Jury Convicts 70-Year-Old Lake Orion Woman In Marijuana Case

[MORE COWBELL]

If its Sal's fault for leaving the door open, then why are they convicting Barb?

Because Sal's dead?

 

If Sal had killed someone in a car crash would Barb be convicted of manslaughter?

exactly!

their reason and logic defies intelligence

[elvis firewolf]

Nah I ain't no Highlander or Rasher, lol, don't really even know who they are.

 

You can take my comments at face value or ignore them at your own peril it is no skin off my nose. It is the best advise you are going be getting however and you can take that one to the bank. Read the attached AG filing on the Isabella County COA hearing. This is the AG's "wish list" that he is asking for via an amicus brief. It states clearly the same point I tried to make. Just cause you don't like the message, don't shoot the messenger my friend.

 

Many people who know this law far better than anyone on this site, myself included, feel it highly likely the AG's demands will be substantially upheld.

 

This means if you think patient to patient is legal, or caregiver to non registered patient is legal this opinion will be a large problem for your world view, and you will have to make a few modifications.

 

And yes, it says if you go over on plants or have to much meds or violate the requirements of locked and enclosed or any other part of the act as the AG interprets it.... you will not be afforded the protection of the act in terms of an affirmative defense or claiming a medical use.

 

So be safe and keep your numbers well within the law. And keep your plants locked up.

PEOPLE v COMPASSIONATE APOTHECARY - AG Amicus Brief.pdf

[peanutbutter]

And yes, it says if you go over on plants or have to much meds or violate the requirements of locked and enclosed or any other part of the act as the AG interprets it.... you will not be afforded the protection of the act in terms of an affirmative defense or claiming a medical use.

 

The AG believes the whole law should become null and void.

 

So according to what the AG wishes, you are about to get arrested. The MMMA doesn't even exist.

[+wolfgang]

If its Sal's fault for leaving the door open, then why are they convicting Barb?

Because Sal's dead?

 

If Sal had killed someone in a car crash would Barb be convicted of manslaughter?

good point!!

APPEAL and who is her lawyer? a court appointed one I'd rally like to know.

[peanutbutter]

Pb, You ready to get payback for Oakland County and the State Screwing over patients? I am ticked. I can't help it. I remember what happened. What they did to this lady and her family. I see what Jones is doing. I see civil rights violations on a massive scale. What is happening is just plain wrong. It makes me sick to stomach. See you on the front lines. I'm working on it. Thanks, bb

 

I'm working on it also. Big time.

 

You'll know when I splash.

[MORE COWBELL]

The AG believes the whole law should become null and void.

 

So according to what the AG wishes, you are about to get arrested. The MMMA doesn't even exist.

 

HIT HE NAIL ON THE HEAD!

 

THIS IS A WAR FOR HEARTS AND MINDS!

[+wolfgang]

Pb, You ready to get payback for Oakland County and the State Screwing over patients? I am ticked. I can't help it. I remember what happened. What they did to this lady and her family. I see what Jones is doing. I see civil rights violations on a massive scale. What is happening is just plain wrong. It makes me sick to stomach. See you on the front lines. I'm working on it. Thanks, bb

Bill and I are ready captain!!

[+Silverblue]

About the plan, I read it but I still sense some question over if there will or will not be a boycott, if there's a recall, who will be up first, and other details. The word is getting out about the trial, so that's good. I also believe there should be no convictions of any mj cases, because we may find it was about MM but the evidence was suppressed, and other evidence was tampered with.

 

I still get a feeling like some people were surprised at this verdict. No one should be surprised if it's OC. The People need to know what's going on; their tax dollars at work convicting medical patients and their caregivers, defying the Will of The Voters, defying the law itself, obstructing justice, tampering with evidence. So many crimes are being committed by those who claim MM is a crime. It's a crime that they refuse to implement this law, it's a crime that real criminals are being set free, while innocent people are put in jail, especially when they're well within the law and the law specifically states they are protected.. All the opponents see is dollar signs, get a conviction, we can use the money for our dept. That's despicable. They invented problems so they could come charging in to fix and undo it. Their blind hatred and brutal behavior is unconscionable. We NEVER dreamed it'd be so bad. I'm so thankful I came here before applying. I almost didn't apply. There are many ways we can work this, our community is HUGE, surely we can do what's necessary to save our law.

