Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Simple as 1,2,3 - Will be the new policy for the MMMA forums

 

So much ado has been made at our attempt to provide a reasonable policy for posting on the forums. Much debate has been had amongst the moderator staff and on the forums amongst our members. As is often the case and even more so on the Internet, communication and semantics are critical when trying to develop a consistent but clear policy regarding the Act that can be enforced easily and without issue. The unambiguous policy to date has created some confusion when its intent was just the opposite. Additionally and without merit many of the moderators have been under attack for attempting to enforce a policy that is designed only to protect patients from arrest, prosecution or penalty. The reference to Nazis is offensive and reflects an absolute lack of knowledge of history, common sense, and humanity. The comparison of anything the moderators do on this site to the devastation the Nazis did in world history is blatant ignorance.

 

Let it be stated now, and made very clear that the MMMA does not believe that the proper interpretation of the law would prohibit any of the behavior that may fall into the so called ambiguous zone. The MMMA believes that the Act should be interpreted liberally, and with the sole purpose of protecting patients and caregivers. Further the MMMA does not believe that dispensaries, farmers markets, any registered caregiver transfers to any registered patient or patient to patient transfers are unlawful. In fact the MMMA believes and acknowledges that all of these acts and behaviors are critical and essential for the medical cannabis community to survive and flourish. Why then would the MMMA attempt to create a policy that purports to limit this behavior? The answer is simple, we are not!

 

What are we trying to do then? The MMMA is simply trying to provide advice and direction for patients and caregivers to avoid arrest, and be forced to defend themselves in court. It is that simple.

 

Perhaps as simple as 1, 2, 3.

 

Simple as 1, 2, 3 will be the new policy for the MMMA forums.

 

The behavior of patients and caregivers will be and should be assessed by a ranking of risk and liability scored by Level 1 risk, Level 2 risk, and Level 3 risk.

 

Ask yourself the following question: is there a consistent and unequivocal interpretation of the behavior by patients and caregivers that LEO would agree is lawful? Said another way, would the behavior in question result in an arrest if you asked all LEO statewide? The focus here is not what the MMMA wants; the focus here is not what the MMMA believes the proper interpretation of the act should be. The focus here is not what LEO in your local community says is lawful. Instead the operative question is how do all Leo state wide interpret the act and what do they believe is unlawful behavior?

 

Is there a consistent and unequivocal interpretation of the behavior by patients and caregivers that LEO would agree is lawful?

 

If the answer is yes you are in a Level 1 Risk category and should be protected against arrest, prosecution, or any penalty.

 

All other behavior outside of this definition falls into Level 2 and 3 risk categories. Level 2 and 3 behavior is not unlawful per se, but is behavior that may subject you to a higher risk or liability of arrest. The key here is that the MMMA is not calling this behavior unlawful.

 

The Level 2 and 3 behavior however is behavior which may not without equivocation protect you from arrest, prosecution, or any penalty, although the MMMA believes it should. Those seeking information and guidance from our site need to know that your protections do not include immunity from arrest. Instead your protections will come via the affirmative defense set out in section 8 of the Act.

 

For those that are not aware, the Act is set up with 2 different levels of protection. There is a section 4 protection which is immunity from arrest prosecution or any penalty. Immunity means that after interacting with LEO, you are released without incident, no arrest takes place, medicine, money, and property is not confiscated. You are not handed an "intent to forfeit" document that requires you to post bond for your property. Immunity means you go home; you kiss your significant other on the lips when you get home and you thank the stars above that you are sleeping in your own bed instead of the concrete floor of the local county jail.

 

Then there is a section 8 protection, which is an affirmative defense. These protections are as real and as important as the protections of section 4, but they occur in a completely different environment that is important to distinguish. The section 8 affirmative defense will take place in Court, before a Judge at an evidentiary hearing (first). This game will start with you waking up from the concrete floor of the county jail. It will include eating bologna sandwiches for breakfast, the mustard jar will have something that looks like an infection growing on of the top. It will have been at least 24 hours since you spoke to your family (72 hours is the maximum), and the return to your normal life will not yet begin until you post bond, get your car out of the lot, which will cost you at least $1000. Then you will have approximately 15 days to post bond on the forfeiture case. This amount is usually 10% of the total value of the property seized. Consider the forfeiture matter a second case, one that will put the burden on you to establish that the items sought to be forfeited were acquired through lawfully earned funds. Lawfully earned funds could be a definition that is in controversy in your forfeiture case.

 

After the arraignment in your criminal case, usually done by video while you remain in the jail cell, you will be on bond. The conditions will likely include no use of medical cannabis while on bond. You will have to hire an attorney or rely upon the experience of the local court appointed attorney's knowledge of the MMMA. After many months of your case pending and when you find yourself at your evidentiary hearing for your section 8 defense much ado will be made about your bona fide relationship with your certifying doctor. "Is my doctor willing to come to court?" is a good question to ask yourself when engaging in Level 2 and 3 behaviors. Remember if your doctor is not your treating physician, in some jurisdictions you may fail to establish the first prong of section 8. Although the MMMA believes this is wrong, this is how it has played out in many jurisdictions. Awareness of these distinctions is all that is being sought by the MMMA.

 

The point here is that the different levels of protection between section 4 and section 8 are significant; with the most important factor being one protects you from arrest (Section 4) while the other (Section 8) protects you from conviction in court. The previous policy and guidance provided on the forums for our members has merely embraced a policy to avoid arrest, or Level 1 risk behavior. Moving forward the key factor that will and should be expressed will be to point out and make known what behavior falls into the category that is a Level 1 risk that protects you from arrest, prosecution and any penalty versus what behavior is a Level 2 or 3 risk that offers its protections pursuant to section 8 in court.

 

No one at the MMMA wants to be responsible for advising behavior that results in a patient or caregiver being arrested. Likewise no one at the MMMA believes patients or caregivers should be arrested. But we are living in a time when the Peoples' law has yet to be implemented as it was intended. There remain many different interpretations throughout the state that are not consistent or absolutely clear, to the extent that all LEO would agree. For example see the twisted interpretation of Court of Appeals cases from the "Legal Updates at the Michigan State

 

Police," website regarding medical marihuana.** Please note that the MMMA disagrees with these interpretations, but would be acting neglectful if we did not point out these simple facts for our community. We are not taking responsibility for how LEO currently thinks, we disagree with it and have been and will continue to try to change how they think. In the meantime, we are simply reporting it for the benefit and protection of the medical cannabis community.

