Jump to content

Medical Marijuana - Behind The Smoke:


Recommended Posts

Not sure if I seen this posted here but excuse me if it was. News Story Link

 

Justice Peter O’Connell of the state Court of Appeals last year used a popular culture reference to explain what he called Michigan medical marijuana law’s “obfuscations, ambiguous language and confusingly overlapping sections.”

 

“Reading this act is similar to participating in the Triwizard Tournament described in ‘Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire:’ the maze that is this statute is so complex that the final result will only be known once the Supreme Court has had an opportunity to review and remove most of the haze from this act,” O’Connell says in a footnote in a September 2010 concurring opinion in People vs. Redden.

 

While Michigan courts slowly try to crystallize the vague and confusing language of the medical marijuana law, law enforcement officials have reached one conclusion — profiting from the law is illegal.

 

Several state law enforcement officials, including the Michigan attorney general, have concluded that marijuana dispensaries in most cases — those operating as a business — are illegal and have been raided by police. Many have shut down.

 

Officials say that the law’s intent wasn’t to make money but to provide relief to medically suffering patients.

 

The law says caregivers who can provide pot to up to five patients may receive “compensation for costs.”

 

“To me, that means they can recover whatever it costs to grow the plant,” said Paul Walton, spokesman for Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper. “The law was intended for there to be small operations for compassion, not profit. Dispensary suggests to me it’s being done for commercial sales and that is not provided for.”

 

Patients must designate caregivers, and vice versa, officials say.

 

“I can’t think of any business model where a business can operate for a long time with five customers,” said Steve Hiller, deputy chief assistant prosecutor in Washtenaw County. “I don’t think you can have a caregiver with a storefront with hundreds of patients even if he gets together with other caregivers.”

 

Walton pointed out that the criminalization of marijuana remains the “default.” In People vs. Redden, the appeals court noted the law is “exemptive,” not “permissive,” he said.

 

Walton cautioned that marijuana remains illegal under federal laws. His office contacts the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in any cases involving more than 100 plants.

 

Special Agent Rich Isaacson, spokesman for the DEA’s Detroit office, said his agents adhere to the policy of the U.S. Department of Justice that basically ignores state medical marijuana laws.

 

“There’s no such thing as medical marijuana in the federal system,” he said. “It really hasn’t altered the way the DEA conducts business. Marijuana is a ‘Schedule 1’ drug. There is no medical benefit from it.”

 

But he added that people adhering to Michigan requirements won’t be pursued.

 

“We target large-scale drug traffickers,” he said.

 

Matthew Abel, a Detroit-based medical marijuana attorney, contends that law enforcement is trying to push the envelope too far.

 

Abel said the “sale” of marijuana is not outlawed, and the state should stay out of medical marijuana users’ transactions.

 

“A sale is equivalent to a transfer or delivery,” Abel said. “What does the government care where patients get their marijuana?”

 

Abel envisions medical marijuana evolving into a “service industry” in which suppliers charge for the marijuana and expenses, such as labor and equipment.

 

“General Motors’ labor is an expense, not profit,” Abel said. “For them to say the law says all dispensaries are all illegal, the law doesn’t say that.”

 

One example of a potentially legal dispensary is 3rd Coast Compassion Center in Ypsilanti. Director Jamie Lowell said the nonprofit organization accepts private donations to pay bills and salaries. He said the facility operates within the confines, spirit and intent of the law.

 

The law enforcement stance goes against some medical marijuana advocates who contend that a group of caregivers can join forces and serve dozens or even hundreds of patients, sometimes referred to as “collectives.”

 

But, Hiller said, according to court rulings, caregivers cannot share each others’ patients, and each patient’s stash must be stored separately, according to court rulings.

 

A precedent-setting Court of Appeals ruling — People vs. Ryan M. Bylsma, stemming out of Kent County, issued Sept. 28 — says that Bylsma, a caregiver, can only grow plants for patients who are formally registered to him through the Michigan Department of Community Health’s registration process.

