During this February 20, 2013 hearing, Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Beth Hand notified the court that her office is contemplating filing criminal charges against a medical doctor for his involvement in certifying two medical marijuana patients, Robert Redden and Torey Clark.
The protracted case against Redden and Clark was initially dismissed back on June 17, 2009, but the district court’s dismissal was appealed by the Oakland County’s Prosecutor’s Office and, since then, the case has dragged on between various appellate and trial courts.
The Marijuana Legalization Initiative is an initiated state statute proposed for the Michigan ballot on November 8, 2016 ballot.
The measure would legalize, regulate and tax marijuana.
Adults age 21 and older would be permitted to possess and use marijuana and to cultivate 12 plants each. The initiative would also allow for hemp farming.
Text of measure
Ballot summary
An initiation of legislation to allow under state law the personal possession and use of marihuana by persons 21 years of age or older; to provide for the lawful cultivation and sale of marihuana and marihuana-infused products by persons 21 years of age or older; to permit the taxation of revenue derived from commercial marihuana facilities and to require that any such taxes be used for the purposes of education, public safety and public health; to permit the legislature to require licensing of commercial marihuana facilities by establishing a Michigan Cannabis Control Board, which board would be responsible for enforcement and administration of this act, including the promulgation of administrative rules.
The initiative campaign is being led by the Michigan Comprehensive Cannabis Law Reform Committee. The group is headed by Jeffrey Hank, who has organized local marijuana legalization initiative campaigns in Lansing and East Lansing, including one that appeared on the May 5, 2015, ballot.
In 2008, an overwhelming majority of Michigan voters approved legislation to legalize marijuana for medical use in the state.
With nearly 50,000 Michigan residents arrested and incarcerated each year for controlled substance violations, the state’s prison industrial complex was expected to a financial hit after the legalization of medical marijuana.
As enacted by 63 percent of Michigan voters, the Medical Marijuana Act directed police to stop wasting the state’s limited financial resources on arresting and locking up sick people for smoking pot.
But Michigan cops had a better idea. In October, police quietly changed a policy on how marijuana is tested at the state crime labs. The new policy allows medical marijuana users to be falsely charged with felony possession of a controlled substance.
While medical marijuana that is obtained from a marijuana plant can be legally obtained and used by patients who have a doctor’s prescription in Michigan, it is illegal for anyone to possess or use synthetic marijuana in the state.
As reported by Michigan Radio, the new state crime lab policy allows legal marijuana users to be charged with a crime they did not commit. The new policy,
“instructs crime labs to treat extracts that contain THC as being synthetic. That’s if it is not absolutely clear they came from a cannabis plant. That opens people to felony charges as opposed to misdemeanors.”
The new policy clearly puts the burden of proof on the accused, rather than on the state. It also directs the crime lab to operate under an unconstitutional assumption of guilt.
Internal documents obtained through a freedom of information request show that some crime lab technicians vehemently opposed the changes. Among those who protested the changes from inside the agency was Lansing Crime Lab Controlled Substances Unit Supervisor Bradley Choate.
“This could lead to the wrong charge of possession of synthetic THC and the ultimate wrongful conviction of an individual. For the laboratory to contribute to this possible miscarriage of justice would be a huge black eye for the Division and the Department.”
According to Komorn Law Office Attorney, Jeff Frazier, who is currently representing a man wrongfully charged with possession of synthetic marijuana under the new policy,
“The Michigan state crime lab systematically is reporting false results, the prosecutors then can go charge people with felonies they didn’t commit. In fact, that’s what they’re doing.”
Frazier went on to say that the new policy “contaminates and taints the very reliability and credibility of the police lab.”
Charmie Gholson, founder of Michigan Moms United, a medical marijuana advocacy group, told Michigan Radio,
“Michigan taxpayers are paying for these trumped up charges. They’re paying for the investigations. They’re paying for the prosecutions of Michigan families with no criminal intent who believed that the state was going to protect them.”
The new policy clearly violates the United States Constitution which protects the rights of the accused, and places the burden of proof on the state.
Should we surprised by that? The multi-billion dollar for profit prison industry peddles its influence through every level of government. It’s an industry that thrives off the incarceration of other human beings. According to the tenants of the corporate Bible, otherwise known as the Friedman Doctrine, the only ethical responsibility any corporation has is to ensure that its shareholders do not lose money.
