Jump to content

Selling Marijuana To Undercover “Patient” Is Entrapment


Recommended Posts

An Oakland County Judge ruled last month that selling marijuana to an undercover police officer posing as a Medical Marijuana Patient is entrapment.  The nine page opinion ordered the charges against the six defendants be dismissed finding the case in which she presided is no different than providing a fraudulent prescription to a pharmacist.

The facts are relatively straight forward.  An undercover officer called a Southfield dispensary and asked what he  needed to obtain marijuana from the dispensary.  The detective was told that he needed to bring proof that he was a registered patient under the MMMA (Section 4) or, proof that a doctor had stated that he had a debilitating condition and would benefit from the use of medical marijuana, along with proof of his application for registration and payment of the $100 registration fee—presumably to insure the detective would fit under Section 8 of the MMMA.  The detective then falsified the medical marijuana paperwork and presented them to the dispensary employees.  The detective also signed a membership agreement where he stated in part, that he was not seeking to become a member for any illegal or fraudulent purpose.  A search warrant was authorized and the dispensary was raided by the police.

The Court, based on the conduct of the officer, ordered the charges get dismissed.  Michigan follows the objective test of entrapment.  That means that court will look to the investigative and evidence gathering procedures of the officers—and not the predisposition of the individual committing the alleged crime. To successfully assert an entrapment defense, the defendant must show the court by a preponderance of the evidence, or by 51% or more that there was an abuse of authority and the criminal acts were instigated by the police.  The court, in ordering the charges get dismissed stated “[t]here can be little question that the actions of the police induced the commission of this crim.  In fact, the actions of the police are the only reason the actions of the defendants constitute a crime.

It is unclear whether this case will be appealed by the Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney but, given the stance of that county’s prosecutor’s office, it would appear that an Appeal is likely.

Newburg Law, PLLC have represented a number of dispensary employees across the state of Michigan. It is important that someone facing delivery of marijuana charges to an officer or even a confidential informant determine whether entrapment is a defense in their case.  You can contact us at (517) 505-2323.

 

 

http://www.onmedicalmarijuana.com/2014/03/03/selling-marijuana-to-undercover-patient-is-entrapment/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

An Oakland County Judge ruled last month that selling marijuana to an undercover police officer posing as a Medical Marijuana Patient is entrapment.  The nine page opinion ordered the charges against

i think this is a great thing,,maybe they can sue for lawyer's fee,,,,,making false paperwork/ cards in its self should be a crime,throw there butts in jail for awhile,,lol...bp

Ty   that is a lot cheeper then a Lawyer with years of Court room visits 

don't start victory dancing... 4 years at least til Mi sct. it looks like mr carruthers petitioned the court for a free lawyer. he probably is assuming how bad COA will trample his rights. he probably growin now to pay for expensive supreme court fight to buy a lawyer a mercedes

Mr. Carruthers’ is represented in his appeal by Southfield attorneys Stuart G. Friedman, Michael Komorn and Neil S. Rockind.

It is unknown at this time how long the Supreme Court will take to decide whether to grant or deny Mr. Carruthers’ application for leave to appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If dispensaries were legal, and you could sell to anyone with a card, presenting false paperwork/cards would clearly be entrapment.

Actually, using the section 8 side of the law, clearly stated in the ballot language, it's possible that any sale to a person with a card could be legal under that section of the law. With that in mind, any and all sales to a cop/informant with a card could be entrapment, because you could have been just selling section 8 style, which would cover selling to people not connected to you through the registry. Therefore, with that possibility always looming, law enforcement shouldn't get to do that at all, it's all possible entrapment.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, using the section 8 side of the law, clearly stated in the ballot language, it's possible that any sale to a person with a card could be legal under that section of the law. With that in mind, any and all sales to a cop/informant with a card could be entrapment, because you could have been just selling section 8 style, which would cover selling to people not connected to you through the registry. Therefore, with that possibility always looming, law enforcement shouldn't get to do that at all, it's all possible entrapment.

 

I wonder if the courts will see the standard to constitute entrapment differently with the MMMA, since the courts have already ruled that all MMJ is illegal and that the MMMA only provides exceptions to penalty/prosecution.  This is similar to the warrant topic.  Is evidence of MJ growing/use sufficient to secure a warrant, since all MMJ is still illegal?  Or does the possibility that a person has a card trump evidence of growing (smell, etc.) absent probable cause that the person is over the limits, etc.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this.  I hadn't heard about this and didn't realize we had case law on this matter.  This is ugly stuff.