 

**

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._99_390580_7.pdf

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._96_382986_7.pdf

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._91_370314_7.pdf

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._89_362839_7.pdf

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._78_276204_7.pdf

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._69_259822_7.pdf

 

 

Soon a day will come when we can all laugh about this but in the interim our community and those that post on the MMMA forums and our membership needs to be made aware and be informed. More importantly they need to act with knowledge, caution, and understanding the various levels of risk associated with the behavior they choose to engage in.

 

With that being said what once was called the unambiguous compliance policy, or behavior that would conform to those principals has been morphed into what will now be described as Level 1 risk behavior. Strict compliance with section 4 of the act is what will be advised to all who care to listen, as the type of behavior that has the lowest degree of risk of arrest. Everything else is Level 2 or 3 risk. That is to say if an encounter with law enforcement occurs the level of risk of being arrested, and being forced to defend yourself in court is higher. Is Level 2 and 3 risk behavior lawful? I personally think so, but who cares what I think. The analysis here is what we know of how LEO sees it collectively throughout the state. It may not be that way in your jurisdiction and it may be that way for a very good reason, but until all LEO acknowledge it as so, that behavior is just simply of higher risk. Please notice that nowhere in any of this analysis is the word unlawful or illegal used we are simply pointing out that there may be a higher risk of a negative outcome.

 

So please understand, that no one at the MMMA wants to impede the success of the medical cannabis community growing and thriving, we just want those that care to listen to understand the difference of how the Act is being interpreted by LEO,the courts, and the impact it is having on patients and caregivers.

 

Knowledge of these distinctions will make for a better understanding of how the lines have been drawn temporarily by the courts and law enforcement, and give our community proper notice of the risks that they may be taking when engaging in the medical use of cannabis.

 

In closing I hope this helps clear up some of the confusion created earlier, and we all look forward to your input and an educated discussion which evolves this community.

 

 

Thank you for your support and understanding.

 

Michael Komorn

 

President of the MMMA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MI C H I G A N S T A T E P O L I C E

LEGAL UPDATE

NO. 89

 

The Court concluded the MMMA does not authorize marihuana dispensaries and the MMMA does not permit the sale of marihuana.

The Court reasoned the “delivery” and “transfer” of marihuana allowed under the definition of “medical use” contained in the MMMA is not equivalent to sale of marihuana. Sale consists of delivery or transfer plus the receipt of compensation which is not allowed under any provision of the MMMA.

 

That is from the Michigan State Police Website ,I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS,, and i do not want to see sick patients getting caught up in this I think patients safety first

Edited by cristinew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot the fact that some patients cannot in fact be housed in a jail facility due to their disability. They also will not be sleeping on floors or eating bologna sandwiches and must have immediate access to medications and medical equipment to moniter them 24/7. I have no fear of arrest because they are literally powerless to keep me in a local jail. Even on a murder charge, I go to a hospital wing and put my feet up and relax. Some of us are much worse off than others. The local jail is not going to take in someone who might just stick the county with a 1 million dollar or better hospital bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot the fact that some patients cannot in fact be housed in a jail facility due to their disability. They also will not be sleeping on floors or eating bologna sandwiches and must have immediate access to medications and medical equipment to moniter them 24/7. I have no fear of arrest because they are literally powerless to keep me in a local jail. Even on a murder charge, I go to a hospital wing and put my feet up and relax. Some of us are much worse off than others. The local jail is not going to take in someone who might just stick the county with a 1 million dollar or better hospital bill.

 

I hope for your sake it is true! I got put in jail, I wasnt allowed my medications ( i had been on them for 12 yrs) I should have been in a hospital, unfortunatly I had a 10 day sentence to do (which equals 8 nites in most countys) but on that 8th nite luckily my lady came to pick me up at midnite, I wasnt out of jail 5 minutes before an ambulance was called, 20 hrs later I woke up in the hospital, but my feet were not up, I had all kinds of stuff shoved in my throat and hooke to my arms and chest! I woke up in I.C.U! so dont think becuase you are ill you will not wake up on the mettal or concrete beds, shoot I wish they gave us baloney sandwiches lmao!

 

Its as simple as 1,2.3

 

1 loose

2Lips

3sink ships!

 

Peace

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know... "sale" of marijuana is not specifically outlawed under MCL or the public health code... im not a lawyer so if im wrong please put the link or code in a reply ... and if what i said is true... it seems like the supreme court should rule on the mcqueen case that sale is allowed between patients. the only thing i can find is the delivery and possession being illegal. delivery is defined as the direct or constructive transfer of a controlled substance from one individual to another regardless of remuneration.. meaning regardless of money being transfered or not... makes sense to me that they would word it that way because it would technically prevent you from selling marijuana without breaking the law. since the mma now allows patients the "medical use" which includes delivery, transfer, and possession, you no longer have that roadblock preventing you from getting to the point that you are able to sell marijuana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one more thing, before i looked into the legality of "sale" of a controlled substance i felt that sale was not allowed under the act. It does not specifically address sale. The closest thing to sale that it addresses is under 4(e) where a caregiver can receive compensation for costs.. so if im wrong about "sale" not being addressed in other state laws or codes than i beleive they will not allow sale specifically

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ICD REQUIRES uninterrupted phone service for (through cell phone and landline) downloading and sending information directly to my cardiologists office. Refractory heart failure patients have several feet of wiring inside their bodies that can be removed and used as a weapon by other inmates.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there are no county jails in the US with bedside phone service, nor do they allow an inmate to possess a cell phone. When a transplant comes through and a patient is in the custody of the state, the state is responsible for not only for providing ADEQUATE medical care but also must pick up the costs related to such.

 

A patient such as myself can easily destroy the annual budget of any county jail. My diet alone will cost thousands over a healthy inmates diet. My medications are not cheap. The bedside receiver/transmitter? It is a requirement. It is a game of numbers which I intend to use to my full benefit.

 

There are those who are ill and those who are beyond the scope of reasoning of being ill. I am the latter.

