Truth Seeker
New Member
Individuals who use medical marijuana to treat certain health problems can tell a jury they are allowed to use the drug under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, under a Michigan Supreme Court ruling issued Thursday.
In its first major ruling on Michigan's controversial law, the court said the 2008 voter-approved measure provides legal protection from prosecution – what's called the right to an affirmative defense – even for users without state-issued medical marijuana cards.
Michael Komorn, an attorney specializing in medical marijuana cases and the president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, said the high court ruling means that defendants in criminal cases will be allowed to present a defense to a jury that their use of marijuana was for medical purposes.
"I have about 10 cases that will be affected by this," Komorn said. "The courts are holding these cases in abeyance while we are waiting for other court rulings.
"This ruling will allow us to present a case and go to trial. It's a game-changer. Up to this point, the Court of Appeals decisions have eliminated and eradicated the right of the people to present a defense to a jury. ... Police will continue to arrest first and ask questions later, but prosecutors are going to have to rethink what kind of cases they want to pursue."
The ACLU of Michigan called the decision a victory for medical marijuana patients throughout the state.
"This decision makes it very clear: A patient who uses marijuana to treat their medical conditions with the approval by their doctor should not be punished for mere technical errors regarding the number of plants or how they were secured," said Dan Korobkin, ACLU of Michigan staff attorney.
In one case ruled on by the court, Owosso resident Larry King, who suffers from severe and chronic back pain, was issued a medical marijuana card in 2009 by the state after being examined and approved by a doctor. He grew 12 marijuana plants for his own medical use. The Shiawassee County prosecutor charged him with manufacturing marijuana, a felony, because some of his plants were being grown outside.
Drug charges against King initially were thrown out because he was a medical marijuana patient. But the Court of Appeals reinstated felony drug charges against him because it held that King would not be permitted to raise a medical defense at his trial. The higher court's decision reverses the appeals court.
Attorney Matthew Abel, who represents King, said he does not know if the ruling will reduce the number of arrests and prosecutions of medical marijuana users but it will directly impact all court cases in play now.
"It will make it more difficult for prosecutors to prevent medical marijuana patients from using the medical marijuana defense," said Abel, who has 25 such cases and estimates there are hundreds across the state. "This is a clear win for patients and caregivers, and a clear loss for overly aggressive prosecuting attorneys (like in Oakland County)."
Calls to Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper and Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe were not returned late Thursday.
In the Oakland County case, the court said the law allows a person arrested on a marijuana-related offense to assert a medical marijuana defense as long as the defendant can show a physician's statement – which certifies a patient has a qualifying medical condition to use marijuana – was made after the 2008 law was passed but before the alleged crime occurred.
"Because the MMMA (Michigan Medical Marijuana Act) was the result of a voter initiative, our goal is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the electorate, rather than the Legislature, as reflected in the language of the law itself. We must give the words of the MMMA their ordinary and plain meaning as would have been understood by the electorate," the opinion said.
The act does not create a general right for individuals to use and possess marijuana in Michigan, the court said, adding that the possession, manufacture and delivery of marijuana remain punishable offenses.
"Rather, the MMMA's protections are limited to individuals suffering from serious or debilitating medical conditions or symptoms. ..." the court said.
Under the law, individuals with a state-issued license are allowed to grow up to 12 marijuana plants at a time in a locked facility and possess 2.5 ounces of dried marijuana.
"If you have a card and you have less than 2.5 ounces, you shouldn't be hassled, you shouldn't be arrested, nothing – it's immunity," said state Rep. Phil Cavanagh, D-Redford Township.
Cavanagh is the sponsor of legislation that passed the House last month that would require a bona fide doctor-patient relationship while strengthening the immunity clause in the medical marijuana law so that ill individuals can't be prosecuted as small-time drug users.
The bill is part of a four-bill package that could get a Senate committee hearing this month, said House Speaker Pro Tem John Walsh, R-Livonia, who has led an effort to "strengthen the use of the affirmative defense."
Advocates are hailing the ruling as a move toward more accurate interpretations of the law and less hassle for patients.
"People have been denied their rights," said Jamie Lowell, co-founder of Ypsilanti's 3rd Coast Compassion Center for medical marijuana patients. "People can finally do what was originally intended by the voters and by the drafters of the act."
Chuck Ream, a longtime Ann Arbor activist involved with city campaigns to reform marijuana policies, called the ruling an "extraordinary advance."
"It doesn't help to have a medicine in theory... you actually have to have access," he said.
