Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Do I have it correct, the CoA ruled that my mmj card establishes prong 1 and 3 of sec 8? Does this mean that lower courts have to accept this as fact?

 

Three cheers for Michael, job well done!

 

Our cards have stickers on the back put on by the court Defendants Exhibit C

has not helped us yet

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

FACTS   Client charged with Possession with Intent to deliver 5-45 Kilograms of Marijuana-7 year felony, and Maintaining a Drug Vehicle- 2 year felony. Client pulled over for speeding, police re

the length they'll go to arguing for prosicution. the total disreguard for the simple meaning of the words in the law. I litterally got sick to my stomach and threw up as I read this. I still don't fe

 

 

ah you're right. looks like you did a great job on every point possible.

its good to know that section 4 also works when you get to court, in front of the right judge...

 

did they weigh the plants without the stalks, like it says in the PHC and MMMA?

actually now i'm curious, if the PHC says stalks dont count. and they cant tamper with evidence. how can they weigh the marijuana without weighing the stalks?

 

did they return his 14 pounds?

is the prosecutor going to appeal? they can appeal at any time for years, cant they? i guess there wasnt a trial, so theres no appeal. but can the prosecutor file charges again?

I think it's 21 days they have to appeal

Link to post
Share on other sites

the length they'll go to arguing for prosicution. the total disreguard for the simple meaning of the words in the law. I litterally got sick to my stomach and threw up as I read this. I still don't feel well.

 

I got to ask, HOW do these people sleep at night? WHEN did it become their job to contort and spin simple, clearly written words into meanings that make LAW ABIDING patients and caregivers into criminals? WHO are they serving?? it sure isn't the voters/citizens

 

I don't see this changing any time soon.

these people are trying to save us from ourselves.

they believe their views should be the reality.

that the voters were duped and THEY were chosen, by some higher power, to set it right.

It's there calling. their mission in life.

they are an insterment of their lord.

they are our devine intervention.

amen

 

any more zelotcy they'd be strapping on an IED

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm right there with ya LHB. Absolutely disgusting and terrifying at the same time.

 

These are the same people that for years said "we just enforce the law, if you want it different change the law", then once the law is changed they are all buttt hurt.

 

Reminds me of the last four years folks saying to the disp folks "leave our law alone, if you want dispensaries get your own bill" then once they did get their own bill folks are all buttt hurt.

 

Very similar mindset if you ask me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm right there with ya LHB. Absolutely disgusting and terrifying at the same time.

 

These are the same people that for years said "we just enforce the law, if you want it different change the law", then once the law is changed they are all buttt hurt.

 

Reminds me of the last four years folks saying to the disp folks "leave our law alone, if you want dispensaries get your own bill" then once they did get their own bill folks are all buttt hurt.

 

Very similar mindset if you ask me.

 

It's not the way things end up in real live it only happens on this site with some people not all

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the key to understanding is that they are true believers in what THEY are doing, just as we are true believers in what we are doing. They feel they are doing the right thing.

 

It is up to us, over time, to change their way of thinking by personifying the medical benefits of marijuana and showing them we are just as 'normal' as they view themselves. Over time, things will change. We saw that first in the general public as the polls and voter responses to cannabis show. They will take longer to come around, but in the end, they will.

 

Dr. Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

to answer my own question, i think mr komorn on planet green trees said that he didnt ask for the marijuana back for his client. possibly he also implied that the police havent been returning seized marijuana in other cases too.

 

which kind of stinks, due to sec4 and i believe sec8 both having that protection...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work Counselor!

 

By the looks of things, it is actually pretty simple as long as the facts are in line. Getting it through judges' and prosecutors' heads is work.

 

Are you asking him something here or making a statement that a judge or a prosecutor can't understand the Law ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

to answer my own question, i think mr komorn on planet green trees said that he didnt ask for the marijuana back for his client. possibly he also implied that the police havent been returning seized marijuana in other cases too.

 

which kind of stinks, due to sec4 and i believe sec8 both having that protection...

 

I was told by a leo that "the federal government came down and said, they can not return any medical Mj ".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told by a leo that "the federal government came down and said, they can not return any medical Mj ".

 

Leo has a reputation for lying, don't believe anything that they tell you without doing the research. I seem to remember a case or two in Cali that the courts ordered the return of the victims meds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most excellent job Mr Komorn!!!! Am so glad to hear this :>) Am I understanding this right, if they would have had the root balls attatched to the plants, they would have considered the possession to be "plants", instead of "unusable material" ? If that is the case, could one just hang their plants with the root balls attatched and not be in jeopardy????

