Jump to content

People Vs King


thatoneartist

Recommended Posts

January 2012 Calendar>>

January 2012 Call>>

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

People v Grissom (James)

140147

 

1Issue: Available soon.

 

 

Pending Oral Argument

In re MORRIS

1427592Issue: Available soon.

Pending Oral Argument

Attorney General v BC/BS & Ofc of Fin & Ins Regulation

142670-13Issue: Available soon.

Pending Oral Argument

People v Kolanek (Alexander)

142695

1427125Issue: Available soon.

Pending Oral Argument

People v King (Larry)

1428506Issue: Available soon.

Pending Oral Argument

Edited by Kingpinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Good luck Larry i guess you have heard we can not use are cards in court can't even say Medical

even after the C.O.A said we could

What would happen if you stood up, looked at the jury and said the following statement" "I stand here before you accused of trafficking and manufacture of marijuana. I have been ordered to remain silent on my beliefs however I cannot lie in court. All cannabis was produced under the MMMA..

I therefore suggest jury nullification. "

What would you get?

Contempt charges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would happen if you stood up, looked at the jury and said the following statement" "I stand here before you accused of trafficking and manufacture of marijuana. I have been ordered to remain silent on my beliefs however I cannot lie in court. All cannabis was produced under the MMMA..

I therefore suggest jury nullification. "

What would you get?

Contempt charges?

 

 

Yep, and a mistrial probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wouldn't get the whole statement out. After standing up, the judge and the officers of the court would be ready to grab the defendant to silence him.

 

After about the third word, someone would be trying to grab him to toss him in a jail cell. Probably several people.

God forbid that courtroom decorum is upset!!

What are they afraid of ? That the "people" know the real story?

What a freaking joke our laws and legal system has become.

Hopefully I will never have to assert my God given rights of free speech.

F--k them.

I do not understand how bobandtorey are being refused a jury trial.

Isn't it in the Bill of Rights?

Everyday I am liking this country's laws less and less.

Glad I did my stint in the Corps to protect these jagoffs.

Peace

Ilynnboy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wouldn't get the whole statement out. After standing up, the judge and the officers of the court would be ready to grab the defendant to silence him.

 

After about the third word, someone would be trying to grab him to toss him in a jail cell. Probably several people.

 

are case is not about Larrys case so i will only post this last time are case has been about Medical Marihuana from day one what has changed? we were locked up had under plants under meds the C.O.A said we could use it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Michigan Supreme Court will hear oral arguments pertaining to Michigan's Medical Marijuana Act for the first time on January 12, 2012. People v King and People v Kolanek oral arguments are both scheduled on that day. Here's the SCt docket: http://courts.michigan.gov/supremecourt/Clerk/msc_orals.htm

 

I've attached the most recent MMMA amicus brief in the King case that was filed today in support of King. I've condensed the PDF file so so that it wouldn't be rejected by anyone's email server. If you want the clearer and larger file size, about 10 mb, let me know.

 

The King case revolves around the definition of an "enclosed, locked facility." The two conflicting Court of Appeals opinions in this case are available at: http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20110203_c294682_45_21o-294682-final.pdf & http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20110203_c294682_46_21d-294682-final.pdf

 

The Kolanek case deals with several issues, but focuses on the interplay between Sections 4, 7 and 8 of the MMMA. The Court of Appeals opinion in this case is available at: http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20110111_c295125_30_2o-295125-final.pdf<BR clear=all>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see it also has page 8 twice, and is missing page 9, and the final pages at the end of the "conclusion" section.

 

all in all, very well stated. It distinctly points out the Errors of the previous "Rulings", and properly conveys the Public understanding of the intentions of the Act, the Protections it incorporates, and high lights the very black and white nature of the MMM Act of 2008, as it was passed via Public Initiative.

 

To rule against this firm, solid, and common sense Public Interpretation, could drive the Wedge of Mistrust between the People and those in Government deep enough to become nearly repairable. When the People lose their Trust and Faith that their government has the peoples best interest in mind, the People Revolt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see it also has page 8 twice, and is missing page 9, and the final pages at the end of the "conclusion" section.

 

all in all, very well stated. It distinctly points out the Errors of the previous "Rulings", and properly conveys the Public understanding of the intentions of the Act, the Protections it incorporates, and high lights the very black and white nature of the MMM Act of 2008, as it was passed via Public Initiative.