 

Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, but for a different reason. Specifically, the appellate court found the facts in the affidavit established the necessary probable cause, despite the passage of the MMMA. Contrary to the trial court’s conclusion, the appellate court found the MMMA did not make the possession or cultivation of marijuana “legal.” Instead, the found that any possession of marijuana continues to violate the Public Health Code and is indicative of a criminal act sufficient for a probable cause finding.

 

So LEO can get a warrant without determining if the guy to be searched is a patient or caregiver.  That's bad news and seems to be likely to set the stage for a similarly bad ruling on the entrapment matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't start victory dancing... 4 years at least til Mi sct. it looks like mr carruthers petitioned the court for a free lawyer. he probably is assuming how bad COA will trample his rights. he probably growin now to pay for expensive supreme court fight to buy a lawyer a mercedes

dude dont need to grow! all of us fools collected and donated money to the rich phaq already!  But like they say its hard to change your stripes! he may very well have a building full of mm, he has enough of his own money, He dont care about pt's He cares about the mighty $$ and nothing else,  aparently you are a lil behind on the carruthers circus!

 

Im not carruthers!

 

Peace

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this.  I hadn't heard about this and didn't realize we had case law on this matter.  This is ugly stuff.

 

Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, but for a different reason. Specifically, the appellate court found the facts in the affidavit established the necessary probable cause, despite the passage of the MMMA. Contrary to the trial court’s conclusion, the appellate court found the MMMA did not make the possession or cultivation of marijuana “legal.” Instead, the found that any possession of marijuana continues to violate the Public Health Code and is indicative of a criminal act sufficient for a probable cause finding.

 

So LEO can get a warrant without determining if the guy to be searched is a patient or caregiver.  That's bad news and seems to be likely to set the stage for a similarly bad ruling on the entrapment matter.

  Yup and i would like to know why this case was not appealed to the high court because when i do tell others they seam to not care or don't believe me

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

on the COA website it says carruthers petitioned for a free lawyer. I assumed he was planning on loosing in COA and was saving pennies for SCT. I don't know anything about this man  or case but public record and media releases. Michigan's laws will reflect that the dispensaries and other illegal grows have the $ to fight and will preserve their rights while patients cant afford it and plead guilty. The law will lean towards provisionary centers (worse yet pharmacy)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

http://courts.mi.gov/opinions_orders/case_search/pages/default.aspx?SearchType=1&CaseNumber=319991&CourtType_CaseNumber=2

 

It's just a simple case search of carruthers at coa. Apparently it means nothing if he has THE dream team of lawyers. I know nothing of the man. I don't even know if the Sct said fake papers is entrapment if that would be grounds for an old case to get tossed. probably not.

got a link to this?

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 hero4u
      Hello.  I was at a bay city dispensary the other day and they were telling me their is a 10 ounce a month limit with all dispensaries.  Is this true?  Was just curious cause i havent hear anything about this? 
    • By hero4u
      Just came from old 27 wellness in Lansing.  I was told the might have to close tonight?  Was also told by other dispensaries in bay city they will be closing??  I thought most got their license?   Why is everyone closing?

      Did i miss something? 
    • By trix
      Washington, D.C. -- If you're going to wage war on drugs, you need to be outfitted like a warrior.
       
      That seems to be the rationale behind hundreds of police department requests for armored trucks submitted to the Pentagon between 2012 and 2014. The requests, unearthed in a FOIA request by Mother Jones magazine, shed light on how the war on drugs has directly contributed to the militarization of local police forces in recent years.

      Read More...
    • By trix
      New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie ® said on Monday that the war on drugs has been a "failure" -- even though he has vowed to enact a federal crackdown on marijuana, a substance that has been a primary target of the drug war for decades.
       
      "This is a disease and the war on drugs has been a failure -- well-intentioned, but a failure," Christie said at a presidential forum in New Hampshire on Monday. He went on to say that the country should "embrace" people who are addicted to drugs and alcohol, offering them a chance at rehabilitation rather than incarceration.

      Read More...
    • By trix
      USA -- The war on drugs is over, and weed won. D.A.R.E., the organization designed to plant a deep-seated fear of drugs in the minds of every late-20th-century middle schooler, published an op-ed calling for marijuana legalization.
       
      Written by former deputy sheriff Carlis McDerment in response to a letter in the Columbus Dispatch, the op-ed explains that it's impossible for law enforcement to control the sale of marijuana to minors. "People like me, and other advocates of marijuana legalization, are not totally blind to the harms that drugs pose to children," McDerment writes. "We just happen to know that legalizing and regulating marijuana will actually make everyone safer."

      Read More...



×
×
  • Create New...