Anyone Else Get A Ticket For "illegal Transport"? I Am A Card Holder.

[GregS]

I wouldn't say the transport law is unconstitutional. A patient under section 4 of the mmma is immune to it, is the correct argument.

Arguably. It is in the Transportation Code. It is NOT in the MMMA, which enjoins the government from penalizing us in any way for medical use, to include transport. It conflicts with and is inconsistent with the latter, which expressly states that it it has no effect on persons under the mmj act. Perhaps it is intended for later regulation of recreational use, but is nonetheless an illegal intrusion on our protections.

[kentuckyrain]

**Update**

 

Will be fighting this one and keep you updated on the outcome.

Edited June 3, 2013 by kentuckyrain

[northerngal]

Good luck!  Please keep us posted!

 

I do know of one similar case in our area here in Northern Michigan.  He received $390 in fines/costs for half of a joint.

 

Another that was over on his weight, plead guilty and received $200 (and some) in fines and lost his license for 6 months.

[Murph]

Discrimination?  Yes.  Illegal discrimination?  No.  The issues regarding whether the law is procedurally legal aside, it is substantively legal.  It would withstand scrutiny if it underwent constitutional review.  You need to realize that there are many laws that seem arbitrary in light of comparison to other laws (or lack of laws).  But this isn't discrimination based on a suspect class or equal protection so it isn't likely to be found illegal. 

 

It's really no different from the alcohol transportation laws.  One could argue that it isn't fair to beer drinkers because coke drinkers aren't subject to the same laws.  The answer to that---"oh well."--it doesn't need to be fair.  As a very wise person once said to me--"Fair?  What's fair?  Fair is a place you take your girlfriend to win her a teddy bear."

CaveatLector, I disagree that this is not illegal discrimination - It is! Should be challenged under HIPPA and Constitutional Due Process and not being

rationally related to significant Gov. interest. Why not do this with ALL medications - BTW most Disp. before they were gone, did put it in marked "bottles."

 

We all know it is just another of Jones "put the screws to them" Laws and He needs some lessons IMHO in that He is not the "lawgiver" in MM Parlance

(e.g. that We have Constitutional Rights We are ALL clothed with.....when one walks into Court the Judge SHOULD see all those Constitutional Rights,

(but of course if you cannot enforce them, they are worthless) and they simply can ignore them as not many can appeal a DC matter - example: just saw a DC

Judge knock down, err. deny a Jury Demand (civil case, made in writing on first response, fee paid, Kosher with Court Rules)....So this Guy thinks the cornerstone

of Our System where the Community members can exercise jury nullification -- and this Guy thinks He can just deny it because HE prejudges cases after two-sentences.

 

This is the problem all over, indeed the entire system -- with MDs its called the "God Complex" (where they can save your Son, Daughter, Mother Father) and become so arrogant

they are well, you get the point. In the Judicial system it is "I am the Law" -- and most times they get away with it (imagine what that does) in small communities with 100 Attorneys,

would'nt wash in Wayne or Oakland more than likely but it does elsewhere.... I would certainly argue the "in locked trunk" Statute is not rationally related to any 

"Government" interest because narcotics, as noted above, no one makes a patient lock them up in the trunk -- and even doing so is just a hassle it does not stop someone from 

smoking anytime and further, I doubt any proof was proffered that it makes a darn but of difference. Its Jones way of screwing with MM.

 

Further, it is not as simple as you seem to want to make it.

 

I think it should be challenged but it is presumed Constitutional as it is a Statute, but it could be struck down if someone with resources took it up. Doubtful however.

 

I would suggest the person that got the ticket start WRITING the Court instead of calling and make a record of those contacts before the default Him/Her. Counsel is of course the 

best thing to do and make sure an appearance is entered. First thing of course is probable cause--why were they even looking in the car and searching? How did it even get to the point the LEO "found" a J under the seat?

 

 I hope to God they did not Consent to search !! Just heard of someone getting busted in a "Hourly Car Rental" because they did not search the thing before they left...and someone dropped something - guess what they now have a case and it was not anything they had -- never ever consent to a search IMHO.

 

www.FlexyourRights.org...never consent to a search. Bottom line - it makes anything found (or placed) instantly admissible..before you even talk to counsel !

Can not think of one reason to ever let LEO search your car.....more so if your a MM patient. Keep mouth shut, call lawyer (even on the side of the road).

Get prepaid legal if your like most of us, lessens the costs if needed (and everyone needs will and trust too)....just educational points, not intended to be advice of any sort....

But I would repeat, whomever got the ticket, PAPER. Writing. Make a paper trial....cannot prove "I called".....

