Attorney Michael Komorn

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae

Michael A. Komorn, Esq.

Michael A. Komorn, Esq.

Lead Attorney


Komorn Law, PLLC
30903 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 240
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
(248) 357-2550

Since 1993 Michael Komorn has been a no pulled punches defense Attorney that gets in the ring to fight to the end. His experience in criminal defense law in all the court systems from District Courts  to the Supreme Court have gained recognition from peers and media.  When you need an Attorney to dive into the trench and fight the battle next to you this is the man you call.

Michael Komorn also has over a decade of legal experience representing the cannabis community for patients, caregivers, physicians, cannabis licensing, business and corporate legal services.

Summary of Professional Experience:

  • Attorney Michael Komorn is a member of the American Bar Association (ABA), National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), and Recorder’s Court Bar Association, State Bar of Michigan (SBM) , State Appellate Defenders Office (SADO) , Michigan Association of OWI Attorneys (MIAOWIA), and Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan (CDAM).
  • Michael Komorn is recognized as one of the top knowledgeable attorneys regarding Michigan’s Medical Marihuana Act, his perspectives have appeared throughout news, including, but not limited to: The Detroit New, Detroit Free Press, WWJ News Radio 950, WJR-AM, The Oakland Press, WJRT-TV, WDET-FM, WMYD-TV 20, and Michigan’s Lawyer’s Weekly.
  • From 2017-Present, Attorney Michael Komorn has been member of the Cannabis Law Section, (previously Marijuana Law Section). 
  • From 2010-Present, Attorney Michael Komorn has been President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association which provides legal advocacy for medical marijuana patients and caregivers as well as a forum for those to share their experience and discuss related issues. 

Work History:

  • 1993- Present – Law offices of Komorn Law, PLLC, Farmington Hills, MI
    Criminal Defense practice, with a primary focus since 2008 on Michigan’s Medical Marihuana laws, expanding into licensing pursuant to the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act (“MMFLA”), Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (“MRTMA”), civil litigation, and business law.
  • 1992-1993 – 36th District Court Misdemeanor Defender Office Staff Attorney.

Education:

  • 1989-1992 – Juris Doctor Degree, University of Detroit
  • 1985-1989 – Bachelor of Arts Degree- Oakland University 

Awards:

  • 2016 – CDAM Right to Counsel Award – This award is given to an individual for a significant body of work, and is often triggered by an extraordinary case that is typical of that attorney’s career. This is typically a reflection of a lifetime of service to defendants and the criminal justice community. 

Specialized Training:

  • Cleveland State University- Marshal College of Law- Journal of Law and Health Series
  • “The Cannabis Conundrum: A Symposium on Legalizing Medical Cannabis in Ohio”
  • Standardized Field Sobriety Training (May 2017 and Updates)

Profession Links:

Educator / Speaker /Instructor:

  • Cannabis Law Section 2021- Seminar regarding People v Michael Thue.
  • Cannabis Law Section 2020- Daubert Hearings, and admission of Expert Testimony.
  • Marijuana Law Section 2017, Speaker- Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Workshop.
  • Seminars at University of Oakland, (2010)
  • CLE International “Medical Marijuana” July 26, 2010
  • Cooley Law School, Student Bar Association Medical Cannabis (2012)
  • University of Detroit Mercy, along side Dr. Mike Whitty (2012).

Related Activities/Community Involvement:

  • Commentator in the following Newspapers, periodicals, radio and television broadcasts: MLive, The Detroit NewsDetroit Free Press, WWJ News radio 950, WJR-AM, The Oakland Press, Morning Sun, Traverse City Record Eagle, The Huron Daily Tribune, Heritage Newspapers, WJRT-TV, WDET-FM, WMYD-TV 20 and Michigan Lawyer’s Weekly.
  • Presented at the Michigan Association of OWI Attorneys Spring Seminar (May 2017).
  • Presented at the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan (May 2017).
  • Published in the Marijuana Law Section Journal (February 2017).
  • Michigan Medical Marijuana Association President 2010-Present.
  • Participated in the Michigan Medical Marihuana meetings and workgroup with the Legislature and staff, and other interested parties. (2011)
  • Testified before the Legislative house Judiciary Committee regarding proposed amendments to the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (2012)
  • Presented at the Criminal Advocacy Program, Wayne County- “The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act- Immunity and Affirmative Defenses” (December 2015).

Court of Appeals Marijuana Related Cases:

The Court of Appeals remanded the case back to the trial court to allow defendant to assert an affirmative defense pursuant to §8 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. MCL 333.26428.

