Court Addresses Confusion In Medical Marijuana Law

[freemannabis]

Here's an excerpt from a recent report for/from the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police:

 

Court Addresses Confusion In Medical Marijuana Law

 

People who aren't registered with the state to use medical marijuana under the Medical Marihuana Act might still have a defense for using the drug as long as their physician has provided documentation of a medical need, the Court of Appeals said in a published decision released on Wednesday.

 

Judges said under the medical marijuana law, an affirmative defense for possession of marijuana is available to anyone who possesses a registration card with the Department of Community Health or who can prove that a physician in a bona fide relationship with the patient has certified that using the drug is therapeutic in treating one of the illnesses listed in the law.

 

However, the decision (People v. Redden, COA docket No. 295809) upheld the circuit court opinion to bind over the defendants in the case for a trial on possession of marijuana, saying that there are questions fit for a trial about whether the amount found in the home met the legal limit, whether the physician's relationship with the defendants was legitimate and whether the marijuana was being used to treat an actual medical condition.

 

Judge Patrick Meter wrote the opinion, which was signed by Judge Donald Owens.

 

Judge Peter O'Connell wrote a separate, lengthy concurring opinion in an attempt to help lower court judges navigate what he called a confusing and "inartfully drafted law."

 

He clarified that the medical marijuana law contradicts federal drug laws and that it doesn't make the use of marijuana legal; it simply provides a defense for those found with marijuana who use it for valid medicinal purposes.

 

Mr. O'Connell said the problem with the law is that it leaves the "onerous task" of deciphering the poorly written and contradictory law to each individual judge, making it difficult for defense lawyers to advise their clients on possible outcomes and for prosecutors to advise the community about the parameters of the law.

 

"Without some guidance from the appellate courts, the lower courts will continue to stumble about," he said.

 

He said much of the confusion from the law comes form its contradictory sections about which rights it confers and to whom it gives them, contradictions he attempted to explain by reviewing each section separately.

 

Mr. O'Connell concluded by suggesting that lawmakers refine the laws and administrative rules surrounding the act in order to make them more uniform.

 

"When prosecutors and defense attorneys agree that the law is hazy and unclear and poses hazards to all concerned because it does not with sufficient clarity identify what conduct is now legal and what conduct remains illegal, it is time for action from our legislative and executive officials," he said. "While the MMMA may be controversial and polarizing, politics should be set aside in the interest of the rule of law in our state."

 

http://www.michiganpolicechiefs.org/pdf/MLR%2009-16-10.pdf

 

http://www.michiganpolicechiefs.org/page.cfm/10/

 

While you're visiting their public web site, be sure to check out the WHOLE REPORT - including everything being done and not being accomplished with the people's money; And, perhaps especially, the attention-grabbing story line in reference to how, legitimate or not, "Benishek Indicates Opposition To Feds Fighting Drugs":

 

Benishek Indicates Opposition To Feds Fighting Drugs

 

Dan Benishek, Republican candidate in the 1st U.S. House District, is a government minimalist, and apparently that includes ending federal drug enforcement actions.

 

His opponent, Rep. Gary McDowell (D-Rudyard), released a video Wednesday in which Mr. Benishek, at a September 5 tea party event, argues the current war on drugs exceeds federal constitutional authority.

 

"That's a part of our problem in this country that we fight against: to keep our government local and have the feds not involved in every aspect of our life," he said in the video. "Let's do what they're constitutionally supposed to be doing and not getting involved in the size of our faucets in our showers and the war on drugs."

 

Mr. McDowell said federal resources are essential to keeping illegal drugs out of communities.

 

"As we continue to see illegal drugs such as methamphetamine and cocaine in our communities, our police forces and sheriffs' departments need more not less federal resources to help combat this problem," he said.

 

And he said U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reports show the International Bridge in Sault Ste. Marie is a growing portal for bringing drugs into the United States.

 

Benishek spokesperson Trent Benishek said the response was to a question about the federal government's authority to wage the war on drugs, not on the validity of that war.

 

"To be clear, as a physician, Dr. Benishek understands the profound effects drugs can have on individuals, families, schools, and communities, and Dr. Benishek supports federal funds to protect our borders and interdict drugs," Mr. Benishek said.

