Detroit — City voters on Tuesday will decide whether to decriminalize psychedelic plants and if Detroit’s charter should be amended to allow for citizen-driven ballot initiatives that impact city spending.
Voter-initiated Proposal E asks Detroiters if they believe the personal possession and therapeutic use of entheogenic plants like psilocybin mushrooms or peyote should be decriminalized to the fullest extent permitted under Michigan law.
If passed, the measure would not legalize the use and possession of psychedelics but it would make it the city’s lowest law enforcement priority.
A second measure, Proposal S, seeks to amend a section of Detroit’s City Charter to allow voters to push ordinances that include appropriating money.
The initiatives are among three being decided by Detroit voters in the general election. City voters on Nov. 2 also will decide if a task force should be created to consider reparations for residents.
If you are interested in opening a cannabis business in Michigan you will need an attorney. Selecting a law firm is important and choosing one who has been fighting for medical marijuana patients and caregivers, adult recreational use and the legal rights of their clients for over 27 years is one of the first steps in achieving your goal in becoming a cannabis entrepreneur. Selecting an attorney who you are comfortable with and can develop a relationship with is extremely important. Search the internet and research our law firm and see how involved we are in the marijuana community. To learn more contact the office 248-357-2550 or do some research on the website Komorn Law.
Proposal E goes to Detroit voters after Democratic state Sens. Jeff Irwin of Ann Arbor and Adam Hollier of Detroit last month introduced a bill to decriminalize two popular psychedelic drugs in a bid to make them available for therapeutic use.
Under Senate Bill 631, possession and use of psilocybin, commonly known as magic mushrooms, and mescaline, found in cacti that is comparable to LSD, would be “exempt from criminal prosecution in certain circumstances.”
Todd Perkins, an attorney who founded the People’s Voice, a nonprofit advocating for the formation of a reparations task force and Proposal S, has called Proposal S a “gateway” to reparations that empowers voters.
Proposal R, which asks whether Detroit should form a committee to consider reparations for residents
DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything – do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain.
Summary:Komorn Law has won another case in Circuit Court. The Judge suppressed the 26 pounds of marijuana of evidence seized following a traffic stop and then lead to the dismissal of the case. The police conducted an unlawful inventory search, contrary to the police department’s established procedures.
Circuit Court Opinion of the Month: Unlawful Inventory Search The Honorable Julie A. O’Neill, of the 56A Judicial District Court, in May suppressed evidence seized following a traffic stop and then dismissed the case.
Judge O’Neill found that police conducted an unlawful inventory search, contrary to the police department’s established procedures, and, pursuant to People v. Toohey, 438 Mich. 265; 475 N.W.2d 16 (1991), the improperly seized evidence had to be suppressed.
Once the evidence was suppressed, there was no evidence to support bindover to circuit court, so the case was dismissed. The defendant was stopped by Potterville Police Chief Barry for speeding and improper use of a turn signal. The defendant did not have on his person his driver’s license, but subsequent investigation revealed that the defendant was properly licensed and had no outstanding warrants.
Chief Barry, upon approaching the pickup truck, saw a black plastic trash bag on the passenger seat; the Chief, who later testified he could smell marijuana, asked the driver multiple times about the contents of the bag; the defendant replied that it was trash.
The defendant also replied that he had some marijuana wax in his possession. Backup arrived, and the defendant was told to exit the vehicle; he complied and then locked it. He consented to a search of his person but declined a request by police to search the truck.
The driver was handcuffed and placed into the Chief’s vehicle. Officers looked through the windows of the pickup and noticed another plastic trash bag in the behind the seats, as well as a smaller plastic bag with a leafy, green substance visible.
The Chief called a prosecutor, who advised that an arrest could be made for the misdemeanor of not having a license in his possession. The driver was arrested. Later, 6 Criminal Defense Newsletter June 2021 during a search of the pickup truck, just over 26 pounds of marijuana was found.
The defendant challenged the arrest as illegal because, he argued, he constructively possessed his license. His wife was able to text a photo of the license, which Chief Barry was able to observe.