 

Ultimately, experts say the courts and possibly the Legislature should have the final say in the law’s evolvement.

 

The law, passed by 63 percent of voters in the 2008 election, within the next year will undergo its first reviews by the Michigan Supreme Court in two cases: People vs. Larry King and People vs. Alexander Kolanek.

 

In the King case, the court will address whether King — a 55-year-old medical marijuana patient — grew and stored it in a sufficiently locked and enclosed facility in and outside his Owosso home in Shiawassee County. King grew pot in a 6-foot-high chain-link dog kennel under lock and key and in a closet inside the home. But the appeals court ruled that the outdoor facility was not secure enough because it didn’t have a roof and was not stationed to the ground, and the indoor closet didn’t have a lock.

 

King was charged with two counts of felony manufacturing marijuana.

 

Attorney Dan Korobkin of the American Civil Liberties Union, representing King, said the court accepted the case also because King raised an “affirmative defense,” that his medical requirement for the drug usurps the criminal charge.

 

“The criminal prosecution of Larry King is a gross injustice,” Korobkin said, also pointing out the outdoor facility was sturdy and indoor facility sufficiently isolated from access in his home.

 

Korobkin noted the dissenting opinion of Justice Thomas Fitzgerald, who said the law’s “susceptibility to multiple interpretations should not result in the use of the act as a sword, rather than a shield.”

 

The second high-court case is the People vs. Alexander Kolanek. Justices will mull whether a marijuana possession charge should stick. Kolanek gained approval from a doctor and his patient card after his arrest, although the doctor says he and Kolanek discussed him getting the card prior to his arrest. The Court of Appeals reversed Oakland Judge Edward Sosnick, who had sided with Kolanek.

 

Kolanek was arrested in April 2009 in Oakland County for having eight marijuana cigarettes in the trunk of his vehicle.

 

The appeals court has ruled in two other significant medical marijuana cases that may be appealed.

 

The court ruled Aug. 23 in favor of the state vs. Brandon McQueen and Matthew Taylor, who were doing business as Compassionate Apothecary LLC, a Mount Pleasant dispensary.

 

The dispensary was shut down for being a public nuisance, in violation of the public health code.

 

Compassionate Apothecary rented lockers to patients and caregivers to exchange marijuana. It also kept up to 20 percent of the transaction cost.

 

The appeals panel, in overturning Isabella County Circuit Court, ruled that patient-to-patient sales are illegal.

 

Another important case was People vs. Robert Redden and Torey Clark, both of whom had received doctors’ approval for but not yet received patient cards when police raided their Madison Heights home in March 2009 and confiscated 21 plants. They were charged with felonies.

 

At their preliminary examination, 43rd District Judge Robert Turner threw out the case and called it “one of the worst pieces of legislation I have ever seen in my life.”

 

But the circuit court reinstated the charges and was upheld in September 2010 by the appeals court, which, said Redden, who suffered from “pain,” and Clark, who suffered from “nausea,” didn’t meet the criteria for “debilitating medical conditions required by the MMMA.” Redden said he had a degenerative hip condition and Clark was recovering from ovarian cancer surgery.

 

They currently face criminal charges in Oakland Circuit Court in Pontiac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if I seen this posted here but excuse me if it was. News Story Link

 

Justice Peter O’Connell of the state Court of Appeals last year used a popular culture reference to explain what he called Michigan medical marijuana law’s “obfuscations, ambiguous language and confusingly overlapping sections.”

 

“Reading this act is similar to participating in the Triwizard Tournament described in ‘Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire:’ the maze that is this statute is so complex that the final result will only be known once the Supreme Court has had an opportunity to review and remove most of the haze from this act,” O’Connell says in a footnote in a September 2010 concurring opinion in People vs. Redden.

 

While Michigan courts slowly try to crystallize the vague and confusing language of the medical marijuana law, law enforcement officials have reached one conclusion — profiting from the law is illegal.

 

Several state law enforcement officials, including the Michigan attorney general, have concluded that marijuana dispensaries in most cases — those operating as a business — are illegal and have been raided by police. Many have shut down.