Edited by El Tiberon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ICD REQUIRES uninterrupted phone service for (through cell phone and landline) downloading and sending information directly to my cardiologists office. Refractory heart failure patients have several feet of wiring inside their bodies that can be removed and used as a weapon by other inmates.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there are no county jails in the US with bedside phone service, nor do they allow an inmate to possess a cell phone. When a transplant comes through and a patient is in the custody of the state, the state is responsible for not only for providing ADEQUATE medical care but also must pick up the costs related to such.

 

A patient such as myself can easily destroy the annual budget of any county jail. My diet alone will cost thousands over a healthy inmates diet. My medications are not cheap. The bedside receiver/transmitter? The cost of the average house in the US. It is a game of numbers which I intend to use to my full benefit.

 

There are those who are ill and those who are beyond the scope of reasoning of being ill. I am the latter.

 

Thank You for verifying that for me, I know it must not be easy, I truly am sorry, I hope I did not offend you and in No way ment to!

 

I hope you Get the medical treat ment you need and will be pulling for you!

 

I happend to be in a county jail one time and they wouldnt give a guy his blood pressure medications! (absolutly dif from your situation) When ever they walked him upto the nursing station his blood pressure was over the moon, so they went to him in his cell and did the blood pressure reading while he was in his bunk, it was acceptable, they denied him his meds and told him to stay in bed if he doesnt want high blood pressure, (honest to your god) same place that cold turkeyed me and sent me a few countys over after they couldnt take other inmates complaints over my violent withdraw!

 

so bottom line is they do not care about anyone, as far as they are concerned once your in orange (my crime of choice was dui and dws) you are the same as the rest of the scum! we are only numbers!

 

Peace my friend, I wish you the best!

 

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible to upset me over something such as this. It is my diagnosis and I have accepted and come to terms with it. The only thing left that can be taken from me is my last breath and someone will have to hold a pillow over my face to do that. Don't apologize. You could not have known. I am not done fighting yet my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one more thing, before i looked into the legality of "sale" of a controlled substance i felt that sale was not allowed under the act. It does not specifically address sale. The closest thing to sale that it addresses is under 4(e) where a caregiver can receive compensation for costs.. so if im wrong about "sale" not being addressed in other state laws or codes than i beleive they will not allow sale specifically

 

If sales are not expliciltly prohibited, and the MMMA allows for transfer and acquisition between certain people- should a sale, if it occurs during the transfer and acquisition, be allowed? Did the COA lack foundation when making their determination, and create a crime where one did not previously exist? The Supreme Court will let us know.

 

Listen to attorney Tom Lavigne discuss this exact thing on Planet Green Trees webisode #100. Also, listen to Planet Green Trees webisode #101, in which Michael Komorn and attorney Matt Newburg engage in a very interesting discussion on McQueen as well as Koon and Nicholson.

 

I like the risk assessment and levels of risk discussion, that Michael has transitioned to, in terms of policy, as opposed to looking at these issues as ambiguous v unambiguous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ICD REQUIRES uninterrupted phone service for (through cell phone and landline) downloading and sending information directly to my cardiologists office. Refractory heart failure patients have several feet of wiring inside their bodies that can be removed and used as a weapon by other inmates.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there are no county jails in the US with bedside phone service, nor do they allow an inmate to possess a cell phone. When a transplant comes through and a patient is in the custody of the state, the state is responsible for not only for providing ADEQUATE medical care but also must pick up the costs related to such.

 

A patient such as myself can easily destroy the annual budget of any county jail. My diet alone will cost thousands over a healthy inmates diet. My medications are not cheap. The bedside receiver/transmitter? It is a requirement. It is a game of numbers which I intend to use to my full benefit.

 

There are those who are ill and those who are beyond the scope of reasoning of being ill. I am the latter.

 

They can put you in a guarded hospital room. Just because your under arrested and being detained doesn't mean they have to hold you in the jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. My point was there will be no concrete floors, bologna sandwiches, and denial of medical treatment. Remember they have to pay those guards 24/7 as well. Every....Single.....Day......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankew Mr. Kormon. With luck those who insist that a limited exercise of our rights is our only protection and the only legitimate take on the issues, and who have continually harangued and insulted those of us who take a liberal position on the law, will be silenced in their insistence that our arguments have no value. To expect that they will not find something else to make fools of themselves is little doubt too much to expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ICD REQUIRES uninterrupted phone service for (through cell phone and landline) downloading and sending information directly to my cardiologists office. Refractory heart failure patients have several feet of wiring inside their bodies that can be removed and used as a weapon by other inmates.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there are no county jails in the US with bedside phone service, nor do they allow an inmate to possess a cell phone. When a transplant comes through and a patient is in the custody of the state, the state is responsible for not only for providing ADEQUATE medical care but also must pick up the costs related to such.

 

A patient such as myself can easily destroy the annual budget of any county jail. My diet alone will cost thousands over a healthy inmates diet. My medications are not cheap. The bedside receiver/transmitter? It is a requirement. It is a game of numbers which I intend to use to my full benefit.

 

There are those who are ill and those who are beyond the scope of reasoning of being ill. I am the latter.

 

This goes to the heart of the Americans With Disabilities Act. The pigs are required by law to afford us reasonable accommodation for our disabilities, to include treatment while in custody. They have refused nitrogycerine to heart patients with angina, forced patients with severe orthopedic conditions into positions and postures that cause further injury, and have killed people in their neglect of patients' conditions, both physical and mental.

Edited by GregS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to burst the bubble, but just because you are on a med or treatment at home doesn't mean you will be on it in jail. They have their own doctors. Obviously, ICD care is pretty required, but don't think a sore back will keep you off a concrete bed.

 

Dr. Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible to upset me over something such as this. It is my diagnosis and I have accepted and come to terms with it. The only thing left that can be taken from me is my last breath and someone will have to hold a pillow over my face to do that. Don't apologize. You could not have known. I am not done fighting yet my friend.

