Does the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act protect you in all Marijuana scenarios?
The Conflict
The central issue in this interlocutory appeal is whether the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), MCL 333.27951 et seq., prevents a person accused of possession with intent to deliver between 5 and 45 kilograms of marijuana from being prosecuted under MCL 333.7401(2)(d)(ii).
Some Background
At a preliminary examination, Michigan State Police Trooper Joshua Ashlock testified about the circumstances of this case.
On October, 26, 2022, Trooper Ashlock received information that Illinois State Police intercepted approximately 85 pounds of marijuana in a rental vehicle headed for southwest Michigan.
The driver of the vehicle agreed to cooperate with Illinois State Police and deliver the marijuana as originally planned to Chad Boylen. Per Boylen’s instruction,the driver brought the marijuana to defendant’s residence in Niles, Michigan. Boylen was arrested outside the residence. Defendant eventually exited the residence after police officers surrounded the house and called for her to exit.
A “protective sweep of the residence” revealed large quantities of marijuana inside.
“After” obtaining a search warrant, officers seized approximately 20 pounds of marijuana from the residence, the majority of which was found in what was believed to be
defendant’s bedroom.
No soup for you says the Michigan Court of Appeals. Back to the public health code you go.
Court of Appeals Opinion
Because we conclude the MRTMA provides no such proscription,we affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for trial on felony charges.
If you want to know more read the opinion here, otherwise just call our office if you get in the same sticky situation.
STATE OF MICHIGAN v JULIA KATHLEEN SOTO – MRTMA – COA 20241007_c370138_23_370138.opn
But Wait… What’s This???
MI COURT OF APPEALS – Over 1000 Cannabis Plants Just a Misdemeanor
Here’s More Court of Appeals Opinions and Decisions
- COURT OF APPEALS DECISION GREEN LIGHT FOR MMMA CAREGIVERS? 1000 plants is OK.
- MICHIGAN MAN GROWING MARIJUANA WON’T FACE MAJOR CHARGES, COURT SAYS
- JUDGES CAN’T PREVENT PEOPLE FROM USING MEDICAL MARIJUANA WHILE ON PROBATION COURT OF APPEALS SAID
- MICHIGAN MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW DOES NOT PROTECT LIARS SAYS COURT OF APPEALS
- MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS CONCLUDES IT’S OKAY TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS
- MI COURT OF APPEALS – Over 1000 Cannabis Plants Just a Misdemeanor
- Search the site for “Court of Appeals” to see more
- Search the site for “Supreme Court” for interesting cases
Note: This article provides a general overview and does not substitute for legal advice. Anyone charged with a CSC offense should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance.
More Articles
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...
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...
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...
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...
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 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,...
