Jame's Story

[Willy]

quick thought to ponder, is out side with a top, and enclosed on all sides,, really out doors? cause our locked and enclosed room// closet/ box/ etc could/would then be classified as outdoor?? ya i know but its just a medicated thought.. LOL

[Herb Cannabis]

Whaaaaat????  What if anything does this mean to us, "Stecker agrees"?

[t-pain]

1. cops say they dont want people reachin in and  getting plants, otherwise how is it 'secured' ?

2. its untested in court (after that legislative change, it was tested before with bob and king).

3. prosecutors have prosecuted no-tops.

 

up to you what you decide.

if you REALLY feel like fighting it, why not just file one of those suits to find out if it needs a top or not.

thats how ter beek v wyoming came along. he never got fined by the city, but he sued to find out if it applied or not.

 

courts decide these things as long has you have standing (are a mmj patient/cg). 

you can do it now, when you dont have any charges against you, or you can try to fight it later, when there are charges looming over you.

Edited August 6, 2014 by t-pain

[Restorium2]

1. cops say they dont want people reachin in and  getting plants, otherwise how is it 'secured' ?

2. its untested in court (after that legislative change, it was tested before with bob and king).

3. prosecutors have prosecuted no-tops.

 

up to you what you decide.

if you REALLY feel like fighting it, why not just file one of those suits to find out if it needs a top or not.

thats how ter beek v wyoming came along. he never got fined by the city, but he sued to find out if it applied or not.

 

courts decide these things as long has you have standing (are a mmj patient/cg). 

you can do it now, when you dont have any charges against you, or you can try to fight it later, when there are charges looming over you.

I wonder how much this would cost?

[bobandtorey]

1. cops say they dont want people reachin in and  getting plants, otherwise how is it 'secured' ?

2. its untested in court (after that legislative change, it was tested before with bob and king).

3. prosecutors have prosecuted no-tops.

 

up to you what you decide.

if you REALLY feel like fighting it, why not just file one of those suits to find out if it needs a top or not.

thats how ter beek v wyoming came along. he never got fined by the city, but he sued to find out if it applied or not.

 

courts decide these things as long has you have standing (are a mmj patient/cg). 

you can do it now, when you dont have any charges against you, or you can try to fight it later, when there are charges looming over you.

 

 

I agree take the easy way out file a Law suits 

 

Can the Court appointed Lawyer do that ?

[t-pain]

dunno how much it will cost. have to ask mr ter beek. few hundred in court filing fees. whatever lawyer fee.

i'm guessing less than a criminal trial.

 

because you wont be bounced back to circuit court. whatever the highest court decides is the final decision.

 

the supreme court called it an "instant lawsuit".

Edited August 6, 2014 by t-pain

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Ter Beek sued because the local ordinance prevented him from doing what he could otherwise do under the mma not to find out if he could do something. You can't sue to find out if you can do something in the way you are implying. That's called an advisory opinion and I am pretty sure courts aren't allowed to give advisory opinions.

 

Also, the court wasn't describing Ter Beek as an "instant" lawsuit as you suggest, there is no such thing.  Instant is legalese used in court opinions which just means "in the case before us."  So a court will write "in the instant case" rather than "in the case before us."

 

Even if you could sue like you suggest, which you can't, it isn't going to be cheap. You still need to sue in circuit court and if you don't like the outcome of the interpretation of the law you are going to be appealing it up to the court of appeals and then supreme court like any other case. 

[bobandtorey]

Ter Beek sued because the local ordinance prevented him from doing what he could otherwise do under the mma not to find out if he could do something. You can't sue to find out if you can do something in the way you are implying. That's called an advisory opinion and I am pretty sure courts aren't allowed to give advisory opinions.

 

Also, the court wasn't describing Ter Beek as an "instant" lawsuit as you suggest, there is no such thing.  Instant is legalese used in court opinions which just means "in the case before us."  So a court will write "in the instant case" rather than "in the case before us."

 

Even if you could sue like you suggest, which you can't, it isn't going to be cheap. You still need to sue in circuit court and if you don't like the outcome of the interpretation of the law you are going to be appealing it up to the court of appeals and then supreme court like any other case. 

 

 

WOW !

 

Thanks

[t-pain]

Ter Beek sued because the local ordinance prevented him from doing what he could otherwise do under the mma not to find out if he could do something. You can't sue to find out if you can do something in the way you are implying. That's called an advisory opinion and I am pretty sure courts aren't allowed to give advisory opinions.

 

Also, the court wasn't describing Ter Beek as an "instant" lawsuit as you suggest, there is no such thing.  Instant is legalese used in court opinions which just means "in the case before us."  So a court will write "in the instant case" rather than "in the case before us."