 

I hope enough people are ready to take whatever action they can.

 

Sb

[brian cash]

hello all i believe we need to get the word out to all the voters that voted this into law, I wrote an e-mail to fox 2 problem solvers (tv station in det), asking them to expose the horrible abuse of our law and our civil rights.

[peanutbutter]

The two videos I made about jury nullification have now been viewed nearly 1100 times.

 

Most of those views are from unique IP addresses.

 

One video is now starting to be shared via e-mail more than web sites.

The other is getting mostly hits from the home page on this site.

 

Send these videos to everyone. Most important is folks that you know in Oakland county.

 

This is the one that seems to get e-mailed:

 

This is the one on the front page of this site:

[+EdwardGlen]

Since the mid-term elections the GOP have been acting like the school yard wimp who is made hall monitor and the power went right to their head. Their aggressive ugly legislation they have been forcing through in the state they control are nothing more than attacks on the weakest in society in the name of fiscal responsibility.

 

Their overreaching legislation is punitive to people who had nothing to do with the fiscal mess we are in but they want them, us, to pay for it. Given the opportunity the 2008 MMMA will be gutted of its legal protections and so grossly over-regulated it will drive all caregivers out of the program leaving patients at the mercy of the state.

 

In order to prevent that from happening and help abate the attacks coming in the form of their legislation we will need to be in offense mode as well as defense. Patients like myself who are house bound should be e mailing and calling your legislator at all levels of government.

 

Talk with relatives and friends and get them involved because there is more legislation that will be hurting working families and all of us Michigan citizens need to support each other.

 

Maybe one of our upper echelon could make contact with the legitimate snyder, jones recall groups and set up petition signing events with the MM community,they're getting press coverage.

 

I am a patient, I'm sick, like most of us patients are and we shouldn't have to be focusing our energies in other areas other than our health but it is what it is.

 

My Doctor has asked me to take it easy, so has my family. But until we are afforded all our rights under the 2008 MMMA I can't take it easy.

 

I got some fight left in me...

 

 

No army can withstand the strength of an idea whose time has come.

- Victor Hugo

 

 

hóka-héy

[Highlander]

HMMMMM sounds like highlander or rasher goin on...

 

just sayin

 

No. You are confusing my continuing desire to learn this law inside and out, follow case law, consult several attorneys on an on-going basis, and try really, really hard to point people to a safe interpretation of the law...confusing this with with some ulterior motive to bring down MMJ. Believe what you will.

 

The act says that the plants must be in a place that permits access only by a pt or CG. Toss out all the locks and security device suggestions/examples, closets, and the like - none of that really matters, and focus on ...a place that only pts and CGs are permitted to enter that has at least some reasonable security measure. I believe one needs to protect against the reasonably forseeable actions of a third party on this - you wouldn't grow plants in a 3' high fenced-in area next to a home for people with substance abuse problems. Sure it would be illegal for those folks to trespass and snatch up some MMJ, but I don't believe that such a careless enclosure meets the intent of the law. I don't think the 3' fence is an an adequate security device. I don't think anybody does. So we can agree that simple trespass to get the mmj means it isn't secure enough. And dangling the stuff out there in the yard tempts people who might otherwise be pretty lawful.

 

An unlocked house, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. There isn't this attractive temptation of visible mmj. The generally law abiding are not lured in. You need to have an active criminal mind to get to those plants - you need to be in the criminal spirit to open the door and walk into that house, hoping to find things to steal. You have to be prepared to rummage through the house. You have to be pretty hard core.

 

See what I'm getting at? The law that makes it illegal to enter someone's home, the presence of a closed door - these are security devices. The threat of legal action against a perp who is out to seal marijuana is a security device that protects those plants. Think about that. Our own laws and law enforcement officers are designed to keep people from walking into our homes - locked or unlocked. These are also security devices. Isn't it true that if you grew marijuana in a 6' fenced area next to the state police post that said marijuana plants would be more secure than a similar setup at a house on 40 acres in the middle of nowhere?