 

Mr. Benishek said raising the issue as he did could backfire on Mr. McDowell. "The citizens of the 1st District are tired of political posturing by careerists like State Rep. McDowell and are ready for real change in Washington," he said.

 

******

 

"A REAL CHANGE".

 

Hmph!

 

Imagine that, eh?!

 

CANNABIS CURES -Without Fears.

 

FREE The CURE!

[+RevThad]

One has to love the way they use half truths...

 

"Judges said under the medical marijuana law, an affirmative defense for possession of marijuana is available to anyone who possesses a registration card with the Department of Community Health or who can prove that a physician in a bona fide relationship with the patient has certified that using the drug is therapeutic in treating one of the illnesses listed in the law."

 

The judges in the majority actually said that:

 

"Section 4 refers to a “qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card” and protects a qualifying patient from “arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner . . . .”

 

And they summed it up with this tidy little explanation:

 

" the MMMA provides two ways in which to show legal use of marijuana for medical purposes in accordance with the act. Individuals may either register and obtain a registry identification card under § 4 or remain

unregistered and, if facing criminal prosecution, be forced to assert the affirmative defense in §

8."

 

A patient or caregiver in compliance with Section 4, should never even need to use the AD, as they are not subject to arrest, or prosecution...

[bobandtorey]

However, the decision (People v. Redden, COA docket No. 295809) upheld the circuit court opinion to bind over the defendants in the case for a trial on possession of marijuana, saying that there are questions fit for a trial about whether the amount found in the home met the legal limit, whether the physician's relationship with the defendants was legitimate and whether the marijuana was being used to treat an actual medical condition.

 

so we had to much Meds? unbelievable!!!! we and the Lawyers need money if the MMMA can help we would grateful

[freemannabis]

And, lest we forget where much of the instilled "confusion" was spawned, and who the misinformation was conceived by ...

 

Remember "Police Update 79" that - harmfully and sufferingly - said this:

 

"The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act does not allow a patient or caregiver to possess marihuana unless they also possess their registry identification card".

 

Which "official report" then goes on to claim:

 

"So, a person possessing marihuana without his or her card can be properly arrested".

 

Not the least bit un-confusingly, the "legal Status Update" then opposingly states:

 

"However, the Act contains an affirmative defense provision, so officers should check with their prosecutor before arresting a person for a marihuana-related crime when the person claims to be a registered patient or caregiver.

 

As most of us who are quite familiar with the "plain and simple language of the law" are fully aware of, and we understand - completely, the statutes of the "affirmative defense" which were merely, confusingly, only haphazardly touched upon in the confusion-spawning "Public Service" report, also specifically and deliberately includes and provides an "equal defense" to "ANY PROSECTION" (of either registered or "UNREGISTERED" "patients") involving ANY relative use or possession or transportation or acquisition of marihuana/marijuana (oh why, oh why, why can't or won't the law just use the wonderful, healing word of the healthy herb - CANNABIS!?).

 

The rest of the fear-mongering-for-profits report is found here:

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._78_276204_7.pdf

 

In spite of all the government/law-ENFORCEMENT's continual LIES, distortions and abuses of public powers and "WE the PEOPLE's" individual and communal voices expressing our wishes, isn't it good to know that ...

 

...the latest report from/for the MSP/Public says this?:

 

11-Carboxy-THC is not a controlled substance.

 

Defendant was driving a car when he was involved in a fatal crash. His BAC at the time of the accident was an estimated 0.091 to 0.115 and there were also 6 nanograms of 11-carboxy-THC in his blood. One of the charges brought against him was OWPD (operating with the presence of drugs) causing death. 11-Carboxy-THC is a byproduct of metabolism created when the body breaks down the psychoactive ingredient of marijuana. Under previous case law, a person who operated a motor vehicle with the presence of any amount of 11-carboxy-THC in his or her system violated MCL 257.625(8) which is the OWPD law. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the previous holding.

