2 1/2 Year Old Case Scheduled In Superior Court

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

On March 25, 2008, a couple's house was burnt down by lightening and they were hauled off to jail in handcuffs as their belongings burned. Friends hired a lawyer, giving him $1,000 retainer fee. They have seen this lawyer once after being released from jail after 2 weeks. In subsequent emails the attorney keep telling them not to worry, go about your life, you are not facing any more jail time. They have been making payments amounting to $600 since, for a total of $1600. They are still making payments even though the husband is permanently disabled and retired, collecting SSDI and SSI, and going without prescriptions and health appointments to make them. The attorney demands $3500 to see the couple to court, and said that if it went to court they could not afford him, but he will do everything he can to negotiate the wife's charges dropped in lieu of a plea on the husband's part, if he so agrees.

 

The county prosecuting attorneys disagree and say the couple is looking at 49 months in prison.

 

The fire department called the police when they discovered 12 plants growing in the ruins, nothing was flowering. The police claim they seized over 3# of marijuana worth over $120,000. The police admit in their report that the marijuana was for personal use, as the husband told them he used medical marijuana. (Keep in mind, this is BEFORE medical marijuana laws.) The attorney waived the Show Cause hearing because elements could not be disputed and is still waiting for the Discovery Hearing to see what evidence the state is claiming. The Battle Creek Inquirer asked for a status on the case and was told that they were still waiting for an indictment from the superior court 2 years after the charges.

 

The couple is facing misdemeanor paraphanalia, felony manufacturing of marijuana, felony maintaining dwelling for manufacturing marijuana, and felony possession of marijuana over 1 oz.

 

The judge ordered the couple released with tether, but the jail booted them out on the street in their nightclothes without a tether. The official paperwork says the couple is out on $50,000 secured bond, which is not the case. They have no income to flee even if they wanted to, and have been in constant contact with the attorney updating him on their situation, address, phone, etc.

 

They have just learned that their case is now scheduled in the January calendar. Is there any comfort I can offer this couple?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

1T

 

Forgot to add that they were forced to pay $6800 in tax fines for not having a controlled substance stamp on them.

[mizerman]

On March 25, 2008, a couple's house was burnt down by lightening and they were hauled off to jail in handcuffs as their belongings burned. Friends hired a lawyer, giving him $1,000 retainer fee. They have seen this lawyer once after being released from jail after 2 weeks. In subsequent emails the attorney keep telling them not to worry, go about your life, you are not facing any more jail time. They have been making payments amounting to $600 since, for a total of $1600. They are still making payments even though the husband is permanently disabled and retired, collecting SSDI and SSI, and going without prescriptions and health appointments to make them. The attorney demands $3500 to see the couple to court, and said that if it went to court they could not afford him, but he will do everything he can to negotiate the wife's charges dropped in lieu of a plea on the husband's part, if he so agrees.

 

The county prosecuting attorneys disagree and say the couple is looking at 49 months in prison.

 

The fire department called the police when they discovered 12 plants growing in the ruins, nothing was flowering. The police claim they seized over 3# of marijuana worth over $120,000. The police admit in their report that the marijuana was for personal use, as the husband told them he used medical marijuana. (Keep in mind, this is BEFORE medical marijuana laws.) The attorney waived the Show Cause hearing because elements could not be disputed and is still waiting for the Discovery Hearing to see what evidence the state is claiming. The Battle Creek Inquirer asked for a status on the case and was told that they were still waiting for an indictment from the superior court 2 years after the charges.

 

The couple is facing misdemeanor paraphanalia, felony manufacturing of marijuana, felony maintaining dwelling for manufacturing marijuana, and felony possession of marijuana over 1 oz.

 

The judge ordered the couple released with tether, but the jail booted them out on the street in their nightclothes without a tether. The official paperwork says the couple is out on $50,000 secured bond, which is not the case. They have no income to flee even if they wanted to, and have been in constant contact with the attorney updating him on their situation, address, phone, etc.