 

I wouldnt count on having your feet up and all the comforts of home, Im pos if your in one of the bigger countys with real county jails, ie, wayne, oakland, macomb, gennessee,etc they have their very own hospital in them, they can accomadate you as a prisoner, it will not be easy you will still be in a locked cell/room, Ive been there in oakland county yrs ago, I got my head split open by a cops service revolver butt! (he broke passenger window where i was sitting didnt even give me a chance to open door, he broke it with his pistol and than whacked me in the head, splitting it open and giving me a concushion) i said i need a dr. they said i needed to shut my mouth while they beat up the other 2 people with me, the driver and another passenger. when we got to oakland county jail, I asked to go to the hospital, they took me upto, the infirmarry and stitched my head up, kept me overnite, in a jail cell that just had limited medical equipment and my arms,hands legs and feet were strapped down so I could not get up or touch anything, not fun, id rather be in a cell with 10 or 12 other guys playing cards and b.s ing, not fun serving your time in a county jail or alone!

 

Once again best of luck! I will be hoping for your best

Peace

Jim

Edited by phaquetoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the difference between levels 2 & 3?

 

What level is bartering for goods or services, where money is not exchanged?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Michael Komorn
      Pregnancy and Medical Marijuana
      Expectant mothers are searching for answers about the safety profile of Medical Marijuana. Unfortunately the scientific community has dropped the ball and kicked it off the cliff on this issue. The lack of scientific research is due to marijuana’s illegality. Further, there exist huge biases within the published research. Mostly the research confounds marijuana use with tobacco and/or alcohol, two known causes of fetus and child harm. Separating out marijuana effects from the self-reported research on mothers who also smoke tobacco and drink alcohol is impossible. Likewise no pregnant women are signing up for research studies due to the illegality of marijuana and CPS removing children from mothers for testing positive for marijuana use.
      Many organizations quote from other organizations, who quote from other studies and reviews. The Minnesota Department of Health OFFICE OF MEDICAL CANNABIS quotes from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee report:
      In the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists official committee opinion, interim update Oct 2017, the committee found:
       
       
      Uninformed opinion, with zero evidence and lots of fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) are used to scare mothers away from a nontoxic plant. These uninformed unscientific opinions are being used by lawmakers to craft laws continuing the cycle of FUD and the illegality of marijuana. “Oh we don’t know what marijuana does, so let’s treat it like heroin” and “if anyone questions our opinion of marijuana, we’ll call them dirty lazy pothead stoner hippies” or “puppets of the marijuana industry”.
       
      But we do know what marijuana does. One cannot live in a bubble and ignore reality and the world around us. Women smoke and eat marijuana while pregnant.
      Cannabis use during pregnancy in France in 2010
      Trends in Self-reported and Biochemically Tested Marijuana Use Among Pregnant Females in California From 2009-2016

      http://news.gallup.com/poll/194195/adults-say-smoke-marijuana.aspx 
       
      Much of the opinions on marijuana are tainted by a small number of poorly designed studies on marijuana. For example, the National Institute of Health gives grants to researchers through NIDA, the National Institute of Drug Abuse, to study marijuana. NIDA’s focus is on drug abuse, so 90% of its grants are for studies on marijuana abuse, not marijuana benefits. When you ignore half of your research, you ignore science. Many of these studies are completed in order to get future grants from NIDA; research is often conducted from the conclusion backwards in order to show some kind of harm from marijuana use. This, in of itself, does not bias research.
       
      https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html 
       
      The bias is introduced when researchers are rushed and forced to publish results, even if the studies were deficient. For example, every website and newspaper ran with the story about marijuana using children lose IQ points. Not many reported on the follow-up study that could not replicate the first study. When eliminating co-founders, the new study found no drop in IQ points. Further, research on twin siblings showed that the drop in IQ was due to parenting, binge drinking or other societal influences, not marijuana.
      https://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2016/08/study-questions-role-marijuana-in-teen-users-iq-decline 

       
      Try reading that last sentence again. In a world of science, evidence, reasoning and logic, a doctor makes a statement that decades of use of marijuana might make you lose intellectual function, based on conjecture.
      NIDA also continues to perpetuate the myth that Marijuana is a “gateway drug”.
      https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-gateway-drug 
      These findings are consistent with the idea of marijuana as a "gateway drug." However, the majority of people who use marijuana do not go on to use other, "harder" substances.
      NIDA, NIH, FDA, DEA, including other federal, state, and local government organizations and private companies continue to perpetuate these and other lies in order to keep marijuana illegal. ASA has filed complaints against the DEA multiple times to get it to remove incorrect statements about marijuana off of the DEA’s website.
      http://www.safeaccessnow.org/iqa_victory 
      A cyclical pattern emerges from the current and past situation surrounding marijuana.
      1.      Stymied scientific research, due to illegality of marijuana and government funding biases
      2.      Using stymied scientific research as a reason to ignore reality.
      3.      Repeating the biased scientific research, long after it was shown to be deficient.
      4.      Using the deficient biased research in “meta-reviews”. Thus taking bad science as a base to create more bad science just by doing an analysis of the bad science conclusions.
      5.      Even after a research study has been fully proven to be deficient and conflicting with better research, continue to hold it up as if it is still valid in some way.
      6.      Publish opinions as if they were facts, without any data to back up any claims.
      Continue reading for more conflicting studies and more calls for research.
      Marijuana: Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure in the Human
      Marijuana use in pregnancy and lactation: a review of the evidence
       
      Marijuana and Pregnancy
      The Association of Marijuana Use with Outcome of Pregnancy
       
      Prenatal Tobacco, Marijuana, Stimulant, and Opiate Exposure: Outcomes and Practice Implications 
      Many of these studies contradict themselves. Some report differences in birth weight, some show no differences. Read the studies yourself!
       
      http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2017-HB-5222 
      House bill 5422 will force MMFLA provisioning centers to give patients and caregivers an unscientific pamphlet, as described by the legislature.
       