 

Officials say that the law’s intent wasn’t to make money but to provide relief to medically suffering patients.

 

The law says caregivers who can provide pot to up to five patients may receive “compensation for costs.”

 

“To me, that means they can recover whatever it costs to grow the plant,” said Paul Walton, spokesman for Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper. “The law was intended for there to be small operations for compassion, not profit. Dispensary suggests to me it’s being done for commercial sales and that is not provided for.”

 

Patients must designate caregivers, and vice versa, officials say.

 

“I can’t think of any business model where a business can operate for a long time with five customers,” said Steve Hiller, deputy chief assistant prosecutor in Washtenaw County. “I don’t think you can have a caregiver with a storefront with hundreds of patients even if he gets together with other caregivers.”

 

Walton pointed out that the criminalization of marijuana remains the “default.” In People vs. Redden, the appeals court noted the law is “exemptive,” not “permissive,” he said.

 

Walton cautioned that marijuana remains illegal under federal laws. His office contacts the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in any cases involving more than 100 plants.

 

Special Agent Rich Isaacson, spokesman for the DEA’s Detroit office, said his agents adhere to the policy of the U.S. Department of Justice that basically ignores state medical marijuana laws.

 

“There’s no such thing as medical marijuana in the federal system,” he said. “It really hasn’t altered the way the DEA conducts business. Marijuana is a ‘Schedule 1’ drug. There is no medical benefit from it.”

 

But he added that people adhering to Michigan requirements won’t be pursued.

 

“We target large-scale drug traffickers,” he said.

 

Matthew Abel, a Detroit-based medical marijuana attorney, contends that law enforcement is trying to push the envelope too far.

 

Abel said the “sale” of marijuana is not outlawed, and the state should stay out of medical marijuana users’ transactions.

 

“A sale is equivalent to a transfer or delivery,” Abel said. “What does the government care where patients get their marijuana?”

 

Abel envisions medical marijuana evolving into a “service industry” in which suppliers charge for the marijuana and expenses, such as labor and equipment.

 

“General Motors’ labor is an expense, not profit,” Abel said. “For them to say the law says all dispensaries are all illegal, the law doesn’t say that.”

 

One example of a potentially legal dispensary is 3rd Coast Compassion Center in Ypsilanti. Director Jamie Lowell said the nonprofit organization accepts private donations to pay bills and salaries. He said the facility operates within the confines, spirit and intent of the law.

 

The law enforcement stance goes against some medical marijuana advocates who contend that a group of caregivers can join forces and serve dozens or even hundreds of patients, sometimes referred to as “collectives.”

 

But, Hiller said, according to court rulings, caregivers cannot share each others’ patients, and each patient’s stash must be stored separately, according to court rulings.

 

A precedent-setting Court of Appeals ruling — People vs. Ryan M. Bylsma, stemming out of Kent County, issued Sept. 28 — says that Bylsma, a caregiver, can only grow plants for patients who are formally registered to him through the Michigan Department of Community Health’s registration process.

 

Ultimately, experts say the courts and possibly the Legislature should have the final say in the law’s evolvement.

 

The law, passed by 63 percent of voters in the 2008 election, within the next year will undergo its first reviews by the Michigan Supreme Court in two cases: People vs. Larry King and People vs. Alexander Kolanek.

 

In the King case, the court will address whether King — a 55-year-old medical marijuana patient — grew and stored it in a sufficiently locked and enclosed facility in and outside his Owosso home in Shiawassee County. King grew pot in a 6-foot-high chain-link dog kennel under lock and key and in a closet inside the home. But the appeals court ruled that the outdoor facility was not secure enough because it didn’t have a roof and was not stationed to the ground, and the indoor closet didn’t have a lock.

 

King was charged with two counts of felony manufacturing marijuana.

 

Attorney Dan Korobkin of the American Civil Liberties Union, representing King, said the court accepted the case also because King raised an “affirmative defense,” that his medical requirement for the drug usurps the criminal charge.