 

Even if you could sue like you suggest, which you can't, it isn't going to be cheap. You still need to sue in circuit court and if you don't like the outcome of the interpretation of the law you are going to be appealing it up to the court of appeals and then supreme court like any other case. 

 

 

 

 

mich supreme court opinion ter beek v wyoming, page 2 and 3:

 

 

Plaintiff, John Ter Beek, lives in the City and is a qualifying patient under the

MMMA who possesses a state-issued registry identification card. 1 Upon the City’s

adoption of the Ordinance, Ter Beek filed the instant lawsuit in circuit court.

 

 

Accordingly, Ter Beek seeks a declaratory judgment that the Ordinance is preempted by

the MMMA and a corresponding injunction prohibiting the City from enforcing the

Ordinance against him for the medical use of marijuana in compliance with the MMMA.

 

 

2 Ter Beek has not been charged with violating the Ordinance or subjected to any

enforcement action in connection with it. The City unsuccessfully challenged his

standing before the circuit court, and has abandoned that challenge on appeal.

 

you could be right. he still seeked a summary judgement.

Edited August 6, 2014 by t-pain

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

No offense intended but I am right.  The "instant lawsuit" was referring to the case at hand. That prevents confusion as to what case they are discussing since high court opinions reference a bunch of cases.

 

He sought a declaratory judgment because the ordinance directly contravened the state law. It wasn't that the law was unclear it was that is was clear and preempted by state law. You can't file a lawsuit solely to have a court advise you as to how you should interpret law. That's an advisory opinion which I think the state constitution prohibits. I know the governor can ask for an advisory opinion and maybe some other state officials.  Maybe not though, don't quote me on that.

[trichcycler]

maybe a kickstarter or gofundme to raise attorney fees before a topless outdoor grow is begun, and get it settled in court...... but I'd advise to put a lid on it for the average patient seeking a better chance at a no hassle garden. safer yet, do it indoors hidden and secret from everyone.  outdoors smells attract nosy neighbors, while indoor smells are easily controlled.

[t-pain]

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-14-32

is for the attorney general opinions.

 

It shall be the duty of the attorney general, when required, to give his opinion upon all questions of law submitted to him by the legislature, or by either branch thereof, or by the governor, auditor general, treasurer or any other state officer, and also to notify the county treasurer of the proper county, of the neglect or refusal of any prosecuting attorney to make the annual report to the attorney general required of him by law.

 

 

AHA! thats why i cant find the making whoopee laws at the making whoopee legislature.mi.gov website. they dont making whoopee list 'michigan court rules' which is where the statue lives. that and the "MCL search" box obviously doesnt search the mich constitution.

 

http://courts.mi.gov/courts/michigansupremecourt/rules/pages/current-court-rules.aspx

 

 

Subchapter 7.300 Supreme Court
Rule 7.301 Jurisdiction and Term
(A) Jurisdiction. The Supreme Court may:

(4) give an advisory opinion (see Const 1963, art 3, § 8);

 

7.305 says they can give advisory opinions from mich courts or other courts.

 

mich constitution:

 

§ 8Opinions on constitutionality by supreme court.
Sec. 8.Either house of the legislature or the governor may request the opinion of the supreme court on
important questions of law upon solemn occasions as to the constitutionality of legislation after it has been
enacted into law but before its effective date.

 

i guess that only applies to the constitutionality of laws, not the ifs and hows.

Edited August 6, 2014 by t-pain

[bobandtorey]

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-14-32

is for the attorney general opinions.

 

It shall be the duty of the attorney general, when required, to give his opinion upon all questions of law submitted to him by the legislature, or by either branch thereof, or by the governor, auditor general, treasurer or any other state officer, and also to notify the county treasurer of the proper county, of the neglect or refusal of any prosecuting attorney to make the annual report to the attorney general required of him by law.

 

 

AHA! thats why i cant find the making whoopee laws at the making whoopee legislature.mi.gov website. they dont making whoopee list 'michigan court rules' which is where the statue lives. that and the "MCL search" box obviously doesnt search the mich constitution.

 

http://courts.mi.gov/courts/michigansupremecourt/rules/pages/current-court-rules.aspx

 

 

Subchapter 7.300 Supreme Court

Rule 7.301 Jurisdiction and Term

(A) Jurisdiction. The Supreme Court may:

(4) give an advisory opinion (see Const 1963, art 3, § 8);

 

7.305 says they can give advisory opinions from mich courts or other courts.

 

mich constitution:

 

§ 8Opinions on constitutionality by supreme court.

Sec. 8.Either house of the legislature or the governor may request the opinion of the supreme court on

important questions of law upon solemn occasions as to the constitutionality of legislation after it has been

enacted into law but before its effective date.