 

The court held that 11-carboxy-THC is not a schedule 1 controlled substance and, therefore, a person cannot be prosecuted under MCL 257.625(8) for operating a motor vehicle with any amount of 11-carboxy-THC in his or her system. For the OWPD charge, lab results should indicate THC levels in the defendant’s blood. People v. Feezel, No. 138031 (Mich. June 8, 2010).

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._85_331586_7.pdf

 

****

 

Baby steps ...

 

BABY steps .....

 

 

FREE The CURE!

 

SHARE The HARVEST.

[+RevThad]

However, the decision (People v. Redden, COA docket No. 295809) upheld the circuit court opinion to bind over the defendants in the case for a trial on possession of marijuana, saying that there are questions fit for a trial about whether the amount found in the home met the legal limit, whether the physician's relationship with the defendants was legitimate and whether the marijuana was being used to treat an actual medical condition.

 

so we had to much Meds? unbelievable!!!! we and the Lawyers need money if the MMMA can help we would grateful

They make it more sound more ominous than need be. The court suggested that such arguments could be raised by the prosecutors during the evidentiary hearings, and that the proper place for such arguments was in the trial court. Keep your chin up, and don't let these thugs scare you, Intimidation is their only tool now, and we will see that one taken away in the future.

 

You guys are in good shape in terms of the law, and unfortunately because you are the first real case involving the law, the courts and lawyers are going to stretch it out as far as possible to get rulings and clarifications on each and every nuance.

[bobandtorey]

They make it more sound more ominous than need be. The court suggested that such arguments could be raised by the prosecutors during the evidentially hearings, and that the proper place for such arguments was in the trial court. Keep your chin up, and don't let these thugs scare you, Intimidation is their only tool now, and we will see that one taken away in the future.

 

You guys are in good shape in terms of the law, and unfortunately because you are the first real case involving the law, the courts and lawyers are going to stretch it out as far as possible to get rulings and clarifications on each and every nuance.

 

 

ominous

Giving the impression that something bad or unpleasant is going to happen

 

we are just a little upset that we are going to be inn court for some time to come and others will fall be for us be for we get are freedom

 

i and the Lawyers know it's more money for them to keep it going and we have no money

 

if i were in this by myself it would be better Torey can not go to trail she has to many mental issues

 

and her Doc at easter seals will say just that

[freemannabis]

CONSTITUTION OF MICHIGAN

OF 1835

 

 

In convention, begun at the city of Detroit, on the second Monday of May, in the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty five:

 

Preamble.

 

We, the PEOPLE of the territory of Michigan, as established by the Act of Congress of the Eleventh day of January, in the year one thousand eight hundred and five, in conformity to the fifth article of the ordinance providing for the government of the territory of the United States, North West of the River Ohio, believing that the time has arrived when our present political condition ought to cease, and the right of self-government be asserted; and availing ourselves of that provision of the aforesaid ordinance of the congress of the United States of the thirteenth day of July, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, and the acts of congress passed in accordance therewith, which entitle us to admission into the Union, upon a condition which has been fulfilled, do, by our delegates in convention assembled, mutually agree to form ourselves into a free and independent state, by the style and title of "The State of Michigan," and do ordain and establish the following constitution for the government of the same.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/historical/miconstitution1835.htm

 

******

 

CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

OF 1963

 

PREAMBLE

 

We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, and earnestly desiring to secure these blessings undiminished to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(dfmoci3qyghkcc551guiya55))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-chap1.pdf

 

****

 

So ... what the ____ happened?!

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/publications/constitution.pdf

 

It all seems tohave went south from there, eh?

 

Well, sometimes ... I guess we just have to head south ... before we get back up north.

 

Be FREE!

 

(from tyrannical rulers)

[westmich]

we and the Lawyers need money if the MMMA can help we would grateful

 

How about just setting up a PayPal account and asking for donations? Put a link to it in your signature.

[freemannabis]

ominous

Giving the impression that something bad or unpleasant is going to happen

 

we are just a little upset that we are going to be inn court for some time to come and others will fall be for us be for we get are freedom

 

i and the Lawyers know it's more money for them to keep it going and we have no money

 

if i were in this by myself it would be better Torey can not go to trail she has to many mental issues

 

and her Doc at easter seals will say just that

 

 

 

STATE CONSTITUTION (EXCERPT)

CONSTITUTION OF MICHIGAN OF 1963

 

 

§ 16 Bail; fines; punishments; detention of witnesses.

