LARA-MMFLA-How does the application process work

LARA-MMFLA-How does the application process work

How does the application process work and who can apply for a license?

 

Anyone — individual or business — who feels that they can satisfy statutory and administrative rule requirements for a marihuana facility license may apply for a license.  The BMMR will begin accepting applications on December 15, 2017.

There is no deadline to complete the application process.

On December 15, 2017, LARA will begin accepting online or paper form applications, utilizing a two-step application process for medical marihuana facility licensing:

  1. Pre-Qualification
  2. License Qualification

This two-step process will allow applicants to begin the application process by completing step one before a location for the medical marihuana facility is established. If applicants have a location secured, they will have the option of submitting step one and step two materials at the same time.

Step One – Pre-Qualification

The first step is Pre-Qualification which includes a full background check of the applicant and all supplemental applicants. This includes – but is not limited to – individuals or businesses with an ownership interest (direct or indirect) in the applicant. As part of the Pre-Qualification (step one), applicants must disclose those individuals and businesses with an indirect or direct ownership interest. Applicants should refer to Sections 401 and 404 of the MMFLA to determine which individuals or businesses must be included in the disclosure.

Before an applicant’s Pre-Qualification (step one) materials can be reviewed, the applicant must pay the $6000 application fee. Until the $6000 application fee is paid, BMMR will not be able to process the application. After the application is processed, BMMR will notify applicants and supplemental applicants when and where fingerprints will be collected.  Local law enforcement agencies will not collect fingerprints for BMMR and BMMR will not accept fingerprint reports completed by applicants before the applicants are instructed to have their fingerprints collected.

Pre-Qualification (step one) may be completed before an applicant has a physical location for its business.

Step Two – License Qualification

The second step is the License Qualification. If applicants have a location secured, they will have the option of submitting step one and step two materials at the same time. License Qualification requires information specific to the physical location of the applicant’s business. An applicant cannot be issued a license until all requirements in the MMFLA and administrative rules are met.

Under Section 205 of the MMFLA, the Department cannot issue a license to a facility intending to operate in a municipality unless the municipality has enacted an ordinance authorizing marihuana facilities to operate within the municipal boundaries. An applicant’s physical location will need to be located in a municipality with an ordinance compliant with Section 205 requirements. Any questions about municipal ordinances should be directed toward the appropriate municipal authority.

While an application is being processed, staff of BMMR will be in communication with applicants regarding additional requirements in statute or administrative rule, including pre-licensure investigation.

After notification of License Qualification (step two) approval from BMMR, an applicant will need to pay a regulatory assessment for each license the applicant is issued.

Grower A license regulatory assessments are capped, by statute, at $10,000.

The regulatory assessment for Grower B-C, Processor, Transporter, and Provisioning Center licenses will be dependent on the number of total licenses subject to assessment and could be as low as $10,000 or as high as $57,000.

The exact amount of the regulatory assessment is not available at this time. There is no regulatory assessment for Safety Compliance Facilities.

https://www.michigan.gov/lara/0,4601,7-154-78089_83746-454499–,00.html

 


Komorn Law has represented numerous clients through the legal chaos of starting up a business in the Michigan Medical Marihuana Industry.

Contact Us For More Information.

800-656-3557

FDA Approval of CBD for Epilepsy Treatment

FDA Approval of CBD for Epilepsy Treatment

Statement by FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on the importance of conducting proper research to prove safe and effective medical uses for the active chemicals in marijuana and its components.

 

Over the past decade, we’ve seen a growing interest in the development of therapies derived from marijuana and its components. Proponents of “medical marijuana” advertised its uses for a wide number of medical conditions, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety – just to name a few of the touted conditions. The FDA has been supportive of research in this area for many years. But marijuana is a Schedule I compound with known risks. Research to demonstrate that marijuana or its components could be safe and effective in the treatment of medical disorders should be held to the same standard as other drug compounds. And certainly it should not be held to a lower standard, as some proponents would suggest. The FDA has an active program to assist drug developers who want to investigate marijuana or its components through properly controlled clinical trials, to demonstrate the potential for safe and effective uses.