Farmer Brown

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

That definition dosent make sense. A plant dosent make cotyledons. Seeds do. There is no such thing as a cutting that produces cotyledons. I guess you could cut an embryonic plant that still has them, but a plant will not produce them. The plant embryo uses its cotyledons for energy until it can produce adaquate energy via photosynthesis. This definition is nonsense and nothing can possibly qualify as a plant under those terms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That definition dosent make sense. A plant dosent make cotyledons. Seeds do. There is no such thing as a cutting that produces cotyledons. I guess you could cut an embryonic plant that still has them, but a plant will not produce them. The plant embryo uses its cotyledons for energy until it can produce adaquate energy via photosynthesis. This definition is nonsense and nothing can possibly qualify as a plant under those terms.

 

The plant produced cotyledons when planted from seed. Clones are cuttings from that plant, so it follows that they have.

Edited by GregS
Link to post
Share on other sites

First, "Thank You" for responding to my question!! I am not sure about the cotyledons, as they are the first two leaves that appear after seed sprout, and generally do not stay on the plant throughout the growing season( or cycle). I guess my question, more specifically, would be, if the folks that went to court over the plants were told in court that they( the plants with no root balls attatched) were "unusable material", then would it not be a logical assumption( yes, I know the definition of assume :>) that if the plants had had root balls attatched, would that meet the definition of a "plant"? Thank You again!!

Link to post
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...
  • Similar Content

    • By keith mclaughlin
      In this Special Edition episode of Let's Be Blunt, Montel Williams and fellow veterans speak out in support of medical cannabis in a virtual press conference organized by MPP in hopes of furthering the Compassionate Cares Act introduced by lawmakers earlier this year in South Carolina. According to the Veterans Affairs National website, veterans will not lose access to benefits if they use medical cannabis through a state sanctioned program, but they cannot allow use or possession at any VA facility due to federal laws, “Veteran participation in state marijuana programs does not affect eligibility for VA care and services. VA providers can and do discuss marijuana use with Veterans as part of comprehensive care planning, and adjust treatment plans as necessary.”
       
      https://youtube.com/watch?v=lBrQGXLY95Q
    • 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
      Komorn Law PLLC is happy to report that the broken criminal justice system shined a light on us today. The battle in Isabella, the State v Team Fisher concluded today with a 14-page opinion that was a joy to read. The Court held that the accused had not only presented proof of the requisite elements of the section 8 defenses, but that no question of fact existed, and therefore all charges are dismissed.
       
      To call my client and his family courageous would be an understatement. My client, a registered patient and a caregiver for his wife, also a registered patient, was raided after an alleged anonymous tip and a trash pull. These minimal facts resulted in a search warrant for both his house and shop. According to the Drug Task Force, the raid of these locations resulted in the confiscation of 29 pounds of marihuana and 1 pound of wax.
       

      The complaint charged the following crimes:
      I. Intent to deliver Marijuana MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(ii). A felony punishable by 7 years and imposition of license sanctions.
      II. Intent to deliver Marijuana plants. MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(ii). A felony punishable by 7 years and imposition of license sanctions.
      III. Manufacture Marijuana MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(iii). A felony punishable by 4 years and imposition of license sanctions.
      IV. Possession of a Firearm in the Commission of A Felony contrary to MCL 750.227b A Felony punishable by 2 years, mandatory prison sentence to run consecutively with and preceding any term of imprisonment imposed for the felony or attempted felony. To Wit Count 3 (as the underlying Felony)
      V. Maintaining a drug house. MCL 333.7405. 2 year and imposition of license sanctions.
      VI. Maintaining a drug house. MCL 333.7405. 2 year and imposition of license sanctions.
       
      Additionally, the drug task force seized every piece or property in the vicinity they could get their hand on, pursuant to the forfeiture law. (no, the amendments have not done a single thing to slow down the DTF’s appetite for forfeiture and the glory of its proceeds). Also, an important part of this story is that my client owned a few guns, and they were in his house at the time of the raid.
       
      As is often not reported, but all too often used, the combination of owning a gun and being outside of section 4 escalates what would normally be allegations of illegal marihuana activity to felony firearm charges. If convicted of the felony firearm charges, the crime requires a mandatory 2-year sentence to prison, to run consecutive to any other sentence. That while felony firearm requires possession of the firearm while committing an underlying felony, akin to a person selling drugs on the street with a pistol on their waistband, all too often prosecutors have extended this allegation to include patients and caregivers who are lawful gun owners. And while the law on its face suggests the possession of the weapon and the illegal marihuana behavior be contemporaneous, the law actually permits persons to be charged with felony firearm even when they are not physically possessing the firearm or even at the location where the firearm and the marihuana is located. My client’s garden was contained within the detached garage which was locked and enclosed and not accessible to anyone, and the firearms were contained within the residence, where less than the amount of marihuana allowed pursuant to section 4 was kept.
       