       
      HB 5222 looks like it will pass. All this fear and doubt of a non-toxic 5,000+ year old medication used by millions of humans in every country in the world.
    • By Michael Komorn
      Hemp, Inc. (OTC: HEMP), the first all-hemp, publicly-traded company in US history forges path in the industrial hemp industry, continues its effort to blow the lid off a nest of deception and double standards many feel have been imposed by the United States government concerning the ancient superfood, hemp seeds. Despite the Cannabis classification, hemp seeds aren't for smoking, nor does it get you "high" as countless people have been led to believe, according to the Kimble Group, LLC. Hemp seeds are growing in popularity, thus, questions are arising concerning their presumed health benefits. So what is it 'they' don't want the American people to know? Why would such enlightening, useful and beneficial information be kept under wraps?
      http://www.prweb.com/releases/hemp/marijuana/prweb9954724.htm
       
       
       
      The first all-hemp, publically-traded company in US History,Hemp, Inc. (OTC: HEMP), hemp.com, blows the lid off a nest of deception.
      (PRWEB) September 28, 2012
       
      It wasn't until this year, August, US senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden, Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul ardently worked together in a bipartisan effort to get industrial hemp removed from the federal doghouse. If passed, this historic senate bill will create economic opportunities by removing federal restrictions on the domestic cultivation of industrial hemp.
      Before light is shed on the benefits on hemp, let's take a look at how and why hemp has been getting a bad rap over the years. According to Hemp, Inc. (OTC: HEMP), the first all-hemp, publically-traded company in US history, William Hurst, an influential American newspaper publisher, created a yellow journalism campaign to associate hemp with marijuana. Why?
      Commercial hemp seeds contain very low amounts of THC, the property responsible for the drug response, plus they contain a substance that counteracts THC. According to Dr. David P. West, who specializes in plant breeding and genetics and who has written a plethora of articles on industrial hemp, says, "The washed hemp seed contains no THC at all. The tiny amounts of THC contained in industrial hemp are in the glands of the plant itself. Sometimes, in the manufacturing process, some THC- and CBD-containing resin sticks to the seed, resulting in traces of THC in the oil that is produced. The concentration of these cannabinoids in the oil is infinitesimal. No one can get high from it."
      Hurst, along with his friend Pierre DuPont, succeeded in outlawing hemp in America and in turn robbed the world of an environmental cash crop. Why would they do such a thing? As noted by Hemp.com, "Because instead of using hemp for paper, clothing, fuel, oils, resins, medicines, and many other uses, we now use trees and synthetic petrochemicals. Hearst owned huge forests and interests in lumber mills. DuPont made synthetic fuels and fibers (nylon, rayon, plastics) from petroleum." Go figure.
      Hemp seeds go back as far as 8,500 years. Initially, the Chinese were harvesting it and using the plant fibers to produce durable cloth, however, 3,000 years ago, they began using the seeds as a food source. Hemp seeds have been a proven source of protein on the planet, primarily because they contain all twenty one known amino acids.
      Clinical herbalist, Larken Bunce, says, "Hemp seeds are a nutritionally dense food source that provide the body with necessary macro- and micronutrients, including protein, essential fatty acids, fiber, vitamins and minerals. The addition of hemp seeds to your daily diet can ensure you are getting necessary essential fatty acids, a good balance of protein and carbohydrates, a good source of fiber as well as some essential vitamins and minerals."
      Essentially, the human organism is unable to produce all essential amino acids, but amazingly, hemp does. The hemp seeds are a great source of polyunsaturated fat as well as essential fatty acids. According to Nourishing Gourmet, hemp foods are also a rich source of phytonutrients, the organic compounds of plants that are thought to promote human health.
      More specifically, Dr. Cassandra Forsyth, nutrition researcher at the University of Connecticut, says, "Hemp seeds are rich in omega3 fatty acids, which reduce your risk of heart disease and stroke." According to an article in Men's Health, written by Carolyn Kylstra on 9/25/12, a 1-ounce serving of the seeds provides 11 grams of protein, not to be confused with incomplete protein found in most plant sources. The article's research found the protein in hemp seeds to be comparable to that found in meat, eggs, and dairy.
      If hemp food is easily digested and in turn can be used to treat malnourishment, why such a bad rap? Why not mass produce since the consumption of complete proteins is necessary for human survival? The US Government's complacency of 'profit before health' can no longer stand on the incredulous foundation on which it was built. The American people are, indeed, waking up.
       
      Michael A. Komorn
      Attorney and Counselor
       
      Email: michael@komornlaw.com
      Website: www.komornlaw.com
       
      Check out our Radio show:
      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/planetgreentrees
       
      Live Every Thursday 8-10:00p.m.
       
      PLANET GREENTREES
      w/ Attorney Michael Komorn
       
      The most relevant radio talk show for the Michigan Medical Marijuana Community. PERIOD
    • By Michael Komorn
      The Path to Amnesty for Persons Investigated, Arrested, Prosecuted, Convicted or suffered penalty of any kind for Marihuana Charges, related to possessing Non-Plant Material medical marihuana including brownies or other edibles.
       
       
       
      Clearing your name of criminal charges in Michigan has always been an uphill battle. With the new retroactive changes in the MMMA law, some medical marijuana charges may be able to be fixed. You may be able to have an adjudication or judgement or conviction made nonpublic under MCL 780.621.  
      (5) An application to expunge a record can only be filed 5 or more years after the sentence, probation, discharge or completion of the prison term, whichever is later.
      There are more requirements before a person can file to have these removed from your record.
      (a) A person who is convicted of not more than 1 felony offense and not more than 2 misdemeanor offenses may petition the convicting court to set aside the felony offense.
       
      Any felony or misdemeanor HYTA or 7411 adjudication or dismissal will be considered a misdemeanor conviction for purposes of expungement, and will count as one of the two possible misdemeanors an adult can have for expungement purposes. If you have more than 2 misdemeanors on your record, you cannot petition to remove any convictions. A conviction for an assaultive, sexual, or other specifically excluded crime cannot be expunged.
       
      If you fail to get the conviction expunged by the court, you will not be able to try again for 3 years after the expungement denial, unless the court specifies an earlier time to refile.
       
      Michigan Court Rule 6.500 spells out the rules and requirements and procedure for getting a relief from judgment of the court. This motion is for people who have run out of appeals and who want to raise additional issues. The 6.500 motion could also be used by defendants who have missed the appeal filing deadlines. Most 6.500 motions get dismissed by the judge, but with extreme diligence, some of these motions are successful.
       