Police and public officials no longer work for the people. Our tax dollars may pay their salaries, but their job is not to serve and protect us. Their job is to keep the private prisons full of young, able-bodied workers. Whether the people they arrest and incarcerate are guilty or innocent is of no consequence to them whatsoever.
THE MICHIGAN STATE POLICE Forensic Science Division finds itself embroiled in scandal as newly released emails paint a picture of a crime lab in turmoil over how to classify marijuana. Attorneys and medical marijuana advocates accuse Michigan prosecutors of pressuring the state’s crime lab to falsely classify the origins of THC found in hash oils and marijuana edibles as “origin unknown.”
Prosecutors exploited the ambiguity to charge medical marijuana users for possession of synthetic THC, despite the fact that the personal use of medical marijuana has been legal in Michigan since it was approved by voters in 2008. Under Michigan law, possession of synthetic THC constitutes a felony, whereas possession of marijuana and its derivatives by someone who is not a licensed medical marijuana user is a misdemeanor.
The emails were obtained by Michael Komorn, lead lawyer for Max Lorincz, a medical marijuana patient who lost custody of his child and now faces felony charges after the lab’s misleading classification of hash oil found in his home.
“I’d never seen a lab report reporting origin unknown,” Komorn told The Intercept. “What was produced for us was the most unbelievable set of documents I’ve ever seen.”
The emails show that as Michigan forensic scientists debated how to classify oil and wax produced from marijuana plants, they were pressured by police and prosecutors to classify the products in a way that would facilitate harsher drug convictions.
“It is highly doubtful,” a forensic scientist named Scott Penabaker wrote in May 2013, “that any of these Med. Mari. products we are seeing have THC that was synthesized. This would be completely impractical.” And in February 2014, the supervisor of Lansing, Michigan’s controlled substances unit, Bradley Choate, wrote that a misleading identification of THC “could lead to the wrong charge of possession of synthetic THC and the ultimate wrongful conviction of an individual.” Lab inspector John Bowen, referring to the THC in edibles and oils, agreed: “Is it likely that someone went to the trouble to manufacture THC and two other cannabinoids, mix them up, and bake them into a pan of brownies? Of course not.”
Despite the unlikelihood that Lorincz and others were somehow cooking up synthetic THC, Andy Fias, a state police lieutenant with West Michigan’s regional drug task force, reached out to the Forensic Science Division in January 2015. “We are encountering a significant amount of THC wax and oil,” he wrote. “If we were to seized [sic] the wax/oil from a card carrying patient or caregiver and it comes back as marijuana, we will not have PC [probable cause] for the arrests.”
Fias had heard that lab analysts were classifying some oil as marijuana rather than THC. He asked: “Is there a way to get this changed? Our prosecutors are willing to argue that one speck of marijuana does not turn the larger quantity of oil/wax into marijuana.”
That aggressive — and intellectually dishonest — prosecutorial mindset explains what happened to Lorincz last year.
On September 24, 2014, Lorincz called 911 from his Spring Lake, Michigan, home when his wife experienced an emergency. “The paramedics came in to assist my wife, and while they were assisting my wife the sheriff came in from the outside,” the 35-year-old father told me. It was then that the officer discovered hash oil on the kitchen counter. “The whole thing is ridiculous,” said Lorincz, who at the time possessed a Michigan medical marijuana card. “I didn’t commit any crime.”
Authorities didn’t see it that way.
The Ottawa County Prosecuting Attorney’s office, led by Ronald Frantz, charged Lorincz with misdemeanor marijuana possession. Instead of pleading guilty, he fought the charge on the grounds that his medical marijuana card allowed him to legally possess the hash. Prosecutors responded in February by charging Lorincz with possession of synthetic THC, a felony.
Because the crime lab claimed to be unable to determine the origin of the THC in the hash oil, prosecutors were able to allege that Lorincz’s oil was not made from marijuana.
Jeff Frazier, a former ACLU attorney who is also working on Lorincz’s case, accuses the state’s prosecutors of circumventing the medical marijuana law passed in 2008 because of their intense opposition to marijuana.
“The lab is intentionally reporting nonexistent felonies,” said Frazier, “and the prosecutors are going after medical marijuana patients with these lab reports that are fraudulent.”
Activists believe that Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette may be behind the pressure on the crime lab. In 2008 Schuette led the opposition to the successful initiative. “He’s been opposed to medical marijuana since the get-go and has used his office to circumvent the law,” said Charmie Gholson, a drug policy reform advocate based in Michigan.