      As many attorneys will say, the conversation with your client is much different when the state is charging felony firearm.

      So with allegation of 29 pounds of marihuana, a pound of wax and felony firearm charges, me and my client and his family put our gloves on and fought back.
       
      The preliminary exam, which originally included my client's wife (represented by David Rudoi) and a codefendant (represented by Jessie Williams) took place over three full days, resulting in each of the accused being bound over on all charges.
       
      Shortly after getting to Circuit Court, the codefendent was offered and agreed to plead guilty to an innocuous misdemeanor. My client's wife was offered a misdemeanor, but refused to admit that she did anything wrong. As previously mentioned, David Rudoi successfully argued to the Circuit Court judge that there was not enough evidence presented at the preliminary exam to substantiate the charges, or that the state had failed to present even probable cause of a crime, and all charges against my client’s wife were dismissed.

      At this point in the proceeding, with my client the only remaining defendant in the case, we began to litigate the case.
       
      We filed literally 16 motions and litigated each of them, which included hours and hours of evidentiary hearings, and testimony from all of the witnesses involved.
       
      It is important to note that the Judge presiding over the case allowed us to litigate the case (didn't fight obstruct or interfere with taking testimony) and was more than prepared for each of the hearings. It was obvious to us that he was conscientious of the issues and did take great efforts to analyze the facts and law for each of the motions we filed. Even though I disagreed with every one of his rulings except one, it was a pleasure to have a Court show more interest in the issues in the case, and my client's due process rights, than the age of the case. For each of the motions filed he issued a written opinion. The list of motions and the court’s rulings are listed below.
       
      1. Motion for a Walker Hearing - Denied
      2. Motion to Dismiss based upon an illegal arrest (Ferretti Motion) - Denied
      3. Motion to Quash the Information and Bindover of the Felony Firearm Charges Based Upon Constitutional Grounds - Denied
      4. Motion to Quash the Affidavit and Search Warrant on Constitutional Grounds - Denied
      5. Motion to Reconsider Search Warrant Motion - Denied
      6. Motion to Quash Bindover and Dismiss - Denied
      7. Emergency Motion to Adjourn - Denied
      8. Motion to Quash Search Warrant - Denied
      9. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Daubert or in the Alternative Set for and (Evidentiary) Daubert Hearing and Memorandum of Law in Support of Dismissal or Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Daubert; (challenge to the advisability of the lab reporting based upon the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division's Crime Lab Scandal #Crimefactory) -Denied
      10. Motion in Limine to Exclude Forensic Evidence or Alternatively for a Daubert Hearing - Denied
      11. Supplemental Memo in Support of Daubert - Denied
      12. Motion to Preclude Evidence Based Upon Judicial Estoppel - Denied
      13. Motion to Preclude Evidence Based Upon Relevancy - Denied
      14. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to MMMA Section 4(g), or Preclude Evidence of Paraphernalia and Request for Evidentiary Hearing - Denied
      15. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Section 4 of the MMMA and the Amendments (That Were Signed into Law September 22, 2016 are Curative and Retroactive) - Denied
      16. Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Section 8 of the MMMA. Granted and all charges (including the felony firearm) dismissed

      Another interesting issue in the case, and I mention this mostly for instructive purposes, was that the State alleged that my client made an inculpatory statement or confession. According to the police (despite no audio or video recording, or written statement acknowledge by my client of what he actually said) my client purportedly uttered some sentences, which included the following words: "Dispensary, Overages, Sell". Of course my client never spoke these words as the investigators alleged. But he did talk to the police (as often times persons who don't believe they have committed a crime would do) however as it goes when people talk to the police, whatever you say WILL be used against you. (DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE-EVER).
       
      As reflected within the 14 page opinion (what a great read) dismissing all charges based upon the MMMA affirmative defense pursuant to section 8, the court took some time addressing the impact of the so called "statement". While the courts final ruling was based upon our arguments minimizing the value of the statement for purposes of the affirmative defense, it was more than obvious to us that this opinion could have gone either way based upon the Court’s interpretation of the law and the impact of the alleged "statement." Let me say it again, DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE.
       
