Jump to content

Only Dried Marijuana Counts, Says Appeals Court


Recommended Posts

Again thank you

 

We all should read the opines they could/ can help if you have a Leo encounter and don't talk to the police nor open your door it never goes good after that

 

Thank you, I'm glad you found my partial summary of the two cases beneficial.

 

Thinking about it earlier. Decarboxylated extract (from the dried leaves and flowers) injected directly in to a small cookie. The "preparation of dried leaves and or flowers" would be evident and separate from the "mixture" of the chocolate. Chocolate covered cherry but with THC extract as the liquid center.

 

Why are they so partial to kief? Must be from their college days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone believe that having 12 marijuana cookies in your kitchen will currently get you busted?

 

Isnt this issue really more about commercially selling the items?

 

I think if you are pulled over or the police have reason to investigate you and you have 12 marijuana cookies that weigh 7 ounces and you only have 1 pt. signed up you'll be heading to jail. Carruthers supports it.

 

I don't think it was about commercially selling the items at all. Seemed to be a simple question of weights and measurements. I'd like to read why you take that angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya jumped topic,.. I said in your kitchen.

 

 And carruthers was commercially selling large amounts.

 

No, I stayed on topic and felt I stayed on with you. ("I think if you are pulled over or the police have reason to investigate you" - covered the kitchen table)

 

In your kitchen if the cops come and you have 7 ounces of marijuana cookies, 8 plants growing, 2 ounces of usable marihuana and 1 patient registered and confirmed through LARA you are getting arrested in Oakland County today and Carruthers would uphold the arrest in my most humble of opinions.

 

Regardless of how much he was selling commercially, had his brownies weighed less he would have made weight and seemingly won the appeal.

Edited by YesMichigan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well of course it is a weight issue to us,.. not so much and partially in Carruthers.  It had to do with the way the cookie/brownie was made and with what material.

 

The material of the brownies would have been acceptable had it been properly represented (as I illustrate above) his assertion that it was "resin" and not further addressing the point (to illustrate the "resin" was a preparation derived from the dried leaves and flowers) I think was in error.

 

Possession of THC extracted from marijuana is possession of marijuana. SeePeople v Campbell, 72 Mich App 41
1, 412; 249 NW2d 870 (1976); see also MCL 333.7106(3).
 
This is directly conflicted by the MMA which defines preparations of the leaves and flowers as "usable marihuana".
 
By possessing edible products that were not usable marijuana under the MMMA, but indisputably were marijuana, he failed to meet the requirements for §4 immunity.

 

The only reason it was "not usable" is because he said the magic word "resin" and wouldn't move off of it. I bet those brownies were medicinal as all hell! The Court of Appeals in the Carruthers opinion read like my Grandma working through how BHO is created without slideshows or knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Carruthers did state he made the brownies to sell to a dispensary as I recall? And was delivering them?

 

I'll admit I didn't read that or see that the COA commented specifically on that aspect in their summation. It read like "You said the wrong ingredient for your brownie so 'No soup for you!'. The law says no resin and you said resin." They ignore the "resin from stems" conveniently of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I think we all like the Randall ruling, hence unpublished.

 

Is there any action for getting it published? If I can help please PM me.

To be fair, the COA found for Ter Beek. The prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court and got smacked.

 

edit: Mistakenly responded to the wrong post. That answer goes to the question whether the COA has ever made a good ruling.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motion for publication has been filed by the defendant-appellant, and a motion to reconsider has been filed by the plaintiff-appellee:

 

http://courts.mi.gov/opinions_orders/case_search/pages/default.aspx?SearchType=1&CaseNumber=318740&CourtType_CaseNumber=2

 

wow! 

 

so what happened, was the prosecutor going to let it go, but then since a publication request came they are going to fight it to the supreme court?

 

or were they going to appeal it anyway?

 

a re-hearing? does the coa do those much? i am thinking not. there is no full panel coa iirc ?

 

 

it also erred in including stems as “usable” marijuana and stalks as

marijuana.

 

i read this but didnt notice it until now.

 

stems are not usable marihuana. most of your buds have stems in them. the stems must be removed before weighing ;)

Edited by t-pain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the MMMA amicus brief scared him to the core. because he knows its true.

 

its disgusting that he does not understand the point of an amicus brief however. both sides are supposed to be looking for 'justice' , not who wins or loses. obviously the MSC wants all opinions reguarding the topic, whether they are for the def or for the prosecution.

 

but this is the same guy who iirc did not even get a finding of fact on the number of plants. what am i expecting? lol

Edited by t-pain
Link to comment
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...
×
×
  • Create New...