Today, the FDA approved a purified form of the drug cannabidiol (CBD). This is one of more than 80 active chemicals in marijuana. The new product was approved to treat seizures associated with two rare, severe forms of epilepsy in patients two years of age and older.

 

This product approval demonstrates that advancing sound scientific research to investigate ingredients derived from marijuana can lead to important therapies. This new treatment provides new options for patients.

This is an important medical advance. But it’s also important to note that this is not an approval of marijuana or all of its components. This is the approval of one specific CBD medication for a specific use. And it was based on well-controlled clinical trials evaluating the use of this compound in the treatment of a specific condition. Moreover, this is a purified form of CBD. It’s being delivered to patients in a reliable dosage form and through a reproducible route of delivery to ensure that patients derive the anticipated benefits. This is how sound medical science is advanced.

So today, in addition to celebrating this scientific achievement and the medical advance that it represents for these patients and their families, we should also reflect on the path that made this possible. It’s a path that’s available to other product developers who want to bring forth marijuana-derived products through appropriate drug development programs.

That pathway includes a robust clinical development program, along with careful review through the FDA’s drug approval process. This is the most appropriate way to bring these treatments to patients. This process also includes a review of the purity of a new drug and manufacturing controls. Before a high-quality drug can be developed, evaluated, and eventually approved by the FDA; it’s critical that the necessary work is done to identify drugs of potential medical benefit and conduct rigorous scientific research through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials. This is true for all drugs, including ones derived from plant materials, like marijuana. And the FDA remains committed to collaborating with federal and state agencies, researchers and product developers on advancing this type of important and conscientious work.

This research process – from early development through preclinical and clinical research – gives us a comprehensive understanding of a new drug. That includes an understanding of whether the new product is safe and effective for treating a particular medical condition, what the proper dosage is and for what populations it is safe and effective, how the new compound could interact with other drugs, or whether the new drug has side effects or other safety concerns.

This work also helps product developers identify the appropriate dosage needed to achieve the desired therapeutic effect while minimizing toxicity and risk. Taken in totality, the scientific evidence generated by these studies forms the basis of the FDA’s evaluation of benefit versus risk. And it’s because of this careful, scientific and evidence-based evaluation by the FDA that health care providers can rely on having a quality product that delivers a consistent, uniform dose of an effective medication that is able to deliver a predictable treatment to patients. This is especially important when considering treatment for serious medical conditions that will be utilized in the clinical care of patients who may have any number of health vulnerabilities. The purified form of the drug CBD approved today by the FDA has been shown to meet these rigorous standards.

Research on the therapeutic effects of marijuana and its components involves a number of federal agencies in addition to the FDA, including the National Institute on Drug Abuse, part of the National Institutes of Health, and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The FDA has taken several specific steps to support this research.

We meet regularly with researchers as they plan and carry out their trials. We have also formed a Botanicals Team that provides scientific expertise on botanical issues for researchers developing drugs derived from plants, such as marijuana. That team published guidance for industry on clinical studies involving botanical drugs, as well as quality controls for lot-to-lot consistency. In recent years, the agency also has recommended to the DEA the approval of several hundred Schedule I research protocol licenses for research on marijuana or its constituent compounds.

Additionally, the FDA also works with companies to provide patients access to experimental therapies while clinical trials are ongoing through expanded access provisions. These approaches help protect patients while also allowing for the collection of data necessary to support the FDA approval of safe and effective therapies for use in the broader population. Through this process, hundreds of children were able to get access to investigational CBD products while this product was being studied.

Drugs derived from marijuana also are eligible for several programs that are intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs that address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions. Much of the work we’ve done to encourage research in this area has led to the approval action we took today.