      It is important to note, and this is not legal advice, but at times throughout the case, the State made the following plea offers:
      Prior to litigating the motions in Circuit Court the State offered my client a resolution that if he Plead to Counts 1) 7 year felony and 5) 2 year high court misdemeanor, they would dismiss the remaining charges, with no sentence agreement. Then after we conducted the Daubert hearing and prior to getting that unfortunate ruling (the motion to reconsider was not necessary) they offered that if my client plead to counts 5 and 6 (2) 2 year high court misdemeanors they would dismiss all the other counts with no sentence agreement. Then of course after we lost the Daubert motion the State withdrew the previous offer, and offered that if my client plead to a 4-year felony and a 2-year high court misdemeanor they would dismiss the rest of the counts with no sentence agreement. Looking back on this case there was a a lot of the blood sweat and tears shed from the backs and brow of Chad, Josh, Steve, Jeff, Dewey, Pam, Deb, David Rudoi, Jesse Williams, Fred Stig-Neilson, Eric VanDussen. Including the all-nighter I pulled Sunday putting together the motion to reconsider regarding the Court’s rulings on Daubert motions (the lab issues), and the preparation for the trial that was to commence Monday - this was a battle that will never be forgotten.

      Additionally rewarding is the fact that my client’s case and the abusive forfeiture they and many from our community have had to endure, was highlighted in (what is clearly the greatest show ever created) "Weediquette" episode 6 of season 2. Stay tuned, the next series of motions we intend to file will be to compel the return of all of the property that was seized pursuant to the forfeiture (as well as seek other remedies for my client and his wife).
       
      I want to congratulate my client and his family for having the will and strength to stand up for what they believed and take on the State on a lopsided playing field in the broken system often called the American judicial system.
       
      #TeamFisher #StopTheRaids #KomornLawMI
       
      The story continues after the prosecutor appealed our dismissal.
      http://www.themorningsun.com/general-news/20180326/shepherd-drug-case-reinstated-to-consider-officer-testimony
    • By Michael Komorn
      Great Show last night- we had the world renowned leading specialist in the human cannabinoid system Dr. William Courtney. If you want to learn about the health benefits of Raw Juicing the cannabis plant, this is the show you want to listen to. (Dr. Courtney and the Medical Cannabis Communities favorite Legislature Representative Callton will be speaking tonight Friday 10 12 12 at the Genesys Conference and Banquet Center, 801 Health Park Boulevard, Grand Blanc township, MI 48439). Also calling in was Stephanie Sherer, the executive director of ASA. A longtime activist in the medical cannabis community, she provided many details to the upcoming challenge filed by ASA against the Federal Governments schedule 1 classification of marijuana. A special thanks to our in studio staff and other callers who participated in this informative and exciting show: Jamie Lowell, Peanut Butter, Greg Palowski, Pernell, Q tipper, Rick Thompson, Chad Carr, Kevin Spitler, Charme Gholson. Planet Green Trees is sponsored by” the Michigan Medical Marihuana Association-.michiganmedicalmarijuana.org and Komorn Law-18006563557. The archive to this episode can be found here: http://www.blogtalkr...am-l-courtney-s
       
      Michael A. Komorn
      Attorney and Counselor
       
      Email: michael@komornlaw.com
      Website: www.komornlaw.com
       
      Check out our Radio show:
      http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees
      CALL IN NUMBER: (347) 326-9626
      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
      Yesterday Komorn Law, on behalf of the MMMA, filed the attached Amicus Briefs with the Michigan Supreme Court for the cases People v Hartwick and People v Tuttle. Oral arguments will be held Thursday. We want to acknowledge the tireless efforts of all the contributors who worked diligently in this endeavor. Specifically from the MMMA, Highlander and t-pain contributed great material, research, and arguments. We truly thank all the participants on the forum whose contributions helped develop many of the ideas and arguments we wanted to advance.
       
      Jeff Frazier, prose artist, Galapagos guitarist, and attorney extraordinaire, drafted much of the brief. He is and was brilliant at incorporating and articulating many of the big ideas we discuss and complain about every day into rational and persuasive prose. ("One Word - probable cause.") ("One Word - Brilliant!")
       
      Also to the clients of Komorn Law (and all the patients, caregivers, and others who have been arrested instead of protected from arrest), and despite the unfortunate circumstances we experienced together, your cases are the (our) motivation. Also we want to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of CPU: Hayduke, Malamute, and especially attorney Dan Grow, whose collaboration created a strategic opportunity to address the issues from multiple positions.

      Also it should be noted that this project may not have been completed if not for the extraordinary effort, by zapatosunidos (Chad). He was outstanding at managing and overseeing this project and made certain these briefs were finished and filed on behalf of the MMMA. But for his commitment the project would not have been completed. (Also, any grammar or spelling mistakes please complain to Chad.)
       
      Tuttle Br. Amicus Curiae.pdf
       
      Hartwick Br. Amicus Curiae.pdf



×
×
  • Create New...