 

To rule against this firm, solid, and common sense Public Interpretation, could drive the Wedge of Mistrust between the People and those in Government deep enough to become nearly repairable. When the People lose their Trust and Faith that their government has the peoples best interest in mind, the People Revolt.

 

That's why Congress passed and the President signed into law the "NDAA".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry

Today is one that I am watching with intensity

I have a very similar case and mine is hinged upon

the decision and the definition these robed gentlemen

decide top place upon the term "Enclosure" .

 

Anybody with any common sense knows darn well that an

enclosure is any four walled surrounding barrier which

locks and prevents entry by unauthorized people..

 

 

But lo and behold things in this assinine country need

to be run through the mud fifty times to establish

the obvious.

 

I was raided without even having a search warrant this summer

and the excuse afterward was that the helo spotted my

full enclosed cage and they just so happened to stop by

with their caravan of clowns and the helo overhead all

coincidentally of course.

 

 

Never mind the fact that I had called into their office

3 separate times and spoke to their secretary asking to

have a solid answer returned to me about the necessity

of a top on it...No reply not once ,,,this took place

every week just before they raided me.

 

My attorney has the phone records to prove it..

 

 

 

Let's just say your case is playing an important or

critical role in my judge's decision.....

 

 

 

I'm at the edge of my seat....

 

please let us know as soon as you do ...

 

 

Thanks much my friend...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry

Today is one that I am watching with intensity

I have a very similar case and mine is hinged upon

the decision and the definition these robed gentlemen

decide top place upon the term "Enclosure" .

 

Anybody with any common sense knows darn well that an

enclosure is any four walled surrounding barrier which

locks and prevents entry by unauthorized people..

 

 

But lo and behold things in this assinine country need

to be run through the mud fifty times to establish

the obvious.

 

I was raided without even having a search warrant this summer

and the excuse afterward was that the helo spotted my

full enclosed cage and they just so happened to stop by

with their caravan of clowns and the helo overhead all

coincidentally of course.

 

 

Never mind the fact that I had called into their office

3 separate times and spoke to their secretary asking to

have a solid answer returned to me about the necessity

of a top on it...No reply not once ,,,this took place

every week just before they raided me.

 

My attorney has the phone records to prove it..

 

 

 

Let's just say your case is playing an important or

critical role in my judge's decision.....

 

 

 

I'm at the edge of my seat....

 

please let us know as soon as you do ...

 

 

Thanks much my friend...

 

Sorry about what happen to you and good luck to Larry K but this case is not about a lock or a roof IMO am no Lawyer but it is all about using the MMJ Law in court

it's really about letting a jury here you are a patient thats what Larry's case is about IMO

good luck with yours

we have also been to the supreme court and we withdrew ares and with us we only had are Rec and the 21 days had passed UNDER plant count and uder 2.5oz and the C.O.A said we were good we all knew that the Law say's after 21 days your Rec acts as your card but now we know it does per the C.O.A

 

but as you know we are still in court now almost 3 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry about what happen to you and good luck to Larry K but this case is not about a lock or a roof IMO am no Lawyer but it is all about using the MMJ Law in court

it's really about letting a jury here you are a patient thats what Larry's case is about IMO

good luck with yours

we have also been to the supreme court and we withdrew ares and with us we only had are Rec and the 21 days had passed UNDER plant count and uder 2.5oz and the C.O.A said we were good we all knew that the Law say's after 21 days your Rec acts as your card but now we know it does per the C.O.A

 

but as you know we are still in court now almost 3 years

 

 

I'm also sorry to hear about your troubles...it's all just a crock of horse pudding...

It seems the latest decisions have been going positively...

so with that vibe set,,let's hope that 2012 is a super year for Mi MMJ and setting

this darn law in stone ...

 

Does anybody have any idea as to how much time the machinations take to get a ruling

established ? example ...yes they are scheduled to hear Larry's case today , but when

will the results be declared ?

 

 

 

As far as details go,,Larry's case does have an important relevance to the outside

growing issue and the required overhead or "top" being a necessity as defined by

enclosure in the MMJ MI law .

 

At least in the eyes of my attorney and my judge as this was the excuse the bandits

used to enter my property illegally and destroy my licensed grow.

 

Enclosure and it's meaning will be properly established by the time Larry's case

is finished...will this take 5 years ? I don't know..but I know what an enclosure is

and mine was easily established as being so...

 

 

I'd like to personally thank The ACLU for taking this case on and representing Larry...

Edited by KindWave Hydro
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...

×
×
  • Create New...