 

They have just learned that their case is now scheduled in the January calendar. Is there any comfort I can offer this couple?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

1T

 

Forgot to add that they were forced to pay $6800 in tax fines for not having a controlled substance stamp on them.

Don't you just love it when the "authorities" determine a dollar amount of what the marijuana and/or plants are worth?

 

3 lbs. of marijuana = $120,000.00 dollars?

 

That surely must be some superkalifragilisticexpialadocious shizznik!

 

LOL!

 

 

Mizerman

 

p.s. I know this is no laughing matter. That very well could have been my wife and I circa 2007...

[bobandtorey]

What a sad story we hear this all to many times i was inn court just today and heard the judge tell a card holder that they had to many plants because the card said NO PLANTS and it was a mistake by MD CH

i wishs them all the luck inn this world to set them Free

[peanutbutter]

Sounds like they did some digging to find a replacement case for the Keith Campbell case.

 

Retroactivity needs to be tested.

 

So ...

 

"We need to test this law. Let's find someone to torture."

[bobandtorey]

Sounds like they did some digging to find a replacement case for the Keith Campbell case.

 

Retroactive needs to be tested.

 

So ...

 

"We need to test this law. Let's find someone to torture."

 

Thats true but they would have to us the AD and as i hear today the PA and the judge will go after the amount on hand and to them any amount is to much is what i was told today

even thou she has a long road ahead her next court date is Jan 7

[Kingpinn]

.

 

 

[TajMahal]

 

That's about it.............Hmmm....if they had not sung that song.

[kruztydj]

wasting more taxes they dont have anymore. Stop arresting sick people ya knotheads.................

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

Spoke with their attorney last night, he has received the PA's Motion of Discovery and the Discovery Hearing is scheduled Jan 5.

 

He has a good record defending mj cases as a NORML legal team attorney and says the medical mj defense doesn't work, however finding a jury that was against it would prove difficult for the PA resulting in nullifying the jury selection process. He will be discussing this option with them if the case gets that far, this is their first felony charge but the second misdemeanor paraphanalia charge so the lawyer is hoping to get to the plea bargain stage to drop the wife's charges in exchange for dropping all felonies, pleading guilty on the misdemeanor with 2 1/5 years time served probation and costs and fines. (The court is under the impression that they have been on Secured Bond for 2.5 years.)

 

Sad that they would have to accept being guilty of anything, but it's all about the money. This will end up costing them in the area of $20,000 when all is said and done I think. Think I'm gonna be sick. And they have lost their home so the state wants to take all the money to keep them homeless. Don't make sense. <sigh>

 

1T

[lawyercaregiver]

Sounds like they did some digging to find a replacement case for the Keith Campbell case.

 

Retroactivity needs to be tested.

 

So ...

 

"We need to test this law. Let's find someone to torture."

 

The MMMA is not retroactive. No rulings on it but I would bet the farm how courts will rule on this issue. A statute is only retroactive if it states that it is retroactive (i.e. the "legislature" must have intended the law to be retroactive). Unless I am missing a phrase somewhere in the statute the language is not there.

 

Also, 3 pounds equals 150K.

 

That's it- from now on I am only selling to LEO at $3,000 per ounce.

[pic book]

I can't see any value in going to trial on it, with 3 pounds they are likely sunk on all charges and no, whatever jury they get is not going to nullify until it's legal to relax and burn one in the box.

 

With no statute at the time of their arrest affirming an AD, and with no color of law allowing use of mj for any purpose in MI back then there's no help for them but serendipitous luck, or mercy on the part of prosecutor and judge. Deft's already had some luck on the bail details; they never put up the $50K but they're still out on bond, at least according to the record. WTF? Seems like they've had their luck! They had a bolt of bad fortune in the lightning, now they need prayer for a second bolt of good.

[Wayne'sWorld]

Keith's case does set precedent on retroactivity. The Michigan Supreme Court let the court of appeals ruling stand forcing Keith to bargain with the prosecutor. I wish these folks the best but the deck is stacked.

