t-pain Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/02/judge_says_no_to_medical_marij.html Kent County Circuit Court Judge Dennis Leiber rejected motions by the defense asking that the cases be dismissed because the officers were covered under the provisions of the voter-approved act. But Leiber said that while the officers may have met some of the provisions of the act, they failed to provide proof that they had a right to the amount of marijuana they had which the Kent County Prosecutor's Office says exceeded the state's guidelines. the article is mum on sec4 or sec8. so i dont know where it is, sounds like he denied them a sec8, so its appeal time. GregS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Yup nothing has changed inn most Counties and when it does get appealed we all know the out come coming for the COA They will never get it dismissed in any County but sure ant happening in Kent County Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregS Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 I don't envy these guys, but this had to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 "The very purpose of the MMMA was to protect patients like Todd Van Doorne and Michael Frederick," Block said following the judge's written opinion was produced on Jan. 29. "This ruling strips them of any medical marijuana defense at trial." No kidding well am surprised Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 I don't envy these guys, but this had to happen. What had to happen ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pic book Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) sec 8 being denied by a judge who said you have too much medicine and whattua mean section 8? never heard of such a thing. oook, judgie poo, based on what standard? show me the research...wtf there ain't none? ain't none, ma dawg, cause feds forbid research since 1937. so if u have 1 gram judgie pooo, i think you have too much cannabis. i am god cause i'm da judge and i get re-elected in this county every time i run and u r a criminal not any kind of a patient. Bailiff, bring in the next criminal. Edited February 2, 2015 by pic book Norby, bobandtorey, trichcycler and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmishRnot4ganja Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 The courts will do anything to keep one of these cases from going to a jury. Maybe the Supreme court will straighten them out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregS Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 The courts will do anything to keep one of these cases from going to a jury. Maybe the Supreme court will straighten them out? I'm real cozy with that. It is the case we were looking for, speaking to the same issues we saw in Carruthers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trichcycler Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 be interesting when/if the cannabis community comes together in support of these officers for this pickle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t-pain Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 What had to happen ? a rehearing in the appeals courts of "are concentrates/butter considered usable marihuana?" i'm guessing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trichcycler Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 anyone aware of any other drug that is separated from it's other possible constituents before its weighed for prosecution ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregS Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) So these guys had an amount not more than reasonably necessary to ensure an uninterrupted supply. The judge is an embarrassment. These cases are more apt to get down to the short hairs of the law than Carruthers did. They have much better legs in the media, and may well be informed by the rulings in Hartwick/Tuttle. Edited February 2, 2015 by GregS Norby 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 anyone aware of any other drug that is separated from it's other possible constituents before its weighed for prosecution ? None They don't take the Cut out of the Coke Wild Bill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 So these guys had an amount not more than reasonably necessary to ensure an uninterrupted supply. The judge is an embarrassment. These cases are more apt to get down to the short hairs of the law than Carruthers did. They have much better legs in the media, and may well be informed by the rulings in Hartwick/Tuttle. We all have heard the PGT shows when they talk about how the Law is now because of Hartwick and Tuttle case but i do agree They do have it much better in the media because they are Leo i wonder if they come to this site ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norby Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 None They don't take the Cut out of the Coke Unfortunately they don't consider that this is mostly cut. 15.5+ oz. of 16 was cut and inactive ingredient, that's not normal with most drugs. Too bad judges and cops can't use reason, logic or sense. Well they can't use it for the better of the victim(defendant). Actually they can since he could have dismissed, but they generally don't. trichcycler and YesMichigan 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trichcycler Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 maybe they could stop making up drug crimes and start enforcing the dangerous ones already on the books that plague cities all over. Why do we have to be the test subjects for this Act, offered to us by the state? NO MMMA ARRESTS until THEY figure out the details I say, with their own money. Norby and zapatosunidos 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YesMichigan Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 (edited) Why do we have to be the test subjects for this Act, offered to us by the state? NO MMMA ARRESTS until THEY figure out the details I say, with their own money. They hate this law, not a single one of them voted for it. Why would any of us think they would ever give the Citizens benefit of the doubt? This law has cost them MILLIONS - we only talk about the times when the card doesn't work. Think of how many times it has been honored. These departments know exactly how much the MMMA has cost them. Just look at the Oakland County crime map and try to find a person arrested for drugs other than Marijuana possession in the last week. We aren't "test subjects" we are guinea pigs that they didn't care about in the first place. We are impediments to their progress, new cars and new hires. Just like us, they are making the best of an imperfect system. The battering ram still gets used and the auctions continue to run. You know all this though - I think we all want to forget the evil desire to confiscate and imprison that defines the will of the Prohibitionist. It is real and persistent, when you wake in the morning they will still want to take your stuff and throw you in a cell. In October 2013, the incarceration rate of the United States of America was the highest in the world, at 716 per 100,000 of the national population. While the United States represents about 5 percent of the world's population, it houses around 25 percent of the world's prisoners. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate Land of the Free.... Edited February 3, 2015 by YesMichigan cristinew and trichcycler 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 maybe they could stop making up drug crimes and start enforcing the dangerous ones already on the books that plague cities all over. Why do we have to be the test subjects for this Act, offered to us by the state? NO MMMA ARRESTS until THEY figure out the details I say, with their own money. Yes we must pay and they get paid trichcycler 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandtorey Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 T this is the same judge that ruled against Tre beek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t-pain Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 (edited) T this is the same judge that ruled against Tre beek hahhahaha, nice find bob. i keep forgetting wyoming is a suburb of grand rapids / kent county. from ter beek v wyoming supreme court: "The court, Dennis B. Leiber, J., granted summary disposition in favor of the city, agreeing that the CSA preempted the MMMA." "Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals, reverse the circuit court’s grant of summary disposition in favor of the City, and remand for entry of summary disposition in favor of Ter Beek." Edited February 3, 2015 by t-pain GregS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.