 

“The criminal prosecution of Larry King is a gross injustice,” Korobkin said, also pointing out the outdoor facility was sturdy and indoor facility sufficiently isolated from access in his home.

 

Korobkin noted the dissenting opinion of Justice Thomas Fitzgerald, who said the law’s “susceptibility to multiple interpretations should not result in the use of the act as a sword, rather than a shield.”

 

The second high-court case is the People vs. Alexander Kolanek. Justices will mull whether a marijuana possession charge should stick. Kolanek gained approval from a doctor and his patient card after his arrest, although the doctor says he and Kolanek discussed him getting the card prior to his arrest. The Court of Appeals reversed Oakland Judge Edward Sosnick, who had sided with Kolanek.

 

Kolanek was arrested in April 2009 in Oakland County for having eight marijuana cigarettes in the trunk of his vehicle.

 

The appeals court has ruled in two other significant medical marijuana cases that may be appealed.

 

The court ruled Aug. 23 in favor of the state vs. Brandon McQueen and Matthew Taylor, who were doing business as Compassionate Apothecary LLC, a Mount Pleasant dispensary.

 

The dispensary was shut down for being a public nuisance, in violation of the public health code.

 

Compassionate Apothecary rented lockers to patients and caregivers to exchange marijuana. It also kept up to 20 percent of the transaction cost.

 

The appeals panel, in overturning Isabella County Circuit Court, ruled that patient-to-patient sales are illegal.

 

Another important case was People vs. Robert Redden and Torey Clark, both of whom had received doctors’ approval for but not yet received patient cards when police raided their Madison Heights home in March 2009 and confiscated 21 plants. They were charged with felonies.

 

At their preliminary examination, 43rd District Judge Robert Turner threw out the case and called it “one of the worst pieces of legislation I have ever seen in my life.”

 

But the circuit court reinstated the charges and was upheld in September 2010 by the appeals court, which, said Redden, who suffered from “pain,” and Clark, who suffered from “nausea,” didn’t meet the criteria for “debilitating medical conditions required by the MMMA.” Redden said he had a degenerative hip condition and Clark was recovering from ovarian cancer surgery.

 

They currently face criminal charges in Oakland Circuit Court in Pontiac.

 

Thanks

we were in court yesterday and the P.A told the judge that we can not use the MMMA because the grow room was not locked at the time of are raid so if you are to take care of your plants make sure you lock youeself in side

we had a locked room but i was inside of the room what a bunch of BS if thats all they got

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks

we were in court yesterday and the P.A told the judge that we can not use the MMMA because the grow room was not locked at the time of are raid so if you are to take care of your plants make sure you lock yourself in side

we had a locked room but i was inside of the room what a bunch of BS if thats all they got

 

From what I have heard you were in perfect compliance with the Act . Your bedroom door was lockable and the plants were inside a closet with nobody but patients living there I don't know you other then in the forums but I can gather like most patients would you and your wife If you had visitors or left the room you would of locked it as a general rule but nobody is perfect and on the day of your raid you answered the door on impluse forgetting to . I can see myself doing the same thing if in my room and planning on returning . If Law Enforcement merely asked you to get a lock on the closet directly you would of complied ASAP eliminating all this expense for the state and yourself . This was very early on in the law everything was new to Michigan but had been around for years elsewhere .

 

The idea you and your wife had to keep separate rooms for yours and her plants was on nobody's mind back then and wouldn't be for a reasonable person trying to keep costs down . Many people do label them and thats sound for everyone . I still do not get the concept of why having separate enclosed rooms is necessary and it seems like a extra burden on legitimate patients . Though I do not believe this came up in your specific case . Patients need more protections , jails are not set up to be safe for them . What seems like reasonable treatment for normal individuals to a patient is often torture .

 

I hope you come to a resolution soon in your favor and one day every single peice of the required activity surrounding medical use is clearly coverred as legal activity everyone in the State understands so were all safe . Its time medical cannabis patients were judged on the " content of their character ."

Edited by Croppled1
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...