      #TrialLawyer @KomornLawMI
      #Prosecutor and #Police #Confess they never understood the #MMMA but #arrested and #prosecuted anyway #PureMichigan
      http://www.9and10news.com/story/33162325/law-enforcement-react-to-new-medical-marijuana-laws 
       
       
      What Happened
       
      On Tuesday September 22, 2016 Governor Rick Snyder signed into law several new bills allowing a state wide regulated licensing scheme for the Medical Marihuana Industry (4209- The Michigan Medical Marihuana Licensing Act). Unlike The Michigan Medical Marihuana Licensing Act, which created a new law, House Bill 4210 amended the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. The MMMA was specifically effected by amending the title and sections 3, 4, 6, and 7 (MCL 333.26423, 333.26424, 333.26426, and 333.26427), sections 3 and 4 as amended by 2012 PA 512 and section 6 as amended by 2012 PA 514, and by adding sections 4a and 4b.
       
      When House Bill 4210 was signed into law, the most significant and important aspect of the new legislation was the amendatory language included within the amendments. Specifically the amendments included the following language:
       
      “This amendatory act clarifies ambiguities in the law in accordance with the original intent of the people, as expressed in section 2(b) of the Michigan medical marihuana act, 2008 IL 1, MCL 333.26422: 
       
      This amendatory act is curative and applies retroactively as to the following: clarifying the quantities and forms of marihuana for which a person is protected from arrest, precluding an interpretation of “weight” as aggregate weight, and excluding an added inactive substrate component of a preparation in determining the amount of marihuana, medical marihuana, or usable marihuana that constitutes an offense. Retroactive application of this amendatory act does not create a cause of action against a law enforcement officer or any other state or local governmental officer, employee, department, or agency that enforced this act under a good-faith interpretation of its provisions at the time of enforcement."
       
       
       
      Enacting section 1. This amendatory act takes effect 90 days after the date it is enacted into law. 
      Enacting section 2. This amendatory act clarifies ambiguities in the law in accordance with the original intent of the people, as expressed in section 2(b) of the Michigan medical marihuana act, 2008 IL 1, MCL 333.26422: 
       
      “(b) Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports and the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics show that approximately 99 out of every 100 marihuana arrests in the United States are made under state law, rather than under federal law. Consequently, changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana.”. [Emphasis added.] 
      This amendatory act is curative and applies retroactively as to the following: clarifying the quantities and forms of marihuana for which a person is protected from arrest, precluding an interpretation of “weight” as aggregate weight, and excluding an added inactive substrate component of a preparation in determining the amount of marihuana, medical marihuana, or usable marihuana that constitutes an offense. Retroactive application of this amendatory act does not create a cause of action against a law enforcement officer or any other state or local governmental officer, employee, department, or agency that enforced this act under a good-faith interpretation of its provisions at the time of enforcement.
       
      In November of 2008, 63% of Michigan voters overwhelmingly passed the Voter Initiative Proposition 1, acknowledging that cannabis is medicine, and that physicians, patients, and their caregivers would be protected from arrest prosecution and penalty of any kind. In the history of Michigan elections, the 3.3 million votes cast approving Michigan’s Medical Marihuana Voter Initiative was the most votes in the history of Michigan elections. An often overlooked and never quoted or cited in any Michigan Court of Appeal or Michigan Supreme Court cases are the following passage from the MMMA
       
      The people of the State of Michigan find and declare that:
       
       
      1. Cannabis aka Marihuana is in fact a Medicine according to Michigan Law.
       
      (a) Modern medical research, including as found by the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine in a March 1999 report, has discovered beneficial uses for marihuana in treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a variety of debilitating medical conditions. 333.26422(a)
       
      Similarly to Michigan, at least 29 other states[1] have passed Medical Marihuana Laws, however pursuant to federal law it remains illegal, and a schedule 1 drug making it challenging for research within the United States. Despite its federal classification there has been an enormous amount of medical research regarding medical cannabis, some of those studies can be read here
       
      CONCLUSION:
      The frequency of migraine headache was decreased with medical marijuana use.
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26749285 
       
       
      Using data on all prescriptions filled by Medicare Part D enrollees from 2010 to 2013, we found that the use of prescription drugs for which marijuana could serve as a clinical alternative fell significantly, once a medical marijuana law was implemented.
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27385238 
       
       
      Conclusions. Suicides among men aged 20 through 39 years fell after medical marijuana legalization compared with those in states that did not legalize.
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232164/ 
       
       
       
      Conclusions and Relevance Medical cannabis laws are associated with significantly lower state-level opioid overdose mortality rates."
      https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1898878 
       
       
      2. By Enacting the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, persons engaging in the Medical Use of Marihuana will be and should be protected against State prosecutions.
       
      (b) Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports and the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics show that approximately 99 out of every 100 marihuana arrests in the United States are made under state law, rather than under federal law. Consequently, changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana. 333.26422(b)
       
      3. The intent of the MMMA was explicitly for the benefit health and welfare of Michigan Patients, not intended to be a benefit for police, The Michigan Department of Treasury or private prisons.
       
      (c) Although federal law currently prohibits any use of marihuana except under very limited circumstances, states are not required to enforce federal law or prosecute people for engaging in activities prohibited by federal law. The laws of Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Washington do not penalize the medical use and cultivation of marihuana. Michigan joins in this effort for the health and welfare of its citizens. 333.26422(c)
       
      The above reference language in the MMMA is found in the Findings and Declarations section MCL 333.26242 (a-c).
       
       
      In addition to the 2008 MMMA, Michigan voters have overwhelmingly supported and approved local ballot proposals for the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana in 21 cities since 2011. Initiatives to decriminalize marijuana have been approved in 15 communities: Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing,  Flint, Kalamazoo, Saginaw, Port Huron, East Lansing, Mount Pleasant, Ypsilanti, Berkeley, Hazel Park, Huntington Woods, Oak Park and Pleasant Ridge. Since 2009, on a handful of ballot proposals were voted down in six communities: Frankfort, Clare, Harrison, Lapeer, Onaway and Montrose.
       
      These facts are important when trying to understand the most recent Michigan State Police data which indicates arrests for marijuana possession and marijuana use are increasing — even as arrests for other crimes are going down, according to data collected by the Michigan State Police.
       
      Between 2008 and 2014, arrests for marijuana possession or use went up 17 percent statewide, that data shows, while arrests for all crimes dropped by 15 percent. Despite these facts arrests for marijuana possession or use went up 17% between 2008 and 2014, according to data from the Michigan State Police. The MMMA was supposed to help protect patients and yet no clear decrease in marijuana possession cases has happened.
       