[peanutbutter]

The MMMA is not retroactive. No rulings on it but I would bet the farm how courts will rule on this issue. A statute is only retroactive if it states that it is retroactive (i.e. the "legislature" must have intended the law to be retroactive). Unless I am missing a phrase somewhere in the statute the language is not there.

 

Also, 3 pounds equals 150K.

 

That's it- from now on I am only selling to LEO at $3,000 per ounce.

 

Laws are intended to be retroactive if the new law protects people from an existing law.

 

Quoted a couple of different ways in the pleadings.

 

There are cases that have been dropped when the patient gets the ID card.

 

The AD has been affirmed in the Redden Clark case at the COA level. That is a retroactive case in some respects.

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

Spoke with the NORML legal team last night, they want to discuss the "necessity defense resulting in jury nullification option."

 

In setting up the appointment I asked if it would be prudent to drive them to court to avoid their car left abandoned in the parking structure in the event court turned sour. They said "They will not be imprisoned at the next court date, if at all."

 

Finally a tad of fresh air, but the couple still is not sleeping at night. Shame that otherwise law-abiding productive tax paying citizens have to live in fear of the system that's supposed to "Serve & Protect."

 

More as it happens.

 

1T

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

Just talked to them last night after a meeting with their attorney to review the wife's discovery paperwork from the PA. No sign of the husband's file yet.

 

The PA is offering to drop all charges on the wife if she pleads guilty to felony possession with sentence recommendation 4-5 months suspended for 1 year probation. They also claim that "After successfully completing probation, the individual's criminal record does not reflect the charge."

 

The state lab report reduced the amount claimed by the field report from 3.2# to 11 oz (328 g).

 

The attorney is demanding to know why this case is so old, why action is being taken now, and where is the husband's discovery. He discussed numerous variances and contradictions in police reports and fire department chief's report. The police already left the scene of the fire when the FD chief did his walkthrough to verify the fire was out and saw the plants. The FD chief called the police back and they all falsely claim they had consent to enter from the defendants.

 

The attorney is assuming that the husband's paperwork will reflect a similar offer to drop all charges in lieu of guilty plea entered for manufacturing with the same sentencing guidelines. Both charges result in the same sentencing, felony possession or manufacturing carry the same punishment. Charging worksheet shows both defendants as first time offenders Felony Class I (lowest felony class). Under these circumstances the court constitutionally cannot impose prison sentencing, and must provide conditional or alternative release.

 

The attorney suggested that if a Felony record must be avoided at all cost they research a Drug Evaluation program, which may be offered in a counter plea, which would result in all charges dropped on satisfactory completion of the program and certification to the court.

 

The couple is weighing cost associated with both options, and whether or not a Felony record is priority at this late stage in their life - both are retired and not worried about employment background checks, but are worried how a Felony drug conviction would affect SS pensions.

 

More as it happens, they must appear for superior court roll on the 5th, and the attorney may be able to dismiss them from attendance, contingent on the plea bargain status.

 

1T

[1337Gr33n]

With Felony drug charges, they may not be able to continue to be legal patients. They should also be looking at that as well, if they haven't already.

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

With Felony drug charges, they may not be able to continue to be legal patients. They should also be looking at that as well, if they haven't already.

 

From what we understand, A patient can have a felony drug conviction, not a caregiver.

 

(17) "Qualifying patient" means a person who has been diagnosed by a

physician as having a debilitating medical condition.

 

and

(15) "Primary caregiver" means a person who is at least 21 years old and

who has agreed to assist with a patient's medical use of marihuana and who

has never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs.

 

1T

[jtgeme]

The PA is offering to drop all charges on the wife if she pleads guilty to felony possession with sentence recommendation 4-5 months suspended for 1 year probation. They also claim that "After successfully completing probation, the individual's criminal record does not reflect the charge."

 

1T

 

It may actually be true. Michigan law has a a deferral program for drug offenses. Its commonly referred to as 7411 (its MCL 333.7411). There are certain requirements to be eligible, and generally speaking the deferral program is not available for "major offenses". While not a hard and fast rule, "major" usually refers to manufacture and delivery charges or the like.