 

Sec. 16.

 

Excessive bail shall not be required; excessive fines shall not be imposed; cruel or unusual punishment shall not be inflicted; nor shall witnesses be unreasonably detained.

 

 

History: Const. 1963, Art. I, § 16, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964

Former Constitution: See Const. 1908, Art. II, § 15.

 

****

 

"excessive fines shall not be imposed"

 

(so what's up with them "Forfeiture Laws"?!)

 

(And, "Robbery" would be the more appropriate term, for sure!)

 

"cruel or unusual punishment shall not be inflicted".

 

Yeah, right!

 

We all know THAT's a crock ...! (of some really old, smelly, horrible thing or another!)

 

: /

 

May The Healing Spirits of Peace, Compassion and Grace be with You and Yours, my true "friends-in-arms".

 

May LOVE ALWAYS prevail.

 

: )

 

And forever make you healthy and happy ...

 

And, finally - once and for ALL - FREE!

 

SHARE The CURE!

[bobandtorey]

How about just setting up a PayPal account and asking for donations? Put a link to it in your signature.

 

 

i will ask for help in doing that may be PB or BB can help us because i do not know how i do have a pay-pal acc:

[David1946]

i will ask for help in doing that may be PB or BB can help us because i do not know how i do have a pay-pal acc:

See if that can somehow be linked to a twitter page. I'd have no problem linking Bob and Torey to my twitter page to procure donations for their defense.

[+Silverblue]

I wanna help but I don't trust those social networking sites they don't have strong enough privacy and security protections, I've had some trouble with paypal too but that was years ago, maybe they fixed it by now I hope. My donation would be small but if a lot of people give something it'll help I'm sure.

 

Sb

[Southern Cross]

i will ask for help in doing that may be PB or BB can help us because i do not know how i do have a pay-pal acc:

It's pretty easy. All you really need is a bank account for PayPal to link to. Just go to:

https://www.paypal.com/

 

Near the top left side it says How PayPal Works and Getting Started. Once you click on Getting Started the website will walk you through the steps to set it up.

 

If you have any questions just post back here.

[bobandtorey]

It's pretty easy. All you really need is a bank account for PayPal to link to. Just go to:

https://www.paypal.com/

 

Near the top left side it says How PayPal Works and Getting Started. Once you click on Getting Started the website will walk you through the steps to set it up.

 

If you have any questions just post back here.

 

Thanks i do have a paypal Acc because i use it to pay the MMMA now and then

[Southern Cross]

Thanks i do have a paypal Acc because i use it to pay the MMMA now and then

In order to be able to receive money through PayPal you will have to create a Premier Account so they can take a small percentage of each donation. That's how they make their money. Then you should be able to add a Donate button to your signature. You can check out the Donate feature and click on the link about half way down to create a Premier account here:

https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?&cmd=_donate-intro-outside

 

Once you do that if you need help adding the Donate button to your signature post back here.

[+420Atheist]

Bob and Tory can't your attorney set up a trust account at a bank that people can deposit directly into? I think all we would need to do is make out the check to the Bob and Tory Trust and send it to the bank.

[bobandtorey]

Bob and Tory can't your attorney set up a trust account at a bank that people can deposit directly into? I think all we would need to do is make out the check to the Bob and Tory Trust and send it to the bank.

 

Thanks we talked some about this on the radio tonight and am going to put a call inn to him tomorrow so we can set it up

 

 

 

Thanks again for all your support

[DenturesLost]

However, the decision (People v. Redden, COA docket No. 295809) upheld the circuit court opinion to bind over the defendants in the case for a trial on possession of marijuana, saying that there are questions fit for a trial about whether the amount found in the home met the legal limit, whether the physician's relationship with the defendants was legitimate and whether the marijuana was being used to treat an actual medical condition.

 

so we had to much Meds? unbelievable!!!! we and the Lawyers need money if the MMMA can help we would grateful

No one said you had too much. The coa simply ruled that the amount that is reasonable should be determined ay the trial court rather than the district judge in your case.