that statement everything that happens in a court of law is relevent to other defendants .

true,very true.

[bobandtorey]

Yes, perceptions mean nearly everything…and consider that with this matter, the perception of legality of the operation of a dispensary/medicating facility/social club is of great significance.

 

Maybe the PA said that this case isn’t about setting precedent for a number of reasons. A dispensary owner in Lansing (same county I believe) recently said that he did’t think the PA/Leos had the guts to bust him…that if they did and he won in court, then the pathway to dispensaries would be blown wide open.

 

I don’t know the Rev. Maybe he was a good/reformed guy and got past his past crimes (rape, kidnapping, burglary). I don’t think prison reforms people, and I think most people convicted of similar crimes are beyond hope. So I tend not to believe he was an upstanding fellow, but I could be wrong.

 

So the Rev. got caught up in a reverse buy with a confidential informant….and the cops came and took the “bad guy” to jail but left plants and meds and the doors to the club open…..This creates the perception that LEO and the PA don’t believe that a dispensary is illegal…dozen’t it?

 

I don’t see the Rev.’s arrest as the beginning of a test case.

 

What we need to focus on is that what we the public saw…a place where patients can get meds, etc. …. isn’t/wasn’t the target of law enforcement…..that LEO waded through the situation, took the “bad guy away” and generally left the rest of the situation alone. I think MJ should be legal for all adults – but right now it isn’t. The perception the public has about those of us who are legal (and the growing tide of acceptance) will be formed by our reactions to these busts/situations. …..We won’t gain much support of the non-believers if every time there is a MJ bust of any sort we throw up our arms and cry “foul” and holler twice as loud if the guy busted claims a medical cover….

 

We don’t want the public perception of us to be tainted by the public perception of a convicted kidnapper/burgler/rapist…and if we throw arbitrary support to these sorts of people, we will lose in the court of public opinion….again, if the REV is a good guy, I’m sorry. I don’t want this to be a test case. Would we want the first dispensary test case to ride on the shoulders of someone with this sort of criminal background? I think this is a case that we should consider distancing ourselves from.

 

Test cases should be with defendants who are otherwise squeaky clean….

 

you are right most of the time in your post it's just i do go to the court cases and all of them have been over something and i feel bad for them because we are going Thur the same thing but we were not over any thing but i go and find out the Truth

[bobandtorey]

when we got Busted that was one thing Leo said they got my name from this site because i at that time was using my real name so they new i had gotten Busted be for but when they came in and saw that we were legal

[Guest CaveatLector]

That sounds like judges are not allowed to look at other judges work. I think that they can if they wish to.

 

This case can not set legally binding chains on any other cases .. correct.

Saying "no impact" would require the judge to have blinders on 24/7.

 

We're still working with perceptions. What people think they know about the law. Perceptions about the law can, and do, change.

 

I've never known a trial court judge to consult with another judge to help decide a case/interpret law. Does it happen? Maybe. But most judges have a huge ego AND their own ideologies/political leanings and decisions are made on a judge's interpretation of the law based on these things. I guarantee that a judge sitting in Kent county is not going to look at a Wayne county judge's interpretation of the law and adopt that view.

 

The bottom line is that a trial court cannot set precedent. Precedent is a term of art and to suggest that a trial court sets precedent is to suggest that every other trial court must follow the first court's decision/interpretation. Maybe you mean a trial court decision could influence other trial courts? But the reason we need appellate courts is because trial courts generally DON'T always agree. The judges were once practicing lawyers---zealouos advocates. That attitude doesn't change once they become a judge, they still always think they are correct and they aren't the type of people to seek someone's advice on how to rule.

[Highlander]

The reverend is a good man, and he has made mistakes in his past. I spoke to him briefly, and his intent was good but risky, so yes, I distanced myself from him and his endeavor.

 

I haven't met you but tend to believe your assessment - however, even if he is a good man, he may be bad for our cause. I would not even consider allowing someone of his background to have a copy of my patient ID card or access to any of my personal information....regardless of how upstanding he came across...and that is what the general public will see, "Oh he's just some dirty felon trying to make money off the sick and suffering and take advantage of the MM law to mask his illegal operations." The Rev. has already earned public mistrust. For us to rally around him makes us guilty by association.....and since the PA doesn't appear to be looking beyond the Rev. at this point, I'm not one to think that us supporting him will get us anywhere positive.

[Highlander]

Highlander, you seem to know things surrounding this case and the Rev that others of us don't know... care to expound?

 

There have been some news items that have indicated the following (in general):

 

The Rev. was approached (according to the Rev.s son) by a guy who offered to get a large volume of MJ fast. The guy then delivered 50# of MJ and I believe another 104# later for a total of 154# recovered between the club and the Rev's house.

 

The guy was a confidential informant.

 

The cops raided the club and the Rev.'s home and took the excess MJ but left the stuff at the club.

 

The Rev. did time for kidnapping, rape, and burglery but has said he is reformed.

 

I can't testisfy as the the accuracy of this information. I am just relaying what I've picked up in the various news spots.