Judge O’Neill rejected that argument and held that the statute, M.C.L. 257.311, expressly requires a driver to have an operator’s license “in his or her immediate possession at all times.”
The defendant also challenged the inventory search as illegal, and Judge O’Neill, as noted above, agreed. The Toohey case requires that inventory searches be conducted “in accordance with established departmental procedures … and must Reports and Studies not be used as a pretext for criminal investigation.”
Judge O’Neill rejected the prosecution arguments, which included that police had probable cause to search due to either plain-view or the automobile exception.
June 25, 2021 – Michigan’s Marijuana Regulatory Agency – in conjunction with the Michigan Public Service Commission, the Bureau of Fire Services, the Dept. of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, and electric providers in the state of Michigan – today produced and distributed materials to inform Michigan residents growing marijuana in their homes about the best ways to keep themselves, their neighbors, and their community safe while continuing to protect Michigan’s electric grid.
Michigan residents with medical marijuana patient and caregiver registration cards have been able to grow a limited number of marijuana plants in their homes since 2008. After Michigan voters legalized marijuana in 2018, Michigan residents over the age of 21 have also been able to grow up to 12 plants at their home. These developments have resulted in an influx of new residential marijuana grows that have a major impact on Michigan’s electric grid.
Since the energy demand for growing marijuana plants is so intensive – often requiring nonstop grow lights, ventilation systems, and other high-demand equipment – it is essential residential marijuana growers understand the impact the increased energy usage in their homes may have on their safety, the safety of their communities, and the safety of electrical workers and first responders.
A Michigan resident growing 12 plants in a home can increase that home’s energy demand by 2.75 times. Maximizing the 72-plant limit for a medical marijuana caregiver’s residential grow operation could result in energy usage equivalent to the average use of 10.75 houses.
Residential marijuana growers should understand the proper steps to take while planning their grow operation to ensure their safety, as well as the protection of their home and utility equipment. Overloading electrical equipment can create fire hazards and damage electrical equipment, which can also lead to extended power outages in your community.
Growing marijuana in a home is a legal right and it must be done safely and responsibly. Before starting a home grow, individuals should:
become familiar with local rules and ordinances
hire a licensed electrical contractor
contact their local utility to ensure their electrical service is sized appropriately to serve the increased energy demand
When residential growers work together with their electric company, significant damage can be avoided, including:
Unanticipated significant overloading can lead to catastrophic failure of utility and customer-owned equipment. If a significant customer load is added before the energy provider has an opportunity to review and utility equipment is damaged as a result, the customer causing the issue may be held responsible for associated costs of repair. There could be lengthy delays in the restoration of service. The utility must determine what caused the issue, find out what the true load sizes are, and upgrade its equipment to serve it.
In addition to damaging the equipment of the customer that added the significant load, there could be possible damage to property of other customers receiving service from the same transformer. This damage can range from appliances to sensitive electronics, smart TVs, computers and more.
Structural fire dangers are by far the worst-case scenario for marijuana home grows. When circuits are overloaded beyond their rating, it becomes a hazard and the cost associated with this kind of incident is immeasurable as it has the potential to cause death in addition to widespread damage to the electrical system and people’s property.
The Michigan Public Service Commission’s website has important information available for Michigan residents, including:
DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything – do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain.
MOUNT CLEMENS — Mount Clemens is one step closer to adopting a medical marijuana caregiver facility ordinance.
At the April 5 Mount Clemens City Commission meeting, one item up for discussion was introducing and reading the ordinance, which was approved in a 4-2 vote. Its April 19 meeting, after press time, was set for when the ordinance adoption could happen.
Commissioners Ron Campbell and Laura Fournier voted no. Commissioner Denise Mentzer was absent from the meeting.
In November, the commission adopted a resolution establishing a moratorium on issuance of any permits, certificates or approvals relating to patient caregiver cultivation of marijuana.