 

M

 

Indeed, it is about time some group be formed (that I have argued for many times) to fund helping those  MM Patients that are jammed up IF it would impact

everyone in MI. Obviously the ACLU does some, but not much, a private group needs to be formed./

Edited June 19, 2013 by Murph

[bobandtorey]

CaveatLector, I disagree that this is not illegal discrimination - It is! Should be challenged under HIPPA and Constitutional Due Process and not being

rationally related to significant Gov. interest. Why not do this with ALL medications - BTW most Disp. before they were gone, did put it in marked "bottles."

 

We all know it is just another of Jones "put the screws to them" Laws and He needs some lessons IMHO in that He is not the "lawgiver" in MM Parlance

(e.g. that We have Constitutional Rights We are ALL clothed with.....when one walks into Court the Judge SHOULD see all those Constitutional Rights,

(but of course if you cannot enforce them, they are worthless) and they simply can ignore them as not many can appeal a DC matter - example: just saw a DC

Judge knock down, err. deny a Jury Demand (civil case, made in writing on first response, fee paid, Kosher with Court Rules)....So this Guy thinks the cornerstone

of Our System where the Community members can exercise jury nullification -- and this Guy thinks He can just deny it because HE prejudges cases after two-sentences.

 

This is the problem all over, indeed the entire system -- with MDs its called the "God Complex" (where they can save your Son, Daughter, Mother Father) and become so arrogant

they are well, you get the point. In the Judicial system it is "I am the Law" -- and most times they get away with it (imagine what that does) in small communities with 100 Attorneys,

would'nt wash in Wayne or Oakland more than likely but it does elsewhere.... I would certainly argue the "in locked trunk" Statute is not rationally related to any 

"Government" interest because narcotics, as noted above, no one makes a patient lock them up in the trunk -- and even doing so is just a hassle it does not stop someone from 

smoking anytime and further, I doubt any proof was proffered that it makes a darn but of difference. Its Jones way of screwing with MM.

 

Further, it is not as simple as you seem to want to make it.

 

I think it should be challenged but it is presumed Constitutional as it is a Statute, but it could be struck down if someone with resources took it up. Doubtful however.

 

I would suggest the person that got the ticket start WRITING the Court instead of calling and make a record of those contacts before the default Him/Her. Counsel is of course the 

best thing to do and make sure an appearance is entered. First thing of course is probable cause--why were they even looking in the car and searching? How did it even get to the point the LEO "found" a J under the seat?

 

 I hope to God they did not Consent to search !! Just heard of someone getting busted in a "Hourly Car Rental" because they did not search the thing before they left...and someone dropped something - guess what they now have a case and it was not anything they had -- never ever consent to a search IMHO.

 

www.FlexyourRights.org...never consent to a search. Bottom line - it makes anything found (or placed) instantly admissible..before you even talk to counsel !

Can not think of one reason to ever let LEO search your car.....more so if your a MM patient. Keep mouth shut, call lawyer (even on the side of the road).

Get prepaid legal if your like most of us, lessens the costs if needed (and everyone needs will and trust too)....just educational points, not intended to be advice of any sort....

But I would repeat, whomever got the ticket, PAPER. Writing. Make a paper trial....cannot prove "I called".....

 

M

 

Indeed, it is about time some group be formed (that I have argued for many times) to fund helping those  MM Patients that are jammed up IF it would impact

everyone in MI. Obviously the ACLU does some, but not much, a private group needs to be formed./

 

 

 

WOW!

[CaveatLector]

CaveatLector, I disagree that this is not illegal discrimination - It is! Should be challenged under HIPPA and Constitutional Due Process and not being

rationally related to significant Gov. interest. Why not do this with ALL medications - BTW most Disp. before they were gone, did put it in marked "bottles."

You don't need to agree with me but you do need to realize that your reasoning is faulty. 

 

First off, you do have it right that rational basis scrutiny would be applied in this sort of case.  That is because you are not dealing with a suspect class or quasi-suspect class or fundamental right.  Rational basis scrutiny is the lowest form of scrutiny used to determine whether a law is constitutional.  Under rational basis scrutiny, a law only need be rationally related to a legitimate government interest and not to a, "significant government interest" as you stated.  That is a very low hurdle.  The very fact that it is considered constitutional that mj is schedule 1 should clue you in that transportation restrictions on it will always be considered constitutional, as they are less regulation and less restrictive than the federal regulation banning mj altogether.

 

Second, you need to realize that a medication is not a suspect class.  Therefore, medications can be, and are, treated differently under the law.  An example of different treatment is what schedule a drug is listed on.  A further example would be whether the drug is over-the-counter or prescribed.  Medications can be treated differently under the law.

Edited June 20, 2013 by CaveatLector

[GregS]

Being in a protected class, as defined in the law, is necessary to prevail in a discrimination action. I have always considered that the closest we can come to being recognized as a protected class would have to be under the Americans' With Disabilities Act (ADA), Title II. Unless we are defined under the law as a protected class we are not, well, protected.