       
      Since 2008, marihuana arrests in Michigan have risen 17%. The Michigan State Police have reported consistently millions in forfeiture proceeds per year.
       

       
      http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2013_Asset_Forfeiture_500018_7.pdf 
      http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2014_Asset_Forfeiture_FINAL_463679_7.pdf 
      http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2015_Asset_Forfeiture_FINAL_scanned_2.docx_500139_7.pdf 
      http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2017_Asset_Forfeiture_Report_577873_7.pdf 
       
      Michaud
      Former director of the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division
       
      Captain Gregoire Michaud has stated publicly that the forensic lab spends 40 percent of its resources testing marihuana, and that is the reason that they have been unable to catch up on the backlog of evidence rape kits. Additional disturbing trends from the Michigan State Police Data indicate:
       
      1. The majority of marijuana arrests are for possession or use.
      In 2014, there were 20,483 arrests for marijuana use or possession, which was 86 percent of all marijuana arrests. About 10 percent of the other arrests are for selling the drug. The remainder of the arrests are for "producing" the drug, smuggling or "other. “Arrests related to marijuana are about two-thirds of all drug arrests in Michigan and in 2014 were 9 percent of all criminal arrests.
       
      2. Data from the Michigan State Police shows that there is a disproportionate number of arrests of persons between the age of 18-24 for marijuana-related crimes. Approximately 43 percent of those arrested in 2014 for marijuana were age 18 to 24. The breakdown for other age groups: 26 percent were age 25 to 34; 11 percent were age 35 to 44; 9 percent were under 18; 7 percent were age 45 to 54, and 3 percent were sage 55 or older. The data associated with the federal drug survey shows that marijuana use is highest among young adults and indicates 24 percent of male and 17 percent of female full-time college students age 18 to 22 use marijuana, the survey shows. 
       
      3. The Michigan State Police Data indicates that males make up a majority of the arrest for marihuana cases.  Men comprised 83 percent of marijuana arrests in 2014, which is disproportionate compared to their rate of usage. The data goes on to indicate that about 9.7 percent of American males age 12 and older are users of marijuana compared to 5.6 percent of women, according to a 2013 federal survey on drug use.  That means men are 1.7 times more likely to use marijuana, but are five times more likely to be arrested on marijuana charges.
       
      4. The Michigan State Police Data clearly indicates that the number of arrest for marihuana is disproportionate for African Americans. An African-American in Michigan was three times more likely to be arrested in 2014 for violating marijuana laws compared to a white person, although surveys and research indicate little difference between usage rates between the two groups.[2]
      In all, African-Americans comprise about 14 percent of Michigan's population, but 35 percent of marijuana arrests.
       
      5. On average, there were about 2.4 marijuana arrests per 1,000 Michigan residents statewide.
       
      6. Since 2011, twenty-one Michigan cities have voted on legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana.
       
      8. Data from the 2013 federal drug survey shows daily use of marijuana is increasing. In 2013, 8.1 million persons aged 12 or older used marijuana on 20 or more days in the past month, which was an increase from the 5.1 million daily or almost daily past month users in 2005 to 2007. The number of daily or almost daily users in 2013 represented 41.1 percent of past month marijuana users, the survey shows.
       
       
       
      It is unequivocal that in 2008 Michigan Voters declared that Marihuana is Medicine, persons engaging in the Medical Use of Marihuana should be protected from criminal prosecutions and the intent of the MMMA was explicitly for the benefit of the health and welfare of Michigan Citizens and not for police and government profit.  It is often hard to understand how a law that received more than 50% vote in all 83 counties in Michigan, could have been so poorly misinterpreted and implemented.  To the extent that one believes that the intention of the MMMA was to provide a shield for patients and caregivers, it is hard to reconcile the overwhelming evidence (from the Michigan State Police data) very little of the voter’s intention was honored.
       
      Instead the Law Enforcement Community has utilized the MMMA as a sword, resulting in a string of 8 years of success defined by the increase of marihuana arrests and consistent profits from forfeiture proceeds.
       
       
      On Tuesday September 22, 2016 Governor Rick Snyder signed into law several new bills allowing a state wide regulated licensing scheme for the Medical Marihuana Industry. Listening to how the Law Enforcement Community reacted to this news gives some insight into how the Law Enforcement Community has been able to get away with this shit. As so articulated by Michigan State Police and the Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina, (who claims to be speaking on behalf of all prosecutors and all law enforcement), ignorance of the law shall be their excuse.
       
      Michigan State Police say they are working with the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and prosecutors to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly. "Hopefully, there are some clarifications there."  “Police and courts are determining how they go forward after years of confusion over the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.” "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was," Vizina said. "They didn't, the prosecutors didn't, law enforcement didn't. It's been a mess in a way." Prosecutors like Daryl Vizina in Cheboygan County hope the laws will be clearer to people in the medical marijuana community. "It's just kind of been a learning process where charges get charged, maybe somebody gets prosecuted, maybe later down the line a higher court overturns the conviction," Vizina said. 
       
       
      The above quotes from those within the law enforcement community should bring shame to them personally but most importantly their profession. For starters, never has the Michigan State Police previously made a public statement that they are trying to learn about the MMMA, the medical use of marihuana or even how they as law enforcement officer shall enforce issues surrounding “usable marihuana.” To see them quoted 8 years after the enactment of the MMMA, in which the MSP are going to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly, sounds more like an apology for not previously understanding the law and previously properly enforcing it.
       
       
      But the quotes by the Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina, (who claims to be speaking on behalf of all prosecutors and all law enforcement), is truly amazing. As a lawyer, I interpret his quotes as a confession to crimes he and others in the law enforcement community have committed against the Medical Marihuana Community. As a lawyer, I would have advised him to take the fifth.
       
      Let’s look at and think about what he is actually saying.
       
      "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was." "They didn't, the prosecutors didn't, law enforcement didn't. It's been a mess in a way."
       