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: detroitnews.com
Author: Jennifer Chambers
Contact: Contact The Detroit News | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com
Website: Medical marijuana users protected under law, high court rules | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com
In its first major ruling on Michigan's controversial law, the court said the 2008 voter-approved measure provides legal protection from prosecution – what's called the right to an affirmative defense – even for users without state-issued medical marijuana cards.
Michael Komorn, an attorney specializing in medical marijuana cases and the president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, said the high court ruling means that defendants in criminal cases will be allowed to present a defense to a jury that their use of marijuana was for medical purposes.
"I have about 10 cases that will be affected by this," Komorn said. "The courts are holding these cases in abeyance while we are waiting for other court rulings.
"This ruling will allow us to present a case and go to trial. It's a game-changer. Up to this point, the Court of Appeals decisions have eliminated and eradicated the right of the people to present a defense to a jury. ... Police will continue to arrest first and ask questions later, but prosecutors are going to have to rethink what kind of cases they want to pursue."
The ACLU of Michigan called the decision a victory for medical marijuana patients throughout the state.
"This decision makes it very clear: A patient who uses marijuana to treat their medical conditions with the approval by their doctor should not be punished for mere technical errors regarding the number of plants or how they were secured," said Dan Korobkin, ACLU of Michigan staff attorney.
In one case ruled on by the court, Owosso resident Larry King, who suffers from severe and chronic back pain, was issued a medical marijuana card in 2009 by the state after being examined and approved by a doctor. He grew 12 marijuana plants for his own medical use. The Shiawassee County prosecutor charged him with manufacturing marijuana, a felony, because some of his plants were being grown outside.
Drug charges against King initially were thrown out because he was a medical marijuana patient. But the Court of Appeals reinstated felony drug charges against him because it held that King would not be permitted to raise a medical defense at his trial. The higher court's decision reverses the appeals court.
Attorney Matthew Abel, who represents King, said he does not know if the ruling will reduce the number of arrests and prosecutions of medical marijuana users but it will directly impact all court cases in play now.
"It will make it more difficult for prosecutors to prevent medical marijuana patients from using the medical marijuana defense," said Abel, who has 25 such cases and estimates there are hundreds across the state. "This is a clear win for patients and caregivers, and a clear loss for overly aggressive prosecuting attorneys (like in Oakland County)."
Calls to Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper and Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe were not returned late Thursday.
In the Oakland County case, the court said the law allows a person arrested on a marijuana-related offense to assert a medical marijuana defense as long as the defendant can show a physician's statement – which certifies a patient has a qualifying medical condition to use marijuana – was made after the 2008 law was passed but before the alleged crime occurred.
"Because the MMMA (Michigan Medical Marijuana Act) was the result of a voter initiative, our goal is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the electorate, rather than the Legislature, as reflected in the language of the law itself. We must give the words of the MMMA their ordinary and plain meaning as would have been understood by the electorate," the opinion said.
The act does not create a general right for individuals to use and possess marijuana in Michigan, the court said, adding that the possession, manufacture and delivery of marijuana remain punishable offenses.
"Rather, the MMMA's protections are limited to individuals suffering from serious or debilitating medical conditions or symptoms. ..." the court said.
Under the law, individuals with a state-issued license are allowed to grow up to 12 marijuana plants at a time in a locked facility and possess 2.5 ounces of dried marijuana.
"If you have a card and you have less than 2.5 ounces, you shouldn't be hassled, you shouldn't be arrested, nothing – it's immunity," said state Rep. Phil Cavanagh, D-Redford Township.
Cavanagh is the sponsor of legislation that passed the House last month that would require a bona fide doctor-patient relationship while strengthening the immunity clause in the medical marijuana law so that ill individuals can't be prosecuted as small-time drug users.
The bill is part of a four-bill package that could get a Senate committee hearing this month, said House Speaker Pro Tem John Walsh, R-Livonia, who has led an effort to "strengthen the use of the affirmative defense."
Advocates are hailing the ruling as a move toward more accurate interpretations of the law and less hassle for patients.
"People have been denied their rights," said Jamie Lowell, co-founder of Ypsilanti's 3rd Coast Compassion Center for medical marijuana patients. "People can finally do what was originally intended by the voters and by the drafters of the act."
Chuck Ream, a longtime Ann Arbor activist involved with city campaigns to reform marijuana policies, called the ruling an "extraordinary advance."
"It doesn't help to have a medicine in theory... you actually have to have access," he said.
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: detroitnews.com
Author: Jennifer Chambers
Contact: Contact The Detroit News | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com
Website: Medical marijuana users protected under law, high court rules | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com
