BAD AXE — More than three years after his Bad Axe rental house was raided, charges against 47-year-old Livonia resident Jeffrey David Ellis were dismissed Friday.
Judge M. Richard Knoblock made the decision after determining that Ellis was in compliance with the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, on that day in September 2009.
In what was sometimes a contentious hearing, two key points in the law were clearly established through witness testimony.
Dr. Randall Sternberg, who also is of Livonia, said he has acted as Ellis’s primary physician for years, and he signed paperwork for Ellis, Eliss’s late-wife, and several other clients to receive medical marijuana cards. This proved Ellis had physician approval.
Sternberg said he helped less than 10 clients obtain medicinal marijuana cards, only giving them to patients who had brought up the notion after years of him knowing they were in pain.
Ellis was able to wean off pain-killers for tendinitis after he obtained his card.
Two other witnesses discussed Ellis’s role as their licensed caregiver for medical marijuana, describing how ailments ranging from degenerative disc disease to extreme nausea were helped by his products. Ellis himself talked about how marijuana had helped his wife deal with her lupus, and how her condition had spurred his extensive research into marijuana in 2008 and subsequent start as a caregiver.
“We knew the law was changing (in 2008) and we were going to get on that immediately,” Ellis said.
The testimonies were in line with another part of the law that requires marijuana transactions to “treat or alleviate the patient’s serious or debilitating medical condition.”
Contention revolved around whether or not the amount of marijuana Ellis was growing was reasonably necessary to treat his clients.
A large portion of the hearing was spent with the prosecution going over how many plants would lead to how many usable ounces and grams of various forms of marijuana.
In the end, Knoblock determined that Ellis was within a reasonable amount to try and give care to his clients.
In what was one of the biggest news stories in 2009, Ellis claimed he had done nothing wrong after local police raided his home. A card-carrying registered caregiver licensed to give patients medical marijuana, Ellis felt he deserves protection under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.
After criminal charges were filed, Ellis sought to use Michigan’s marijuana law to defend himself during trial. However, prosecutors argued Ellis deserves no protection from the state’s medical marijuana law because he was not in compliance with all provisions of the act. Specifically, the door was not locked to the basement where Ellis grew marijuana. Also, police say Ellis had more marijuana plants than what’s allowed by law.
Ellis countered that the door to the home was locked, and that plants without roots were counted by police, and they should not have been counted because the law allows for caregivers to have enough in stock and in the growing process to not cause a shortage in a patient’s supply.
Knoblock originally agreed with prosecutors, noting Ellis was not in compliance with all the provisions of the state’s law.
Because he could not use the law during trial, Ellis plead guilty to a charge of manufacturing and distributing a controlled substance outside of a license in November 2011. In April 2012, he was sentenced to serve 60 days in jail and 36 months probation. However, Knoblock agreed to stay the terms of Ellis’s sentence, as it was known Ellis and his defense attorney, Michael A. Komorn of Southfield, were going to appeal the case to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Since that time, the Michigan Supreme Court has weighed in on the state’s medical marijuana law. Specifically, the court ruled that even if a defendant does not meet all the provisions of the act, a separate portion of the law still gives a person the right to use the medical marijuana law as a defense during a trial.
The result of that ruling was that the Michigan Court of Appeals vacated Ellis’s plea, and sent the case back to Huron County for Friday’s hearing. During that hearing, he had to prove he had a physician’s recommendation to serve as a caregiver; possessed a quantity that’s not more than is reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marijuana for his patients; and that he engaged in the possession/manufacturing of marijuana for a patient’s treatment. Had there been a question of Ellis being in compliance with those three areas during Friday’s hearing, the matter would have been decided by a jury. Instead, Knoblock ruled he was in compliance and the charges have been dismissed.
There will be no jail time or criminal record for a Genoa Township couple charged in the seizure of medical marijuana from their home.
65-year-old Dewey Edward Thomas and his wife, Pamela, had been charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to manufacture or deliver after police found more than 70 pot plants growing on their farm in Genoa Township in August of 2011. Thomas has insisted that neither he nor his wife broke the law, noting that he is a certified caregiver for her and that she is a certified medical marijuana patient with a debilitating condition.
Prosecutors had contended that the couple had more plants than allowed under the law. But following ongoing legal proceedings, an agreement was reached that they would plead no-contest to a lesser charge of marijuana possession. In exchange, they were sentenced to non-reporting probation which will keep their convictions out of the public record.
The plea deal follows a previous decision by Circuit Court Judge Michael Hatty that denied a motion by prosecutors to prevent the couple from presenting a Medical Marijuana defense to a jury. The couple’s attorney, Michael Komorn, said the deal indicates all sides understood the couple was legitimately using marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Some of the first big changes to Michigan’s 2008 voter-approved medical marijuana law take effect on Monday, including extending the one-year registry cards to two years and further defining the doctor-patient relationship necessary for authorization.
An overwhelming 63 percent of Michigan’s voters approved the medical marijuana law, but lawmakers claimed it left too much open to interpretation and passed measures at the end of last session which were supposed to “clarify” the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.
The doctor-patient relationship needed for an authorization before marijuana can be legally used was one of the biggest issues faced by the Legislature, reports Alanna Durkin at The Associated Press. Lawmakers were concerned that it was just too easy to get authorized to use cannabis.