The FDA will continue to support rigorous scientific research on potential medical treatments using marijuana and its components that seek to be developed through the appropriate scientific channels. However, we remain concerned about the proliferation and illegal marketing of unapproved CBD-containing products with unproven medical claims.

The promotion and use of these unapproved products may keep some patients from accessing appropriate, recognized therapies to treat serious and even fatal diseases. The FDA has taken recent actions against companies distributing unapproved CBD products. These products have been marketed in a variety of formulations, such as oil drops, capsules, syrups, teas, and topical lotions and creams. These companies have claimed that various CBD products could be used to treat or cure serious diseases such as cancer with no scientific evidence to support such claims. We’ll continue to take action when we see the illegal marketing of CBD-containing products with unproven medical claims. We’re especially concerned when these products are marketed for serious or life threatening diseases, where the illegal promotion of an unproven compound could discourage a patient from seeking other therapies that have proven benefits.

Today’s approval demonstrates our commitment to the scientific process and working with product developers to bring marijuana-based products to market. We remain committed to our gold standard for product development and review. Such a process ensures that any new therapies from marijuana and its constituents are safe, effective and manufactured to a high and consistent quality. And most importantly, that these products have been proven safe and effective for patients.

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.

LARA-BMMR Bulletin-Safety Compliance Facilities Testing

LARA-BMMR Bulletin-Safety Compliance Facilities Testing

On March 14, 2018 The Dept. of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) has posted a revised technical bulletin for clarification on testing and accreditation standards.

The bulletin refers to Safety Compliance FacilitiesTesting, The purpose of the bulletin is intended to address requests for clarification on Rule31(6) and (7) of the Emergency Rules filed on December 4, 2017.

This bulletin can be viewed at the following links

Komorn Law – PDF Link

State of Michigan – LARA link

 

MMMA all government statistics, reports, grants and analysis

MMMA all government statistics, reports, grants and analysis

Michael Komorn is an expert Michigan Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Lawyer, but staying an expert requires one to keep track of all of the MMMA reports, policies, notices and Administrative rules.

Many departments within the Michigan state government have issued policies on the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, this page attempts to collect them. While these government policies cannot be relied upon as legal advice, they may be used as guidance in some circumstances.

This page may be missing some reports.

 

Administrative Rules  
MMMA Administrative Rules (outdated)
 
MSHDA Policy on Medical Marijuana  
House Fiscal Analysis on 2014 LARA MMMA admin rules.  
MMP New Rules 2015 Announcement  
Lara Medical Marihuana Written Certification guidelines  
Director of the Bureau of Tax Policy at the MI Department of Treasury letter on medical marijuana 2011  
MSHDA ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN proposed changes re MMMA.  

 

Statistics  
2009 – 2010 MMMA Financial report  
2009 MMMA Statistic Report  
2010 MMMA Statistic Report  
2011 MMMA Financial report  
2011 MMMA Statistics report  
2011 MMMA Statistic Report
2012 MMMA Report Statistics  
2013 MMMA Registry ID cards report  
2013 MMMA Statistic Report  
2013 MMMA Registry ID cards Report  
2014 MMMA Statistical Report  
2014 MMMA Registry ID cards Report  
2014 MMMA Statistic report  
2015 MMMA statistic report  
2015 MMMA Financial Report  
2015 MMMA Statistic report  
2016 MMMA Statistical Report  
2017 MMMA Statistical Report  
Auditor General Audit on LARA MMM Program  
AUDIT RESPONSE SUMMARY Performance Audit of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Program  
 FEASIBILITY AND COST OF OUTSOURCING THE MEDICAL MARIHUANA PROGRAM  
MDOC 2012 Statistical Report MMMA crimes  
MDOC 2013 Statistical Report MMMA crimes  
MDOC 2014 Statistical Report MMMA crimes  

 