 

Dissabiliy law amounts to little more than lip service from the government, an the courts do not commonly find for plaintiffs.

Edited June 20, 2013 by GregS

[GregS]

Please feel free, Murph, to form the private group you speak of. It would, yes, be a benefit. And by all means, let us know what you can pull together.

[Murph]

All, 

New amendment to the Mich MM Act.  effective 4/1/13, says anyone carrying in a vehicle HAS TO HAVE IT IN A CASE IN THE TRUNK so everyone should get a cheap pelican case at Walmart or somewhere

and keep anything MM wise you have in it, period. It is just something to catch people up and use as an excuse to bust.

 

PELICAN sells at walmart and I think some of them will take a paddlelock or other locking type (keyed, although a good paddlelock is the best no key to loose. I would even go as far

as bolting it to the frame...._) SO again, any MM in a vehicle now has to be in a case in the trunk  -- if no trunk, then in the back as far as possible from driver and un-accessable to driver

if not your getting a ticket (but even better never mention MM, or a case or even consent to a search as that should be declined, nicely, as you do not waive Constitutional Rights people died

to give you.....that is always my reply with a smile and nice tone...never ever ever consent to a search...(sure they are most times think your Holding something but if you have kept your mouth

shut they have no probable cause and cannot obtain any warrant...as no Judge (worth salt) signs a warrant based on "the driver refuses to answer any question and remained silent).

Remember they can (and do) LIE - the opposite is not true, if you lie to LEO you can be charged -- so remain silent. Do not answer questions, smile and demand your lawyer as search is the #1 way

some people end up in Court --- PRACTICe what you will do if confronted with these questions at a pull over -- practice with your family/friends. Crack window, give DL, Reg. and Proof Ins. keep hands

on wheel and remain silent.....even chit chat is iffy (sure we want to be nice and respectful, but they are trying to jam you and arrest you - why would you help?) I just sit there and record......better yet call your Atty and let him/her listen (sure they love it) in and give the phone to the LEO.....

 

The ONLY exception is a vehicle without a trunk (think minivan or SUV) and in that case it has still to be in a case, and as far from the driver as possible, like in the back.

 Personally, anytime one is transporting MM, it should be direct from point A to point B with no stops in between, no stores, nothing, and secure it at Home (where the strongest

privacy expectations are).

 

Having said that, a LOCKING case is even better and keep it in the trunk  as it adds another layer of privacy expectation -- keep it in the vehicle at all times just in case (pun intended).

 

As always this is informational and copy paste, not intended as any type of advice.

 

M

[GregS]

The transport issue, Public Act 406, is going to court using Koon as a defense in the 82nd District in West Branch.

 

The group you speak of, Murph, starts tonite in Lansing.

Edited July 16, 2013 by GregS

[Murph]

 

Yes, a ticket from a state trooper for illegal transport, says to deal with it in 10 days, it is going on 2 weeks, stopped in and called them, they said they are issuing a court date? Not sure what is gonna happen and not received anything in the mail as of today,,, Hubby is a card holder,   but did not have one joint in a locked box , (even though I purchased one and he chose not use it ) it was under the passenger seat.

 

Anyone else get this ticket? If so, what happened? What should I expect?

 

Thanks in advance,,,,

 

 

So wondering How your case (Transporting) is going? You mention "calling" the Court for Court date. You need to do this in Writing and build a paper trail -- but best is get Counsel to do so but I realize that alone is probably more than your going to pay - bu tone never knows.

 

EVERYONE GET A CONTAINER AND PUT IT IN THE TRUNK. IF NO TRUNK, A LOCKABLE ONE KEPT AS FAR FROM DRIVER AS POSSIBLE.

Just another way to trip people up.

Finally, did the LEO take the Meds? I do not think that is authorized in the Statute eff. April 1, 2013. Check it out and demand your meds back -- EVERYTHING must be in writing and keep copies of everything dated and chronologically in a file. Document, Document, Document.

 

M

[GregS]

Circuit court arraignment coming up 8/12/13. 34th Circuit.

Edited July 30, 2013 by GregS

[CedarSpringsCG]

All, 

New amendment to the Mich MM Act.  effective 4/1/13, says anyone carrying in a vehicle HAS TO HAVE IT IN A CASE IN THE TRUNK so everyone should get a cheap pelican case at Walmart or somewhere

and keep anything MM wise you have in it, period. It is just something to catch people up and use as an excuse to bust.