 

My point is that the strength of the security device necessary to permit access only by a pt or CG will change based on many circumstances.

 

I think it is very reasonable to conclude that plants located in an unlocked home with no one home are indeed in an "enclosed, locked, facility."

 

And as PB said, noone was permitted to walk into the Agro's home, until a warrant was issued.

 

Sorry if I disappointed you with the lack of controversy.

[peanutbutter]

WOW!! thanks

 

The question then becomes "was it secure enough?"

 

A question of fact .. not of law.

[Highlander]

 

The question then becomes "was it secure enough?"

 

 

...secure enough that to meet this bar:

 

"security devices that permit access only by a registered primary caregiver or registered qualifying patient."

 

 

"Permit", per Webster:

 

1: to consent to expressly or formally <permit access to records>

 

2: to give leave : authorize

 

3: to make possible <the design permits easy access>

 

intransitive verb

 

: to give an opportunity : allow <if time permits>

 

oh but that last little bit there is a little scary huh? The part about "give an opportunity" Kinda sounds like an unlocked front door gives an opportunity for one to walk in and get to the plants.

 

But then we call up our old grammar teacher and are reminded that "permits" as used in this context has the direct object "access" and, therefore is a transitive verb - hence that scary little bit (give an opportunity) at the end doesn't apply, and our closed but not locked front door was a security device that permitted (authorized/allowed) access only to the pt and CG.

[bobandtorey]

WOW!! thanks

 

The question then becomes "was it secure enough?"

 

A question of fact .. not of law.

 

I think the State is using the C.O.A opinion from the Kingpinns case

[bobandtorey]

and it was not just the unlocked door she had 2 plants on the outside also

[Highlander]

and it was not just the unlocked door she had 2 plants on the outside also

 

It has been alleged but do we know for sure? We've all seen those second story decks without access only through the house. Could be outdoor plants, if any, were still in a location difficult to find and access without illegally entering the house in the first place.

[bobandtorey]

i still think the jury was scared and thats what the appeal will be about

[peanutbutter]

It has been alleged but do we know for sure? We've all seen those second story decks without access only through the house. Could be outdoor plants, if any, were still in a location difficult to find and access without illegally entering the house in the first place.

 

Those were two dead plants that had been left on an elevated deck. No outside access.

[2d]

If you read Section 8 of the law. a locked enclosed facility is not required. Section 8 is dependent on two things. Meeting the requirements of Section 8(a) and Section(7). So why are there any cases involving a locked enclosed facility. As long as Section 7 and 8(a) are complied with, then then the "shall be Dismissed" kicks in. In a initiative there is no interactions from other laws that apply. Ever! It stands on it's own as a constitutionally protected initiative of the people. Here's why.

 

In Newsome v Bd of State Canvassers, 69 Mich App 725, 729; 245 NW2d 374 (1976), this Court held that "[c]onstitutional and statutory initiative and referendum provisions should be liberally construed to effectuate their purposes, to facilitate rather than hamper the exercise by the people of these reserved rights."

 

a.

The people's intent controls the interpretation of the MMMA.

In People v Redden, this Court observed that because the Act was a citizen initiative under Const 1963, art 2, § 9, it must be interpreted in light of the rules governing the construction of citizen initiatives.9 This Court has explained that initiatives should be construed to "effectuate their purposes" and to "facilitate rather than hamper the exercise of reserved rights by the people."10 In addition, the words of an initiated law should be given their "ordinary and customary meaning as would have been understood by the voters."11

The purpose and intent of the people must be gleaned from the language of the MMMA itself. As the Michigan Supreme Court observed in interpreting Const 1963, art 1, § 25, a voter-approved initiative amending the Constitution:

"The object of construction, as applied to a written constitution, is to give effect to the intent of the people in adopting it. In the case of all written laws, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced. But this intent is to be found in the instrument itself. . . . 'Where a law is plain and unambiguous, whether it be expressed in general or limited terms, the [lawgiver] should be intended to mean what they have plainly expressed, and consequently no room is left for construction.'"