LARA determinations and documents  
Final Determination of Asthma petition  
Final Determination of Autism petition  
Final Determination of Autism petition  
Final Determination of Retinitis Pigmentosa petition  
Final Determination of Parkinsons disease petition  
Final Determination of PTSD petition  
Final Determination of Parkinson’s Disease petition  
Final Determination of Autism petition  
LARA MMMA Frequently Asked Questions  2013
Final Determination of Insomnia petition  
Final Determination of Manic Depression petition  
Final Determination of PTSD petition  
LARA MMMA Reduced Fee Eligibility  2013
Notice of Public Hearing for Retinitis Pigmentosa petition  
Review Panel Meeting Minutes 4-27-18  04-27-2018

 

MMMA Law Enforcement Grants  
2018 Medical Marihuana Grant County Allotments  
2015 Medical Marihuana Grants APPLICATION  
2015 Medical Marihuana Grants County Info  
2016 Medical Marijuana Grants Money by County  
2016 Medical Marijuana Grants Report  
2017 Medical Marihuana Operation and Oversight Grants  
2017 Legislative Transfer  
2017 Medical Marihuana Grant Application
2016 Medical Marihuana Grant Report  
Grants Allotment for 2017  

 

Michigan Judicial Institute MMMA documents  
Controlled Substances Bench Book  
Section 4 Flowchart  
Section 8 Flowchart  

 

MSP MMMA documents  
MSP training on Medical Marijuana  
Archived MSP Legal Updates  
Medical Marihuana ID Card samples  
MSP Legal Update No 78  
MSP Legal Update No 89  
MSP Legal Update No 96  
MSP Legal Update No 99  
MSP Legal Update No 102  
MSP Legal Update No 103  
MSP Legal Update No 122  
MSP Order 53  

 

Misc Departmental policies and info  
FIP Substance Use Disorder Pilot Policy on MMMA  
Senate Financial Analysis on repealing Improper Transport statute  
LARA Curriculum MODEL CORE APRIL 2013  
2015 lawsuits against the state of Michigan – $550k Medical Marijuana lawsuit settlement with Medversant  
Treasury Department RAB_2018-2 MMMA Taxes  
Treasury Department Policy 2016
State Emergency Relief policy on MMMA
Michigan Energy Assistance Program Policy and Procedure Manual on MMMA
Governor’s traffic safety advisory commission 9-12-17 minutes
MCOLES February 15, 2017 meeting minutes
MDHHS MATERNAL INFANT HEALTH PROGRAM – OPERATIONS GUIDE
Unemployment Insurance Agency Notice to Employers and Claimants Concerning Medical Marijuana

 

Original Proposal  
2008 State Ballot Proposal summaries  
Medical Marijuana Ballot Proposal of 2008  
MMMA Proposal 1 Questions and Answers  

 

LARA Internal Scorecards, timely reviewing of cards  
BMMR Scorecard  Dec 2017 
Lara October Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  Dec 2016
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  June 2017
LARA Scorecard  
LARA Scorecard  

 

Ken Stecker of PAAM materials and training of MSP and other Law enforcement agencies in Michigan on MMMA  
Training Announcement An Overview of Drugged Driving and the Medical Marihuana Law  
2010 Michigan Traffic Safety Summit Ken Stecker  
2014 Michigan Traffic Safety Summit Ken Stecker  
Ken Stecker Medical Marihuana 2009 presentation  
Michigan Impaired Driving Assessmet 2014  
Stecker Driving While Drugged 2011  
What Law Enforcement Needs to Know Enforcement Needs to Know Regarding Traffic Laws Regarding Traffic Laws 2009  
Impaired driving prevention FY2017
Is This What the Doctor Ordered Full
Is This What the Doctor Ordered – 1 (K Stecker)
Is This What the Doctor Ordered –  2 (K Stecker)
Is This What the Doctor Ordered –  3 (K Stecker)

Clearing the Air – Bill Schuette presentation

 

See Also all MMFLA applications, rules, forms etc.
https://komornlaw.com/mmfla-all-forms/

LARA-Medical Marihuana Regulation – House Bill 4209-HB4827 and HB4210-FAQ

LARA-Medical Marihuana Regulation – House Bill 4209-HB4827 and HB4210-FAQ

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

 

When can I apply for my license?