This case ultimately was dismissed pursuant to §8 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.

Holding that there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed the offense of possession with intent to deliver marijuana under the aiding an abetting theory, when officers only witnessed the defendant at the facility once, but not at the time of the execution of the search warrant, and merely found a utility bill depicting the defendant’s name, resulting in the Court of Appeals vacating defendant’s conviction and sentence.

Following trial and conviction for possession with intent to deliver marijuana, the Court of Appeals remanded the case to the trial court directing an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the defendant can present an affirmative defense pursuant to §8 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. MCL 333.26528. The Court further found that an edible product, namely brownies, were not considered “usable” marihuana pursuant to MCL 333.26423(k).

Following this case, the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (“MMMA”), was amended to specifically provide for medical marihuana edible products as “usable marihuana” and provided for an equation to determine equivalency to usable weight of marihuana.

Defendant was charged with delivery of marijuana, possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, and possession of marijuana. The trial court denied defendant’s motion for immunity pursuant to §4 of the MMMA. MCL 333.26424. The Court of Appeals held that the non-MMMA compliant conduct in this case is the sale of marijuana to a confidential informant where the confidential informant was not one of the defendant’s registered patients. This conduct formed the basis of Count 1. However, the conduct that forms the basis for Count and 3 stems from defendant’s lawful possession at the time of the traffic stop. The Court went on to state that it is clear at all times during the traffic stop, defendant was in compliance with §4(a)-(c). The court ultimately held that the trial court erred by concluding that there was a nexus between defendant’s non-MMMA-compliant conduct and the MMMA-compliant conduct that formed the basis for Count 2 and 3, and therefore dismissed Counts 2 and 3.

The Court of Appeals found that immunity pursuant to the Medical Marihuana Facilities Licensing Act grants similar immunity pursuant to §4 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act and is therefore a question of fact that should be determined prior to trial.

The Court of Appeals found that the provisions of the Michigan Probation Act that allows a court to prohibit a probationer’s MMMA-compliant use of marijuana impermissibly conflicts with MCL 333.26427(a) and (e) of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act and are unenforceable. Further, the Court held that revocation of probation under the MMMA-complaint use of marijuana constitutes a “penalty” in violation of MCL 333.26424(a) of the MMMA. The Court concluded that the district court erred in prohibiting defendant from MMMA-compliant marijuana use as a term of probation and that defendant’s motion to modify the terms of his probation to allow him to use medical marihuana should have been granted.

Other Marijuana Related Cases:

  • People v Goupil, Case No., 11-2145-FH

This case was ultimately dismissed pursuant to an invalid and unconstitutional search of the defendant’s home.

  • People v Goupil, Case No. 11-ST-119

Following a jury trial, the defendant was ultimately found not guilty.

  • People v Abro, Case No. C-18-0381-FY

The defendant was charged with delivery of marijuana. This case resulted in all charges being dismissed on or about April 18, 2019.

  • People v Avery, Case No. 18-0260-SM

Defendant was charged with possession of marihuana or synthetic equivalent. Following an evidentiary hearing pursuant to §4 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, all charges were dismissed.

  • People v Ballard, Case No. 18-003964-FH

The defendant was charged with delivery/manufacture of marijuana and was ultimately dismissed on or about August of 2018 as a result of Defendant’s motion.

  • People v Bates, Case No. 15-741-FH

Defendant was charged with delivery/manufacture of marijuana. Following a Section §8 evidentiary hearing, resulting in a question of fact for the jury and the inability to present a the §8 affirmative defense, the People offered defendant a misdemeanor, which defendant ultimately accepted.

  • People v Berry, Case No. 16-0557910-FY

Order of Nolle Pros was signed on March 14, 2016.

  • People v Berry, Case No. 16-0476-FY and 17-024612-FH

Defendant faced various marijuana charges, and ultimately pled to a Civil Infraction, resulting in a $1.00 fine.

  • People v Tasselmyer, Case No. 19-000219-FH

Defendant was charged with controlled substance – delivery / mfg of marijuana. An order of Nolle Pros was signed on April 1, 2021.

Other Affiliations:

Planet Green Trees TV (Over 540 Episodes)
Internet Radio / Video Focused on Cannabis and Hemp Legal Topics hosted by Michael Komorn.

Michigan Medical Marijuana.com
Cannabis news and information.

Michigan Medical Marijuana.org
Non Profit Organization and community forum.

Hemp Holdings LLC
President of Hemp Holdings LLC a Global Hemp Industry Company.

Share This