But starting Monday, April 1, doctors are required to complete face-to-face medical evaluations of patients, review relevant medical records, and assess their medical condition and history. Follow-up with patients to see whether marijuana is helping are also required.
The new rules will help doctors and patients by codifying what is expected throughout the medical marijuana authorization process, according to Michael Komorn, a Michigan attorney who specializes in medical marijuana law.
New laws took effect Monday that further define medical marijuana in Michigan for patients, caregivers and doctors.
Medical marijuana advocates say the new laws, to some degree, help clarify Michigan’s 2008 voter-approved amendment allowing the medical use of marijuana. And, to some degree, the new laws don’t.
“In some ways, the Legislature’s intent was to fill in the holes,” says Michael Komorn, a Southfield attorney and president of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Association. “All the confusion should be put aside and all the clarity should be there.
“But I don’t really know if that’s the case.”
The new medical marijuana laws are among many passed by lawmakers in the lame-duck session of the Michigan Legislature in December.
Among the changes:
• State-issued cards given to patients who have a doctor’s approval are good for two years rather than one.
• People who have committed a felony in the past 10 years or ever committed an assault won’t be allowed to be caregivers. And, caregivers will have their registrations revoked and face felony charges if they sell to someone who isn’t allowed to use medical marijuana.
• Doctors are now required to do face-to-face evaluations of patients, review their records and follow-up afterwards to assess whether medical marijuana is working.
Komorn said he doesn’t understand the legislative intent of barring 10-year felons from being caregivers when there’s been nothing to indicate that prior felons are a problem.
“A lot of patients with long-standing relationships with their caregivers are going to have to look elsewhere,” he said. “So why pick on existing caregivers when there’s been seemingly no reason to do so?”
Clarifying the roles of doctors and expectations of patients, however, is a step in the right direction.
“There’s no question this gives us some direction,” Komorn said. “My real concern is that anytime you start allowing the government to judge what takes place inside the doctor’s office, it becomes slippery slope for disaster.
“No other physicians are being held to the type of scrutiny that medical marijuana physicians are,” he said.
Implementing Michigan’s voter-approved medical marijuana law hasn’t been easy.
It has largely been left to the Republican-controlled legislature since it was passed in 2008 to write the rules for it.
But increasingly, it’s the court system that’s sorting it out.
With marijuana remaining a schedule 1 drug and illegal under federal law, medical marijuana providers are increasingly having their cases heard in the courts once they’ve been cited or arrested by police.
Eventually, that may change, too, says Komorn.
“When juries begin to hear cases and judges dismiss charges, then you’ll see prosecutors and police taking a different approach,” he said.
The Oakland County Sheriff’s Office and the Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office did not immediately return messages seeking comment about the new laws.
Contact Charles Crumm at 248-745-4649, charlie.crumm@oakpress.com or follow him on Twitter @crummc and on Facebook.
“The Court’s opinion seems to suggest the voter-approved initiative should be decided by jurors on what is criminal and what is medical.”
Recently, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled on Compassionate Apothecary in Mount Pleasant (McQueen v. State of Michigan), sending many patients scrambling, fearing their access to medicinal marihuana will be severely restricted, with Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette interpreting the decision as widespread authority to shut down all dispensaries.
While the decision could be viewed that way, the Supreme Court was much more pragmatic in its decision, essentially telling communities, “It’s your choice.” The ruling, issued earlier this month, allows prosecutors to shut down dispensaries as a public nuisance, but not as an illegal drug operation. The decision seems to lean toward taking a civil approach instead of filing criminal charges, allowing attorneys and county prosecutors to have a local option of how they want to address dispensaries.
What this means to dispensaries is that registered patients are still protected from arrest when acquiring cannabis, but the provider, or dispensary, is subject to arrest and prosecution, regardless of whether or not money is exchanged. The Court’s opinion seems to suggest the voter-approved initiative should be decided by jurors on what is criminal and what is medical.
While it would be difficult for a city to say that a dispensary is now a nuisance when it has functioned for several years providing safe access to the community, at least one city, Flint, is intent on doing so.
In communities where dispensaries are working, what is the incentive to shut them down? Many have thrived and provide compassionate services to the sick, without incident and operating within municipal guidelines.
It is important to remember that Compassionate Apothecary was shut down not because of criminal charges or illegal sales, but deemed a public nuisance, and its owners were not and have not been charged with any crimes.
Essentially, the Supreme Court’s ruling puts the decision on medical marijuana back where it belongs — in the hands of the people. In dispensary cases, owners/operators now have the option of a jury trial, to let residents of the surrounding community decide whether or not to accept the business or view it as criminal behavior. Despite this, for dispensary operators who want to avoid liabilities, it is not advisable to stay open.
The wildcard in this ruling is whether and to what extent Michigan’s law enforcement community will pursue closing dispensaries, and if they seek to shut down or criminally charge those facilities. Until this happens, dispensary operators who remain open should be prepared to defend themselves in nuisance or criminal cases.
As new legislation is discussed in Michigan relating to legalizing dispensaries, it is important to remember the intent of the MMMA — to provide a safe, uninterrupted supply of medical marijuana to patients. While the dispensary model can be successful, and was in several Michigan communities, the safest advice would be to encourage patients and caregivers to return to the self-sustaining cottage industry model while seeing how the battle plays out in Lansing.