 

After December 15, 2017.

 

What does the Medical Marihuana Licensing Board (“the board”) do?

 

The Medical Marihuana Licensing Board is comprised of 5 members, appointed by the Governor (with input from the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House), to administer the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act. This includes reviewing applications, issuing licenses, revoking/suspending licenses, renewing licenses, and investigating individuals who are applying for licensure or complaints received about someone who holds a license.

 

What are the different licenses I can apply for?

 

You may apply for the following licenses:

 

Grower

Processor

Transporter

Provisioning Center

Safety Compliance Facility

 

What costs are associated with a license?

 

Payment to secure transporters for transferring marihuana, as needed;

Annual, nonrefundable fee (of up to $5,000) to be set by, and paid to, your local municipality.

 

These fees are used to offset administrative and enforcement costs associated with the operation of a marihuana facility in the municipality;

 

An application fee per category and class of license;

 

Investigation and processing fees not covered by the application fee;

 

An annual regulatory assessment fee;

 

A renewal fee;

 

Late fees if renewal fee is not paid on time;

 

Provisioning centers will pay 3% on gross retail receipts

 

 

Does my municipality have any involvement with my license?

 

Yes, a municipality (city, township or village) has the following involvement:

 

Must pass an ordinance which authorizes the type of facility you wish to open;

 

May limit the number of each type of facility within the municipality’s boundaries;

Any other ordinances relating to marihuana facilities;

 

May adopt zoning regulations relating to facilities within its jurisdiction;

 

The municipality must receive notice from you that you have applied for any one of the five licenses;

 

May establish an annual fee to be paid by you; the fee can be as much as $5,000.00;

 

Must approve your request to have your license transferred, sold or purchased.

 

Does my criminal history prevent me from obtaining a license?

 

It depends on whether the following are true:

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been convicted of or released from incarceration for a felony under the laws of this state, any other state, or the United States (federal law) within the past 10 years or has been convicted of a controlled substance-related felony within the past 10 years.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been convicted of a misdemeanor involving a controlled substance, theft, dishonesty, or fraud in any state within the past 5 years.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been found responsible for violating a local ordinance in any state involving a controlled substance, dishonesty, theft, or fraud that substantially corresponds to a misdemeanor in that state within the past 5 years.

 

The Board may take into consideration the following:

 

Whether the applicant has been indicted for, charged with, arrested for, or convicted of, pled guilty or nolo contendere to, forfeited bail concerning, or had expunged any relevant criminal offense under the laws of any jurisdiction, either felony or misdemeanor, not including traffic violations, regardless of whether the offense has been expunged, pardoned, or reversed on appeal or otherwise.

 

What prohibits a person from obtaining a license?

 

An applicant cannot obtain a license if any of the following is true:

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has knowingly submitted an application for a license under this act that contains false information.

 

The applicant cannot be a member of the Medical Marihuana Licensing Board.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she fails to demonstrate the ability to maintain

adequate premises liability and casualty insurance for its proposed marihuana facility (an insurance policy that covers at a minimum of $100,000).

 

The applicant cannot hold an elective office of a governmental unit of this state, another state, or the federal government; is a member of or employed by a regulatory body of a governmental unit in this state, another state, or the federal government; or is employed by a governmental unit of this state. This subdivision does not apply to an elected officer of or employee of a federally recognized Indian tribe or to an elected precinct delegate.

 

The applicant, if an individual, is ineligible if he or she has been a resident of this state for less than a continuous 2-year period immediately preceding the date of filing the application. This requirement does not apply after June 30, 2018.