Gregoire Michaud, director of Michigan’s Forensic Science Division, wrote in a July 2013 email that “In my meeting with PAAM [Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan] it was decided that any questions regarding law interpretation (e.g., recent controlled substance cases) will be directed thru the applicable Technical Director who will then reach out to Mr. Ken Stecker.”
Kenneth Stecker, an official with PAAM, stridently opposes medical marijuana usage and in a 2012 speech said, “I literally every night look at websites, blogs, everything for two to three hours dealing with the medical marijuana issue.” At the time, Stecker said that he had given “over 150, 200 presentations” on the “hornet’s nest” of medical marijuana.
A December 2013 email quotes Stecker as saying, “THC is a schedule 1 drug regardless of where it comes from.” He neglected to mention that penalties for possession very much depend on where it comes from.
John Collins, a former director of the Forensic Science Division, told Fox 17 television, which first reported Lorincz’s case earlier this year, that prosecutors were playing politics with science. “In my experience, it was just a nonstop political game that really got frustrating, and it wore down the morale of our staff, and it quite honestly, it wore me down.”
“It was really a big deal for me to let people understand that our laboratories were not in the prosecution business, they’re not in the conviction business, they’re in the science business,” Collins told Fox 17. “And if we don’t position ourselves as being in the science business, then we really start to go down a path that’s going to lead us to a lot of trouble.”
The Michigan State Police provided the following statement:
The ultimate decision on what to charge an individual with rests with the prosecutor. The role of the laboratory is to determine whether marihuana or THC are present. Michigan State Police laboratory policy was changed to include the statement “origin unknown” when it is not possible to determine if THC originates from a plant (marihuana) or synthetic means. This change makes it clear that the source of the THC should not be assumed from the lab results.
Bill Schuette and Ronald Frantz did not respond to requests for comment. Kenneth Stecker declined to comment.
Meanwhile, Max Lorincz’s life remains in limbo, and his 6-year-old son is in foster care. Currently, he gets a few hours per week of visitation, but father and son have been apart for over a year now.
“It’s been the worst year of me and my wife’s life,” Lorincz said. “You’re talking about taking away an entire year of bonding with our son. It’s something we can never get back.”
This isn’t the first time conviction-hungry Michigan prosecutors have destroyed the lives of medical marijuana users.
In 2014, prosecutors charged Kent County sheriff’s sergeant Timothy Bernhardt with running a drug house because he received and distributed marijuana butter. Bernhardt was a licensed medical marijuana patient but not a licensed caregiver and thus was not permitted to distribute the drug to other users.
In a lab report from Bernhardt’s case, the crime lab classified Bernhardt’s marijuana butter as THC and investigators claimed to be unable to identify its origin. Armed with that report, prosecutors in Kent County went after Bernhardt with full force. Bernhardt eventually pleaded guilty to the drug house charge and was forced to resign after 22 years with the department, even though the butter was being used for medical purposes. He faced up to two years in prison, but a month before the sentencing hearing he killed himself.
“They killed him,” said Gholson. “They have blood on their hands.”
Just days before Bernhardt’s suicide, a Kent County prosecutor named Tim McMorrow told a state court that Michigan voters, despite their overwhelming approval of medical marijuana, do not have the final say. “The voters do not have a right to adopt anything they want,” McMorrrow said. “Something doesn’t become valid because the voters voted for it.”
Article By – Juan Thompson – Nov. 14 2015, 8:43 a.m.
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Intercept
The Intercept is an online publication launched in February 2014 by First Look Media, the news organization created and funded by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.[2]
Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill are the editors. The magazine serves as a platform to report on the documents released by Edward Snowden in the short term, and to “produce fearless, adversarial journalism across a wide range of issues” in the long term
“A primary function of The Intercept is to insist upon and defend our press freedoms from those who wish to infringe them. We are determined to move forward with what we believe is essential reporting in the public interest and with a commitment to the ideal that a truly free and independent press is a vital component of any healthy democratic society. […] Our focus in this very initial stage will be overwhelmingly on the NSA story. We will use all forms of digital media for our reporting. We will publish original source documents on which our reporting is based. We will have reporters in Washington covering reactions to these revelations and the ongoing reform efforts. We will provide commentary from our journalists, including the return of Glenn Greenwald’s regular column. We will engage with our readers in the comment section. We will host outside experts to write op-eds and contribute news items.