 

Literally the courts are forced to use a dictionary and sentence construction to interpret the act itself, if any confusion exist about the law. There is no reference to section 4 from section 8, so there is no dependence. Section 4 can't be used as a guide or as a limiter. It was not "The Lawmakers Intent". Just Watch the O'Keefe video. Read the ACT. There should never be a case involving a patient that the medical defense can't be raised. They are using us to feed their system. Thanks, Bb

 

"Read the ACT. There should never be a case involving a patient that the medical defense can't be raised".

 

That says it all, no? Maybe our judiciary needs a literacy test.

[MORE COWBELL]

They are using us to feed their system. Thanks, Bb

 

Thanks for telling it straight BB and crew!

[The Digital Nomad]

........ Someone could very well read your posts and see you are a mod and then decide you must be well educated on this topic and therefore take your advice. Is that what you want?

 

yes. I used a link to the appropriate website to back it up, I am not a mod - I provided source for others to read themselves.

This is a public forum, people from all backgrounds and education levels post here. Before I became disabled, I was employed in several fields, college educated in CJ and IT. Now, that I am disabled I work full time in the MMMP as an advocate and club leader. I have traveled to several clubs, dispensaries, and many patient's homes and grows - I had to, because I wanted to be knowledgeable in this field. People should be careful when getting advice online, in this case - a mistake can lead to arrest and jail.

 

I am still not sure the intent of your response to my post. Plant count based on plant stage does not apply in michigan. Other states have argued about what stage is a plant, a plant? In michigan, it is simply - "did you intend to manufacture another plant." A dead plant in rooting medium, left on a porch - is still a count of intent to manufacture that plant, even though you failed.

 

So, good advice - follow the law, do not attempt to manufacture more than your allowable plant count.

 

Again:

MCL 333.7401(1) provides:

“Except as authorized by this article, a person shall not

manufacture, create, deliver, or possess with intent to

manufacture, create, or deliver a controlled substance.

 

-DN

[TheGanz]

How can the prosecution recite an old law, claiming this patient is a criminal and ask the court to disregard what we the people voted into law? I cant wrap my head around how these prosecutors can get away with this? Am I missing something? How can the court ignore a law that she clearly is complying with?

[The Digital Nomad]

How can the prosecution recite an old law, claiming this patient is a criminal and ask the court to disregard what we the people voted into law? I cant wrap my head around how these prosecutors can get away with this? Am I missing something? How can the court ignore a law that she clearly is complying with?

 

What you are asking - "Where did she cross the line from complying with the MMMAct, to being charged under the CSAct".

 

Even under the MMMAct it states a punishment for violation - (k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other penalties for the distribution of marihuana. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-333-26424

 

That means in Addition to 2 years, $2,000 fine, you ALSO get CSA charges!

 

The Jokeland County sheriff is trying to alege that Barabra was knowningly a part of the 'dispensary' that was "selling marijuana to someone not allowed to use it" (laughably - an LEO with a legitimate looking state issued ID card) This is why she is charged with Controlled Substance Act violation.

 

-DN

[Guest Happy Guy]

What you are asking - "Where did she cross the line from complying with the MMMAct, to being charged under the CSAct".

 

Even under the MMMAct it states a punishment for violation - (k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other penalties for the distribution of marihuana. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-333-26424

 

That means in Addition to 2 years, $2,000 fine, you ALSO get CSA charges!

 

The Jokeland County sheriff is trying to alege that Barabra was knowningly a part of the 'dispensary' that was "selling marijuana to someone not allowed to use it" (laughably - an LEO with a legitimate looking state issued ID card) This is why she is charged with Controlled Substance Act violation.

 

-DN

I believe the sheriff intended to overthrow her status not because her dispensary sold to an unqualified patient with a fake card, rather a patient not connected to her through the registration process. I believe that is an important distinction to make. They did use a fake patient(cop) with a fake card to prove the dispensary would buy from and sell to any patient walking in the door. This was after they tried to make real patients testify to the fact and could not because of their right to be silent. So they get fake patients with no need or want to be silent to make their case against the dispensary. It's a long story and all of it is important. This can be used against anyone who does a patient to patient transfer. They say you lose your status and can't even say you are a patient after you get caught transfering, fake patient/card or not. I believe that is the bottom line.