      Vizina’s statement can only conclude that the prosecutions against medical marihuana patients were done in bad faith, by persons who should never have been involved with policing or prosecuting medical patients. To state that he personally didn’t know the law but prosecuted others for violating the same law is the definition of a “due process violation”. His statement objectively interpreted means that he expected those he was prosecuting to have a greater grasp and knowledge of the MMMA than himself, the elected County Prosecutor. To publicly state that not knowing or understanding the law this has been the guiding force for prosecutions is an expression of failure and ignorance. The statement reflects a lack of integrity, honesty and the requisite duty of fairness in any prosecution.
       
      The duty of a prosecutor is not to “win at any cost” or even “try to win if the law is unclear to them and the police”. Prosecutors, as judicial officers, have a duty to the accused as well, and that is to ensure the protection of the accused constitutional rights when accused of a crime. This is the obligation of the prosecutor in any case that it chooses to prosecute. Often overlooked and seemingly forgotten in the modern justice system is the States moral and ethical obligation to ensure a fair trial for the accused. Failing to do this is the definition of an unequal and uneven playing field. But this is how it has been.
       
       If you don't believe me, examine the recent amendments to the MMMA, wherein the Legislature has confirmed the States erred for the last 8 years. The legislatures recent amendments to the MMMA, acknowledge for the first time the declarations section of the MMMA. The Legislature acknowledges the intentions of the MMMA has always been to change state law to practically effect and protect from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana. In doing so, the Legislature has provided relief for those persons who have been wrongly prosecuted by the State for its failure to acknowledge the protections intended for patients and caregivers. 
       
       
      The curative and retroactive amendments to the MMMA, in House Bill 4210, unequivocally clarify and make legal the possession of non-plant material marihuana . The People v Carruthers holding is ultimately overruled and no longer applies to Michigan Patients and Caregivers.
       
      Section 4 of the MMMA as amended 
       
      c) For purposes of determining usable marihuana equivalency, the following shall be considered equivalent to 1 ounce of usable marihuana: 
       
      (1) 16 ounces of marihuana-infused product if in a solid form.

      (2) 7 grams of marihuana-infused product if in a gaseous form.

      (3) 36 fluid ounces of marihuana-infused product if in a liquid form. 
       
      The new amendments create an opportunity to bring relief to those who have been wrongly accused. An opportunity to revisit and correct the situations where the probable cause of a crime in any investigation of patients and caregivers was illegally continued or escalated because the subject matter of the investigation was the non-plant material marihuana. It is important to understand the exponential number of scenarios where an investigation was continued or escalated because the material or substance associated with the investigation was "contraband" or non-plant material marihuana.
       
      If this happened to you, you were right to believe that it was wrong. The police, the prosecutor and the state were wrong. You may have a remedy to right this wrong. 
       
      The new amendments are more than clear in what they fix and to which individuals may benefit from this correction. The state admits and acknowledges that the MMMA contained ambiguities that needed clarifying. The current state court interpretation of the law had failed to express the original intent of the MMMA. "Changing state law will have the practical effect of protecting from arrest the vast majority of seriously ill people who have a medical need to use marihuana.” The amendatory language of the MMMA provides an opportunity to set aside a prior conviction or revisit a prior case that is over, and reopen the case to litigate the states admitted errors.
       
      Legislatively enacted laws usually never apply retroactively unless the amended language contains an explicit reference to a retroactive application. This is a very unique opportunity that does not happen often. Persons who have been afflicted by the State’s own admitted errors now have a potential path to right this wrong.
       
      The ability to set aside a conviction has limitations, and Courts are in the business of closing cases, not reopening them. Expungement, albeit expanded by law in 2015, and Motions to Set Aside Convictions MCR 6.500, based upon constitutional or statutory ground are generally difficult. The amendments to the MMMA found in HB 4210 create an entirely new statutory method to seek relief from conviction, and penalty. 
       
      If you or a loved one meets the criteria described above, and if you believe you have been a victim of the State and it’s admitted errors, or your case or conviction resulted from the irrational interpretation that non-plant material marihuana is not usable marihuana, call Komorn Law, 1-800-656-3557. We are currently offering Legal Services evaluating your case, and advising clients of potential remedies and or legal strategies to clearing your record from marihuana related conviction. 
       
      It is the obligation of the prosecutor in all cases to verify that the accused’s constitutional rights are respected. A prosecutor is not supposed to bring unconstitutional charges against a person. How can a prosecutor then give an excuse that they did not understand the law? Questions remain on how prosecutors will handle medical marijuana
        
       
      Law Enforcement React to New Medical Marijuana Laws
      September 22, 2016 
      New medical marijuana laws bring questions on how local law enforcement are reacting to the changes and how they’ll handle medical marijuana now.
      9 & 10’s Blayke Roznowski and photojournalist Noah Jurik talked to a prosecutor and the state representative who authored part of the bill.
      "Hopefully, there are some clarifications there," Cheboygan County prosecutor Daryl Vizina said. 
      Police and courts are determining how they go forward after years of confusion over the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.
      "We had a lot of people assuming they knew what the law was," Vizina said. "They didn’t, the prosecutors didn’t, law enforcement didn’t. It’s been a mess in a way."
      Michigan State Police say they are working with the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and prosecutors to make sure they understand the law and enforce them properly. 
      It’s something the sponsor of one of the bills, state representative Mike Callton, says will make enforcement easier.
      "Let’s say policeman pulls a person over and they have a medicine container of medicine. Well, it’s got a bar code or scantron on it and police can determine from that scantron, where it’s been grown, who transported it, where it was tested, where it was refined, if it was refined and where they bought it and that this is, indeed, the medicine for this patient," Callton said.
      Prosecutors like Daryl Vizina in Cheboygan County hope the laws will be more clear to people in the medical marijuana community.
      "It’s just kind of been a learning process where charges get charged, maybe somebody gets prosecuted, maybe later down the line a higher court overturns the conviction," Vizina said.
      In the long run, lawmakers think the new laws will eliminate doubt, and increase safety when it comes to medical marijuana.
      "We needed a way for patients to get this kind of medicine without having to buy it from somebody named Rick in the back alley," Callton said. "There had to be a legitimate way for people to buy this."  
      http://www.9and10news.com/story/33162325/law-enforcement-react-to-new-medical-marijuana-laws
       
       
       
       


      Michael Komorn 
      Komorn Law Pllc
      http://www.KomornLaw.com
        [1] Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin
      [2] http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/06/aclu_report_marijuana_arrest_r.html
×