“The city has experienced a number of cooperatives in vacant industrial or commercial buildings where multiple caregivers have gone into one building, fenced it off and are growing plants as if they had a growers license under the Medical Marijuana Ordinance,” Mount Clemens City Attorney Michael Murrary said.
Murray added that the ordinance provides for caregivers to be restricted to single-family residences. The ordinance would permit two caregivers per home, with each residence being the principal dwelling for each caregiver.
DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything – do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain.
The U.S. house just passed the The SAFE Banking Act (H.R.1996 — 117th Congress 2021-2022). The act would establish a safe space for financial institutions to engage in cannabis commerce.
The SAFE Banking Act is a first step in ensuring that state regulated markets can operate openly in the banking system. Still according to federal law these state markets are running a criminal enterprise as marijuana is still (as of 4/20/21) on the controlled substance list as a CS1. But the IRS still want it’s money anyway and reminded marijuana businesses through the IRS 280E that they are illegal and still have to pay taxes.
Summary: H.R.1996 — 117th Congress (2021-2022)
Secure and Fair Enforcement Banking Act of 2021 or the SAFE Banking Act of 2021
This bill generally prohibits a federal banking regulator from penalizing a depository institution for providing banking services to a legitimate cannabis-related business. Prohibited penalties include terminating or limiting the deposit insurance or share insurance of a depository institution solely because the institution provides financial services to a legitimate cannabis-related business and prohibiting or otherwise discouraging a depository institution from offering financial services to such a business.
Additionally, proceeds from a transaction involving activities of a legitimate cannabis-related business are not considered proceeds from unlawful activity. Proceeds from unlawful activity are subject to anti-money laundering laws.
Furthermore, a depository institution is not, under federal law, liable or subject to asset forfeiture for providing a loan or other financial services to a legitimate cannabis-related business.
The bill also provides that a federal banking agency may not request or order a depository institution to terminate a customer account unless (1) the agency has a valid reason for doing so, and (2) that reason is not based solely on reputation risk. Valid reasons for terminating an account include threats to national security and involvement in terrorist financing, including state sponsorship of terrorism.
Starting A Cannabis Business?
Start it right from the beginning – by choosing the right legal team
DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything – do your research on Official Government and State Sites, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain.
Komorn Law is proud to report a significant and relevant case victory directly related to our recent Michigan Court of Appeals Opinion win in the People v. Thue case where as a registered medical marijuana patient cannot be penalized for consuming medical marihuana while on probation.
The Client Issue
Our client was charged with violating his probation for allegedly testing positive for “Marihuana” on 2 occasions. The allegations were based upon a urine test which both indicated the metabolite of Delta-9 THC, Carboxy -11/ COOH-11.
Our client was certified as a medical marihuana patient after the date of the first alleged violation but before the second alleged violation. We had filed several motions, including but not limited to, a “Motion to allow for the Medical Use of Marihauana While on Probation”.
A probation violation hearing began on January 14, 2021, whereby testimony was taken, from the probation officer, and our expert.
Our position and the evidence we presented established that the urine samples indicating the metabolite Carboxy-11 COOH-11, were from a lawful source. The matter was adjourned, mid hearing.
Return to Court
On February 22, 2021 – when we appeared before the court again in person, we were happy to hear the court had read and reviewed the People v,.Thue case, commented on our involvement, and was prepared to rule on the allegations regarding the 2 positive urine tests.
Because of the People v,Thue case our previous position regarding “lawful THC” became moot.
In summary the court found that because of the current valid medical marihuana patient status of my client, he could not be revoked from probation, for either violation. That is to say, that the allegation of his use prior to becoming a registered medical marihuana patient (and the allegation after he became a certified patient) were dismissed.
“Counsel, that is my interpretation of the case” the Court said. To which I replied, I agree that is the correct interpretation.
The Court dismissed both of the violation, and amended the sentencing order to allow for the medical use of cannabis while on bond.
Huge shout out to our client for his courage in wanting to assert his rights and challenge the allegations, the legal defense team at Komorn Law PLLC, and Dr. Land for his expertise in science and assistance in presenting our case.