 

The applicant is ineligible if the Board determines he or she failed comply with section 205(1).

 

The applicant fails to meet other criteria established by rule.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been convicted of or released from

incarceration for a felony under the laws of this state, any other state, or the United States (federal law) within the past 10 years or has been convicted of a controlled substance-related felony within the past 10 years.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been convicted of a misdemeanor involving a controlled substance, theft, dishonesty, or fraud in any state within the past 5 years.

 

The applicant is ineligible if he or she has been found responsible for violating a local ordinance in any state involving a controlled substance, dishonesty, theft, or fraud that substantially corresponds to a misdemeanor in that state within the past 5 years.

 

What other things may potentially prevent an applicant from getting approved for a license?

 

The Board may take into consideration the following:

 

The integrity, moral character, and reputation; personal and business probity; financial ability and experience; and responsibility or means to operate or maintain a marihuana facility of the applicant and of any other person that either:

 

Controls, directly or indirectly, the applicant.

 

Is controlled, directly or indirectly, by the applicant or by a person who controls, directly or indirectly, the applicant.

 

The financial ability of the applicant to purchase and maintain adequate liability and casualty insurance.

 

The sources and total amount of the applicant’s capitalization to operate and maintain the proposed marihuana facility.

 

Whether the applicant has filed, or had filed against it, a proceeding for bankruptcy within the past 7 years.

 

Whether the applicant has been served with a complaint or other notice filed with any public body regarding payment of any tax required under federal, state, or local law that has been delinquent for 1 or more years.

 

Whether the applicant has a history of noncompliance with any regulatory requirements in this state or any other jurisdiction.

 

Whether at the time of application the applicant is a defendant in litigation involving its business practices.

 

Whether the applicant meets other standards in rules applicable to the license category.

 

Whether the applicant has been indicted for, charged with, arrested for, or convicted of, pled guilty or nolo contendere to, forfeited bail concerning, or had expunged any relevant criminal offense under the laws of any jurisdiction, either felony or misdemeanor, not including traffic violations, regardless of whether the offense has been expunged, pardoned, or reversed on appeal or otherwise.

 

 

Where can I find more information on each type of license?

 

Details on each license category can be found in Part 5 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act, 2016 PA 281.

 

See-  http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-281-2016-PART-5-LICENSEES

 

https://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/LARA-Marihuana-Act-HB4209-HB4827-HB4210-Frequently-Asked-Questions.pdf

 

 

For more information visit these sites

 

More Info Regarding House Bills

Marihuana Act Business Development

MMMP.org

Komorn Law

Michigan Medical Marihuana

Cannabis/Medical Marijuana

Cannabis/Medical Marijuana

Patient Rights Under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act

Your Rights as a Qualified Patient

When a person qualifies under the current Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), they have certain rights as a patient.

1. They can possess up to 2.5 ounces of usable marijuana.

2. They can grow up to 12 marijuana plants so long as they keep them in a secure, locked facility.

3. If a person is growing the plants outdoors, they cannot be visible from outside of their property and should be within an enclosed locked structure.

4. They can have THC in their blood if accussed of driving under the influence.  A recreational user is subject to Michigan’s zero tolerance level which means if you consumed marijuana 4 days ago it is still in your system even if it is not affecting your behavior or judgement.

Note: Cannabis can stay in your system for 30 days or longer after one use.  A law firm such as Komorn Law should be able to get you through this.

As a patient or caregiver, they also need to register with the Cannabis Regulatory Agency

Current Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) Laws and Updates

See the current laws and updates here as they are constantly evolving into a regulated government business.

A Law Firm focused on the Rights of Patients and Caregivers

Since 1993, the Law Office of Michael Komorn has provided outstanding, results-focused legal counsel to its clients in all areas of criminal defense – in state and federal courts – including medical marijuana law. We are advocates of our clients’ rights. Our mission is to provide the highest standards of legal advice and expertise with an emphasis on client satisfaction and exceptional results.