 

PELICAN sells at walmart and I think some of them will take a paddlelock or other locking type (keyed, although a good paddlelock is the best no key to loose. I would even go as far

as bolting it to the frame...._) SO again, any MM in a vehicle now has to be in a case in the trunk  -- if no trunk, then in the back as far as possible from driver and un-accessable to driver

if not your getting a ticket (but even better never mention MM, or a case or even consent to a search as that should be declined, nicely, as you do not waive Constitutional Rights people died

to give you.....that is always my reply with a smile and nice tone...never ever ever consent to a search...(sure they are most times think your Holding something but if you have kept your mouth

shut they have no probable cause and cannot obtain any warrant...as no Judge (worth salt) signs a warrant based on "the driver refuses to answer any question and remained silent).

 

Remember they can (and do) LIE - the opposite is not true, if you lie to LEO you can be charged -- so remain silent. Do not answer questions, smile and demand your lawyer as search is the #1 way

some people end up in Court --- PRACTICe what you will do if confronted with these questions at a pull over -- practice with your family/friends. Crack window, give DL, Reg. and Proof Ins. keep hands

on wheel and remain silent.....even chit chat is iffy (sure we want to be nice and respectful, but they are trying to jam you and arrest you - why would you help?) I just sit there and record......better yet call your Atty and let him/her listen (sure they love it) in and give the phone to the LEO.....

 

The ONLY exception is a vehicle without a trunk (think minivan or SUV) and in that case it has still to be in a case, and as far from the driver as possible, like in the back.

 Personally, anytime one is transporting MM, it should be direct from point A to point B with no stops in between, no stores, nothing, and secure it at Home (where the strongest

privacy expectations are).

 

Having said that, a LOCKING case is even better and keep it in the trunk  as it adds another layer of privacy expectation -- keep it in the vehicle at all times just in case (pun intended).

 

As always this is informational and copy paste, not intended as any type of advice.

 

M

The new law does not say in a locked case.  I wish people would quit saying that.  Do not assume you will get a ticket just because it is not "locked". 

 

The law states very specifically, Enclosed in a case in the trunk, or enclosed in a case that is not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle if you do not have a trunk.

 

Now, I am not arguing that it is smart to lock it.  I do lock it in a safe box. But the key here is "inaccessible" from the interior of the car, and in a case.  That's what the law says, nothing more.  It also does not define what a case is.  A case is a container used to hold or protect something according to the dictionary.  Meaning a case could be a zip lock bag or a mason jar.  As long as the MMJ is inaccessible to the people inside the car, it is acceptable.

 

It is a BS law designed to allow more arrests.  It doesn't help anyone, it doesn't stop people from smoking while driving, it is complete BS just to get more arrests.  it doesn't stop someone from smoking 2 bong rips and driving either.

 

So, legal is in any container, inaccessible to the occupants of the vehicle.  Smart is locked in a case in the trunk, with the key locked inside your glovebox requiring you to stop the car and use the ignition key to unlock the glovebox to get the key to the case in the trunk.  But what's smart and what's legal aren't always the same thing.

 

--Cedar

[Spartyon]

even smarter case with combo lock so the police cant get the key unless you give them the combo.

[imiubu]

I started carrying a back pack due to their commonality. I take it with me every time I leave the house transporting meds or not, just to create a habit.

This has two zippers that meet & the pulls have holes big enough to accommodate a padlock.  Shove a bottle of water in one side pocket and an apple in the other and off I go. I drive a van so the back pack gets tossed to the rear.

Edited July 30, 2013 by imiubu

[Highlander]

I can envision a discussion at the side of the road with LEO where he says "but this isn't a case." as he is looking at MMJ in a container/box/safe/backpack/vault etc.

 

So I went out and bought a case that actually says "case" on it. 

[ozzrokk]

I can envision a discussion at the side of the road with LEO where he says "but this isn't a case." as he is looking at MMJ in a container/box/safe/backpack/vault etc.

 

So I went out and bought a case that actually says "case" on it. 

 

 

Right It appears that some of them may need it spelled out for them....... I used to envision the same thing with a suitcase......... I could see the cop saying that it is not a case..... but but but it's uhhhhhh it's a suitCASE...............

[imiubu]

I can envision a discussion at the side of the road with LEO where he says "but this isn't a case." as he is looking at MMJ in a container/box/safe/backpack/vault etc.

 

So I went out and bought a case that actually says "case" on it. 

 

Can't be much plainer than that !

 

Maybe I will just embroider 'case' on my back pack.

Might look out of place with Scooby Doo on the front though (as if I care).

[pergamum362]

Well, if anyone was wondering about carrying while on a motorcycle, according to dearborn, a backpack doesnt cut it. He didnt ticket me or take me to jail but insisted i take out my tool case and put it there.

[t-pain]

anyone going to call the attorney generals office about this issue?

[bobandtorey]

anyone going to call the attorney generals office about this issue?

sure i can call what is it that you would like me to tell them?