Our longer-term mission is to provide aggressive and independent adversarial journalism across a wide range of issues, from secrecy, criminal and civil justice abuses and civil liberties violations to media conduct, societal inequality and all forms of financial and political corruption. The editorial independence of our journalists will be guaranteed, and they will be encouraged to pursue their journalistic passion, areas of interest, and unique voices.
We believe the prime value of journalism is that it imposes transparency, and thus accountability, on those who wield the greatest governmental and corporate power. Our journalists will be not only permitted, but encouraged, to pursue stories without regard to whom they might alienate.”
Council to hear from public on location of marijuana dispensaries
DETROIT FREE PRESS
The Detroit City Council has set a public hearing on zoning regulations for medical marijuana shops at 1 p.m. Dec. 17, 2015.
The Detroit City Council today set a public hearing for next month on its proposal to regulate medical marijuana distribution in the city.
The council will hold the hearing at 1 p.m. Dec. 17 on zoning restrictions that will govern where pot dispensaries can and cannot locate in Detroit. It is to be the companion legislation to measures that the council approved in October requiring dispensaries to be licensed by the city and shop operators to be subject to police background checks.
Detroit has seen a proliferation of more than 150 unlicensed and unregulated dispensaries in recent years, and it’s taken a year for city officials to thoroughly research and prepare a regulatory system that will both limit the number of dispensaries and ensure that medical marijuana patients have safe access to the drug, according to Councilman James Tate, who has spearheaded the regulation effort.
Councilman Scott Benson, a vocal critic of the dispensaries who says many of them are merely fronts for recreational put use, sought to have the zoning ordinance changed to prohibit dispensaries from locating in the vast majority of commercial or retail strip malls in the city, but that motion was outvoted.
Councilwoman Raquel Castañeda-López also sought to have the ordinance prohibit clustering of dispensary operations in industrial areas of the city, saying that would hurt residents who live near industrial areas. Her motion also was outvoted.
The zoning ordinance’s restrictions mandate that dispensaries not be located within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, drug-free zones, caregiver centers and liquor stores.
Dispensary owners and advocates of medical marijuana have argued that the city’s restrictions would leave few areas of the city where dispensaries could operate legally, reducing access for people who use marijuana for legitimate medical needs. But residents have flooded public meetings on the issue, saying their neighborhoods have been overrun by pot shops.
On Tuesday, November 10th, the Warren City Council held a public hearing regarding a proposed medical marijuana ordinance being championed by Mayor Jim Fouts. Fouts claims the ordinance is in response to concerns about growing medical marijuana in residential areas, including a house explosion on Harold street on September 28th that was reportedly due to butane hash oil extraction being performed inside of the home.
The Warren ordinance seeks to:
• Prohibit the consumption of marihuana in any area of any property open to the public or in a non-public area of a property where the owner has prohibited it
• Prohibit the transfer of marihuana at a caregiver’s residential dwelling
• Prohibit the odor of marihuana from being emitted beyond the interior of a structure
• Demands ventilation, filtration, and exhaust equipment to control the odor of marihuana
• Prohibits the growing, manufacturing, or processing of marihuana by a caregiver outside of an M-1 or M-2 industrial district. A qualifying patient may grow marihuana in their home, but only after registering and submitting a plan with the city’s building department and allowing inspections by both the building and fire departments
• Demands that, if a fire occurs as a result of the growth, cultivation, or processing of medical marihuana, that the qualifying patient be responsible for all emergency response costs or injuries which result
• Demands that when medical marihuana is transported inside of a motor vehicle, that it only be done in a sealed and locked container which is not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.
Violation of the proposed ordinance would be misdemeanors.
During public testimony, Southfield attorney Michael Komorn said, “There is an old saying for lawyers: When you don’t have the facts, argue the law, and when you don’t have the law, argue the facts.” Komorn went on to say, “After reading these proposed amendments, I can tell they have neither.”
Attorney after attorney echoed Komorn’s sentiment, stating the proposed ordinance was unconstitutional and in direct conflict with the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act as well the Supreme Court opinion issued in Ter Beek v City of Wyoming.
In addition, several residents also testified about how they would be negatively affected should the ordinance pass.
After enduring 2 hours of public testimony, of which none was in support of the ordinance, Council President Cecil St Pierre stated that the Council had “received an education” regarding the proposed ordinance and a motion was passed to table the first reading of the ordinance for further discussion by the committee of the whol
e. Several Council members, including Council Secretary Scott Stevens, pressed to have a motion to deny heard – a vote, however, never materialized. It is expected that a revised ordinance will appear on the Council’s agenda sometime in the next several months.