 

i guess that only applies to the constitutionality of laws, not the ifs and hows.

 

I have reached my quota of positive votes for the day

[GregS]

Might this be an option to look at the transport law, which we all know is unconstitutional in that it conflicts with the act?

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Tpain, as the Michigan Constitution portion that you quoted states, only the Governor or legislature can request an advisory opinion on a question of law from the Supreme Court.

 

The only way that court rule applies that you cited, if you were to read it all the way through, would be through a certified question to the Supreme Court from the Governor or at the request of the appeals court. Problem is you won't get to an appeals court because your case will be dismissed in circuit court because you are asking for an advisory opinion there. The only way you'd get the advisory opinion would be to be prosecuted and convicted, appeal it, convince the court of appeals that they shouldn't interpret the law themselves, and then have them send on a certified question to the supreme court asking for what amounts to an advisory opinion. That ain't gonna happen. The appeals court would interpret the law and you would get their interpretation and if you didn't like it you could appeal their decision to the supreme court. Advisory opinions aren't handed out like candy, especially on a basic interpretation of law like this.

[t-pain]

ter beek did it.

 

if this cannot be used for a top on an outside grow question, it can be used for 750.474 illegal transport law. no matter what you call it. declaratory judgement, advisory opinion.... etc

[bobandtorey]

The filing of a declaratory judgment lawsuit can follow one party sending a cease-and-desist letter to another.^[8] A party contemplating sending such a letter risks that the recipient, or a party

related to the recipient (such as a customer or supplier), may file for a declaratory judgment in their own jurisdiction.^[9] This may require the sender to appear in a distant court, at their own

expense. So sending a cease-and-desist letter presents a dilemma to the sender, as it would be desirable to be able to address the issues at hand in a candid manner without the need for

litigation. Upon receiving a cease-and-desist letter, the recipient may seek a tactical advantage by instituting declaratory-judgment litigation in a more favorable jurisdiction.^[10]

 

Sometimes the parties agree in advance of discussions that no declaratory-judgment lawsuit will be filed while the negotiations are continuing. Sometimes a lawsuit is filed, but not served, before

sending such a notice, to preserve a jurisdiction advantage without engaging the judicial process fully. Some parties send cease-and-desist letters that make "an oblique suggestion of possible

infringement" to lower the risk of the recipient filing a declaratory-judgment lawsuit.^[11]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgement

Edited August 7, 2014 by bobandtorey

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Tpain Ter Beek didn't do it. Ter Beek sued the city for its ordinance disallowing what was allowed under the mma.  The ordinance clearly disallowed what the mma allowed. The lawsuit was basically saying, hey you can't constrain me under an ordinance like that when the state law allows this because you are infringing on my rights given under state law.  That is completely different from someone asking, hey does the state law allow this?

[bobandtorey]

Imho  the  Ter Beek case ruling  gave cites a way to control cannabis growing in your home 

[bobandtorey]

I agree and Oakland County may lead the way  and misinterpreting is what they do best 

[SirLongSmoke]

Got some bad news on Friday. I will keep you updated as the events unfold. Tomorrow will be judgment day!

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

WHAT?

[ozzrokk]

Good luck sir..............

[bobandtorey]

WHAT?

My name is James Rose and I live in southwestern Michigan. I was raided by the state police today. I was in compliance with state law having an enclosed fenced area for outdoor plants. I had 24 outdoor plants within the locked gate system, locked by 2 locks at the gate. I had 32 indoor plants locked with a coded deadbolt lock inside a barn style garage. They took all my outdoor plants because they were saying the top of the fence was not fenced. That violation gave them the right to take everything including the indoor plants that were securely locked. They took all my manufactured and cured cannabis which totaled about 4 ounces. I do not know if I will receive the felonies they listed to me. I will be told via phone.

 

I have a clean record and have never been to jail. I work with emotional impaired students. I just try to guide them in the right direction instead of the carousel of negativeness. I work at a school as an outreach worker that will now probably be taken away from me, regardless of the outcome, because of the slander that will peruse. I'm a special Olympics coach for the basketball team at the school that I've work at for several years. I also volunteer my time as a chaperone for the Special Olympics track team. I have a wife and two beautiful little girls.

 

I am trying my best to deal with this situation but I need help. I need support for a push in the right direction with the Michigan law. If anyone can give me advice or help please let me know. I don't have enough money to fight this in court. Most lawyers want more than I have to even discuss the situation.

I'm asking for compassion and understanding. LETS MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Bobandtorey I am aware of the original story as I am following the thread so no need to repost it. I am asking, what, in response to sirlongsmoke saying today will be judgment day.