Attorney Michael Komorn is president of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association In his role as president, Komorn has worked to organize patient/caregiver rally events, taken on several pro bono cases and fought to maintain the innocence of his clients using Michigan’s Medical Marihuana Act.

Related Subjects (Public Health Code Laws):

Note: These laws have changed since the Adult Use Recreational Laws 2018

But: You can still be charged under the Public Health Code Laws

And: It is still a controlled substance in Michigan and Federal as of this date (June 19th 2023).

Possession of Marijuana
Possession with Intent to Deliver Marijuana
Manufacture of Marijuana
Delivery of Marijuana
Maintaining a Drug House or Drug Vehicle
Jury Instructions for Marijuana Crimes

 

Charged with a Marijuana or other Crime?

If you or someone you know is facing charges as a result of Medical Marijuana recommended to you as a medical marijuana patient under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, contact Komorn Law and ensure your rights are protected.

Contact us for a case evaluation at 248-357-2550

Attorney Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. He is the President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA), a nonprofit patient advocacy group with over 26,000 members, which advocates for the rights of medical marijuana patients and their caregivers.

Michael is also the host of the Planet Green Trees Radio Podcast and Planet Green Trees TV, a marijuana reform based show, which was broadcast every Thursday night 8-10 pm EST for over 525 episodes.

 

More Posts

What is a Preliminary Exam?

Michigan Preliminary Examinations The Strategic Gatekeeper in Felony Defense The Preliminary Examination as the First Line of Defense In Michigan felony cases, the preliminary examination (PE) is the first—and often most decisive—opportunity to challenge the...

What does Nolle Prosequi mean?

What does Nolle Prosequi mean? Fatal Flaw In criminal cases, nolle prosequi may be employed when there is a significant weakness in the prosecution's case, when the prosecutor acknowledges an inability to prove the charges, or even when the prosecutor has lost...

People v. Lukity, 460 Mich 484 (1999)

Case Summary The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the defendant’s conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct against his fourteen‑year‑old daughter. The Court held that although one evidentiary error occurred, it was...

Motion in Limine vs Motion to Suppress

Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineOverview Although both a motion in limine and a motion to suppress deal with evidence, they serve very different purposes in Michigan criminal cases. Understanding the distinction is critical because each motion affects...

A Motion in Limine – What does it Mean?

Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineA motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the judge to exclude (or sometimes allow) specific evidence before the jury ever hears it. It’s one of the most important evidentiary tools in both criminal and civil...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Threat of Terrorism

Case Summary In People v Kvasnicka, the defendant sent a message to a young girl stating she “would not be laughing” when he came to her school to “shoot it up or blow it up like Columbine.” Charged under Michigan’s threat‑of‑terrorism statute, he argued the law was...

What is a Franks Hearing?

What is a Frank's Hearing?A Franks hearing is a critical legal tool used when a defendant claims that police lied, exaggerated, or recklessly disregarded the truth in a search warrant affidavit. When law enforcement places its hand on the Constitution, the law...

Michigan House Bill Proposes 32% Tax on Internet Devices for Kids

Taxed Again..? They're working on it.A newly introduced Michigan House bill would impose a 32% excise tax on smartphones, tablets, gaming systems, and other internet‑connected devices marketed to or primarily used by minors. Lawmakers backing the proposal argue the...

Shadow cash is corrupting Michigan courtrooms

The Shadow Cash Threat: Protecting the Integrity of Michigan Courtrooms In recent months, a spotlight has been cast on a hidden influence within the Michigan legal system: "shadow cash." This term refers to third-party litigation funding (TPLF), where outside...