 

Based on the facts as you describe them, it does not sound like too bad of a deal. I need a bit more info, but I would be considering that offer - mostly because it seems they were in possession before the MMA was enacted. Complete the terms of probation and your record is "clean".

 

Now, it sounds like there are quite a few issues that may make this an excellent case to take to trial or perhaps negotiate a better deal, but the offer is something to consider. Remember, the cost of felony trial representation could be very high, and it sounds like things are pretty tight for this couple already. I don't necessarily like to think about justice as a matter of dollars and cents, but it would be unrealistic not to.

 

I wish them all the best.

 

Link to 7411 Statute

 

Edit:

 

From what we understand, A patient can have a felony drug conviction, not a caregiver.

 

1T

 

That sounds right to me. And if I remember correctly, a patient can also grow for him/her self.

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

It may actually be true. Michigan law has a a deferral program for drug offenses. Its commonly referred to as 7411 (its MCL 333.7411). There are certain requirements to be eligible, and generally speaking the deferral program is not available for "major offenses". While not a hard and fast rule, "major" usually refers to manufacture and delivery charges or the like.

 

Based on the facts as you describe them, it does not sound like too bad of a deal. I need a bit more info, but I would be considering that offer - mostly because it seems they were in possession before the MMA was enacted. Complete the terms of probation and your record is "clean".

 

Now, it sounds like there are quite a few issues that may make this an excellent case to take to trial or perhaps negotiate a better deal, but the offer is something to consider. Remember, the cost of felony trial representation could be very high, and it sounds like things are pretty tight for this couple already. I don't necessarily like to think about justice as a matter of dollars and cents, but it would be unrealistic not to.

 

I wish them all the best.

 

Link to 7411 Statute

 

Edit:

 

 

 

That sounds right to me. And if I remember correctly, a patient can also grow for him/her self.

 

Thank you for your consideration on their behalf.

 

As I understand then, it would be a good option for the wife with Felony Possession (11 oz), but probably not an option or offer for the husband with Felony Manufacturing. We'll see when his file is located and sent to the attorney of record if and what they are willing drop and charge. From conversations with the NORML attorney, both had been assigned PDs before he was retained by the family, and the NORML attorney is the attorney of record for her but not for him, so the records were sent to his PD. They are requesting the PD to provide his file.

 

Thanks for the input, never know when they could miss something that could help their defense.

 

More as it happens...

 

1T

[Mememe]

When they got married, didn't 2 people just become 1? Why are they being charged separately?

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

When they got married, didn't 2 people just become 1? Why are they being charged separately?

 

That's why we're assuming the PA will deal with a different charge of manufacturing. I can't get any answers on why they were both charged with the same 4 offenses though, still researching.

 

Thanks for following and commenting.

 

1T

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

Latest update, not good news I'm afraid.

 

Seems the wife's discovery discloses that she waived rights and talked to LEO, the husband refused to talk. Her disclosure includes an article in the Battle Creek News in which the wife stated that her husband used mj for his medical conditions and started growing about 6 years prior to the article.

 

The PA offered her a plea deal because she "cooperated", looks like they are throwing the husband under the bus and going for broke because he refused to cooperate.

 

More as it happens.

 

1T

[+Annnie]

I am sending these ppl my Highest prayer requests.. thanks for keeping us informed although being informed sometimes is depressing..Blessings to all MM patients and caregivers registered or not..

[bobandtorey]

That's why we're assuming the PA will deal with a different charge of manufacturing. I can't get any answers on why they were both charged with the same 4 offenses though, still researching.

 

Thanks for following and commenting.

 

1T

 

 

this has me thinking why would they charge Torey and me with 21 plants she had 10 and i had 11 but the charge is 20-200

[Guest 1TokeOverLine]

Guess the sky is their limit concerning mj - they get a drug offense and can do whatever they want I guess. No legal angels watching out for us. The money to be made for lawyers and cops is in prosecuting mj cases and drug forefitures. No money=no defense.

 

(but give a methhead probation and no record or seizures.)

 

 

1T