Jump to content

Local Case May Define Medical Marijuana Defense


AKenewell
 Share

Recommended Posts

Local case may define medical marijuana defense

 

By Dennis Pelham

Daily Telegram

Posted Feb 17, 2010 @ 05:42 PM

 

ADRIAN, Mich. —

Medical marijuana use is legal only after a patient’s state registration application has been approved and an identity card issued, a judge ruled Tuesday in a potential precedent-setting case.

 

Lenawee County District Judge Natalia M. Koselka agreed with a prosecutor’s argument that a state registration is needed for protection under the new Michigan Medical Marijuana Act passed by voters in the 2008 election.

 

Attorney F. Mark Hugger of Ann Arbor said the ruling will be appealed in an effort to establish that medical marijuana users have a right to assert a defense without first being registered. A Tecumseh man his law firm represents was arrested during a traffic stop in Adrian Township for possessing marijuana on March 29. The Michigan Medical Marijuana Act was in effect at the time, but the state registration system was not yet available.

 

Christopher Patrick Pomy, 29, applied in May and his registration was approved in June. His physician since 2001, Dr. James Peggs of Chelsea, testified at a hearing last month that Pomy suffers from a painful intestinal disorder and that he meets the medical marijuana law’s requirement for a liklihood of “therapeutic or palliative benefit.”

 

No rulings on the medical marijuana law have yet been made by the Michigan Court of Appeals, and no opinions have been issued by Michigan Attorney General Michael Cox.

 

Michigan State Police issued two bulletins on the medical marijuana issue as a guide for police officers that seem to support both sides in the Lenawee County case.

 

A Dec. 15, 2008, legal update said an affirmative defense to legal medical use “is not limited to registered patients.”

 

An update issued April 27, after the registration system was in place, said the act “does not allow a patient or caregiver to possess marijuana unless they also possess their registry identification card.” A person arrested without a card on them at the time, however, can assert a defense that they are legally registered, the update said.

 

That is the stand taken by assistant Lenawee County prosecutor Burke Castleberry. He argued Pomy could not legally possess marijuana before his card was issued in June. The legal status of “medical marijuana user” was not available until the state registration system went into effect on April 4, he said in a written brief.

 

Attorney Douglas Mullkoff, of the same firm as Hugger, argued in a defense brief that a section of the act allows an affirmative defense without being registered.

 

“Nothing in this section requires registration. This court cannot read a requirement of registration into the act without legislating from the bench,” Mullkoff stated.

 

http://www.lenconnect.com/news/courts/x2077696061/Local-case-may-define-medical-marijuana-defense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is then why do i here inn the court rooms from the PA that this Law only allows for the A.D and then when you want to use it they say no

 

They only part of the AD they want is the ability for the defendant to file a motion.

 

They read that as if it is the only way allowed to present a defense. After which the defendant is not allowed to use the defense again.

 

That way they can also ignore the limits of 2.5 / 12 in the other parts of the law if they demand the patient to prove any amount at all was needed for medical application. In other words if they apply it this way they get to second guess the doctor.

 

By using this method they are able to eliminate as much of the protection of our law as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the A.D is solid he got busted the same day as us but didn't have his Doc's Rec is that the way i read it if so the C.O.A has already ruled on that maybe he should let a jury decide

I agree it's solid. The Ruling you speak of is Incorrect. It must be Appealed / Repealed ?, anyway. The Law says you are covered by the Qualifying Condition. That is all the Proof you need is a "Qualifying Condition" to use the AD.

 

I hope that Doctor at Least was Paid a Pro Witness Fee. That is Unwarranted to bring in a Practicing Physician into a Court of Law over some Chicken Scrastchings Like this is a Criminal Act itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only part of the AD they want is the ability for the defendant to file a motion.

 

They read that as if it is the only way allowed to present a defense. After which the defendant is not allowed to use the defense again.

 

That way they can also ignore the limits of 2.5 / 12 in the other parts of the law if they demand the patient to prove any amount at all was needed for medical application. In other words if they apply it this way they get to second guess the doctor.

 

By using this method they are able to eliminate as much of the protection of our law as possible.

[/quote

OK do you or any one else think they will try this on us because the way i see it the PA may have maid a mistake with us because are card hads that sticker on it as to being Defendant's Exhibit because no one else has that on their card i think that may save us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree it's solid. The Ruling you speak of is Incorrect. It must be Appealed / Repealed ?, anyway. The Law says you are covered by the Qualifying Condition. That is all the Proof you need is a "Qualifying Condition" to use the AD.

 

I hope that Doctor at Least was Paid a Pro Witness Fee. That is Unwarranted to bring in a Practicing Physician into a Court of Law over some Chicken Scrastchings Like this is a Criminal Act itself.

 

 

i agree also this Law is the best Law better then any other State would it matter if you get your Rec after your busted i don't think so as you have said if your sick then your protected IMO

we alredy had are Rec i just don't know why we are still in court as some people will say (theirs more to are story) but theirs not more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...