Michigan judge charged in stealing from incapacitated adults

No Good Headline to Lead with HereSummary Federal prosecutors have charged a 36th District Court judge and three associates with orchestrating a long‑running financial scheme that diverted funds from incapacitated adults under court‑appointed guardianship. The...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Prisoner in Possession

Prisoner in Possession of a Controlled SubstanceCase Summary In People v Tadgerson, the Michigan Supreme Court addressed a critical question: does the crime of a prisoner possessing a controlled substance under MCL 800.281(4) require proof of intent, or is it a...

What is Inference Stacking?

What Is Inference Stacking? A Legal ExplanationInference stacking—also called pyramiding of inferences—is a rule of evidence that prohibits courts or juries from building one inference on top of another when the first inference is not supported by direct evidence....

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Murder

Case Summary In People v Jones, the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed whether a single act of abuse can support convictions for both first‑degree child abuse and felony murder. The defendant argued that using the same conduct to support both charges violated...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Neglect of Duty

Case Summary In People v Harper, a Wayne County Sheriff’s deputy was charged with neglect of duty after witnessing an inmate escape during his smoke break and taking no action to stop or pursue the prisoner. The prosecution relied on the Sheriff’s Department policy...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Metallic Knuckles

Case Summary In People v Dummer, the defendant challenged Michigan’s metallic‑knuckles statute, arguing that simply possessing the weapon was protected by the Second Amendment. The Michigan Court of Appeals acknowledged that possession of metallic knuckles is...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Election Interference

Case Summary In People v Burkman, defendants created a robocall targeting African American voters during the 2020 election. The call falsely warned that mail‑in voting would expose voters to law‑enforcement tracking, debt collection, and forced vaccinations....

Michigan Cannabis Tax Fraud Cases Are Rising

Hands up CaponeMichigan’s regulated cannabis industry is in a very different place than it was when medical marijuana and adult-use legalization were the primary battlegrounds. As prices compress, margins disappear, and tax burdens increase, enforcement doesn’t...

Deadlocked Jury – What does it mean?

A deadlocked jury is often called a hung jury—A deadlocked jury—often called a hung jury—occurs when jurors cannot reach the unanimous (or legally required) agreement needed to deliver a verdict. In criminal cases, most jurisdictions require unanimity. When the jury...

Social Security Scams – What to Know

The Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have issued several warnings about ongoing Social Security scams and continue to advise caution to the public. Here are some of the popular Social Security scams to watch out for in...

Court to Allow Challenge to Michigan’s New 24% Cannabis Tax

Summary A Michigan Court of Claims judge has ruled that the lawsuit challenging the state’s newly enacted 24% wholesale marijuana excise tax may proceed. The ruling, issued January 5, 2026, keeps alive a significant constitutional challenge brought by industry groups...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Arrest

People v Lyons, No 370840, ___ Mich App ___, ___ NW3d ___ (May 13, 2025)Case Summary In People v Lyons, the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle stopped by police. Before the vehicle fully stopped, he exited and began walking away. Officers ordered him to return, he...

Michigan Drivers Face Higher Gas Tax in 2026

Keep Pushing.Summary Michigan’s fuel‑tax structure will undergo a major statutory shift on January 1, 2026, raising the state gas tax from 31 cents to approximately 52.4 cents per gallon. The change eliminates the 6% sales tax on fuel and replaces it with a higher,...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Manslaughter

Case Summary These two cases examine the boundaries of involuntary manslaughter. In People v Aiyash, a gas‑station clerk locked an agitated customer and three patrons inside the store, after which the customer shot the patrons. In People v Sherrill, the defendant...

Michigan begins 2026 with New Laws

Michigan’s 2026 legal landscape includes major tax reforms—most notably the gas‑tax increase from 31¢ to 52.4¢ per gallon—along with cannabis tax changes, wage increases, consumer protections, and transparency laws.Michigan begins 2026 with a slate of new laws...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Appeal

Michigan appellate courts issued several significant decisions refining how convictions are reviewed, when relief from judgment is appropriate, and how procedural errors must be preserved. These cases collectively clarify retroactivity, evidentiary‑weight standards,...