Aug 5, 2015 – After a year long battle, Michigan Attorney Michael Komorn and his staff have chalked up another positive conclusion for a client caught up in the medical marijuana and forfeiture debacle.
Some may consider it a win, but this slow ruination of a family like so many other Michiganders… should most likely have never occurred.
What’s left to do after this… is to put the shattered pieces back together, emotionally, physically and financially. Then hope the children can go on and forget this ever happened.
The story’s beginning of the end starts here… Read on and you will find out how it began.
The Beginning of the End: Prosecutors drop marijuana charges against Michigan mom.
Prosecutors have dropped marijuana charges and will return items seized from a woman in the wake of a Michigan Supreme Court ruling last week.
“I’m elated that this part is over,” said Ginnifer Hency. “…It’s been a long year.”
St. Clair County Prosecutor Michael Wendling said about 18 cases were on hold while prosecution and defense waited on the Supreme Court decision.
“We reevaluated the files that we had pending and at least five were no longer viable in light of the Supreme Court decision,” Wendling said.
“I think that’s an analysis that prosecutors across the state are undertaking.”
The Supreme Court ruling last week clarified when caregivers and users can use their medical marijuana certification as a defense or immunity if charged with a marijuana-related crime. It was the court’s ninth medical marijuana ruling since voters approved the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act in 2008.
“We would have to have specific evidence on those items in order to overcome that burden now that we did not have to show before,” Wendling said.
Wendling said any unresolved civil forfeiture cases connected to those five dismissed cases also will be dismissed, and items seized will be returned.
The Free Press in February reported that police seized more than $24 million in assets from Michiganders in 2013. In many cases the citizens were never charged but lost their property anyway.
Komorn said Hency was arrested and her home raided in July 2014. The medical marijuana caregiver was charged in December 2014 with possession with intent to deliver marijuana.
According to appeal documents from the prosecution, Hency told a Drug Task Force member she had six ounces of marijuana in a locked bag that she intended to exchange for a different strain with another caregiver and give the marijuana to her patients.
Her case was dismissed by visiting District Judge David Nicholson in May after Nicholson found that no crime had occurred.
The prosecutor’s office appealed in circuit court. Oral arguments on the appeal were supposed to be heard by Circuit Judge Michael West Wednesday.
“But that does not eliminate the horror of what they’ve had to deal with the last year,” Komorn said.
“It didn’t come easy. We’ve had to fight for a year.”
Komorn said Hency’s family was devastated by the July 2014 raid on their home and Hency has had trouble finding employment because of the pending narcotics charge.
Hency said authorities seized several items, including a Chevy Impala, two iPhones, an iPad and a ladder, when they raided her home in 2014. The mother of four, who has multiple sclerosis, told Forbes Magazine that they even took her sex toy.
Hency said she appreciated the prosecutor’s decision to dismiss the case “in the interest of justice.” But she said she feels her case isn’t completely finished.
“When I get my stuff back I will consider it over,” Hency said.
From the beginning of the end to when it started
(you should start at the bottom and work your way back up to here)
Attorney Michael Komorn (center) and Former state lawmaker Tom McMillin (right) takes part in a discussion of alleged abuses by law enforcement drug task forces in Michigan.
Attorney Michael Komorn who specializes in Medical Marijuana participates in a meeting in Port Huron about how law enforcement drug task forces are abusing their power in Michigan.
Speaker after speaker claimed the raids by heavily armed police officers on their homes have resulted in extensive damage and scared their children. During the raids, they claim officers tried to intimidate them.
“It’s child endangerment. It’s sexual harassment. It’s excessive force. That’s civil rights violations,” claims Charmie Gholson, with Michigan Moms United. Gholson organized Tuesday’s meeting, which is the first of a series meetings planned around the state.
Former Republican state lawmaker Tom McMillin sat on a panel which asked questions of the speakers at the meeting.
“Some of this stuff sounds criminal that law enforcement is doing,” McMillin said during a break in the meeting.
There were no law enforcement officials at Tuesday’s meeting in Port Huron. Charmie Gholson says she intentionally didn’t invited the St. Clair County sheriff’s office out of concern that some of the people at the meeting would feel intimidated.
After a state House committee meeting last month where Annette Shattuck testified about her experience with the local drug task force, St. Clair County Sheriff Tim Donnellon told the Washington Post she lied about officers on the county’s drug task force.
“She’s a liar, plain and simple. That’s all I can tell you,” he said. He says that the task force did not hang lingerie from the ceiling fans or stomp food on the floor. The Shattucks, he said, are “trying to further their cause, which at the base of it is the legalization of marijuana in the state of Michigan.”
State lawmakers are looking at making changes to the law under which drug task forces operate.
The state House has passed a package of bills to add new reporting requirements and increase the burden of proof required to seize private property in drug raids.
The bills are currently before the state Senate.
Source: Michigan Radio.org Original Article By Steve Carmody • Jul 29, 2015
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 Planet Green Trees Radio, a marijuana reform based show, which is broadcast every Thursday night 8-10 pm EST. Follow Komorn on Twitter.
Imagine going back home one day to find an empty house and all your belongings gone; or even worse, imagine being in your house and having your door suddenly smashed open by law enforcement officers in masks and being told at gunpoint that your personal possessions are being taken away.
This is what happened to Annette Shattuck, a mother of four and a registered marijuana caregiver in Michigan. As she recently testified to the Michigan House of Representatives, her house was raided in 2014 while her 56-year old mother was taking care of her children.
Everything from food, electronics, and vehicles to birth certificates, cash, and social security, insurance and public assistance cards was taken and has yet to be returned. As if this weren’t enough, she was left penniless due to a $1 million hold on all her bank accounts and has been unable to access the adoption subsidy for her special-needs son.
Civil asset forfeiture laws, which were popularized during the drug war hysteria of the 1980s, allow law enforcement to seize money and any other private property, regardless of whether its owner has been convicted of a crime. Not only does this constitute a violation of civil liberties and property rights, but it also fuels widespread abuse of power.
Law enforcement agencies have incentives to confiscate goods since they get to keep a percentage of the profits.
As of 2012, the Asset Forfeiture Fund was estimated to hold around $6 billion, so it is no surprise that this has become a goldmine for law enforcement.
Earlier this year, New Mexico’s Republican Governor, Susana Martinez, signed a new law that ends the practice of civil asset forfeiture in the state, which now has the strongest protections against wrongful asset seizures in the country.
In California, a bill co-sponsored by the Drug Policy Alliance, ACLU and the Institute for Justice passed the California Senate by a vote of 38-1 earlier this month.
A recent (6/8/15) editorial in the Livingston News visited the Michigan forfeiture laws which has become a hot topic lately.
The editorial goes on to say…
“When law enforcement agencies raid a suspected drug dealer’s home and confiscate property such as cars, money or other items, we understand this.
Police don’t want criminals to benefit from their illegal activity.
However, what happens if there is no conviction?
That property should and would be returned, one would think.
However, that’s not the case in Michigan, and we’re glad our state Legislature is working to reform civil asset forfeiture. The current forfeiture rules must be fixed because they allow police to confiscate items even if it’s determined there was no crime committed.
Michigan’s Civil Asset Forfeiture laws allow police to take property from citizens if they suspect a crime was committed, even when there is not enough evidence to charge them. Homeowners must then prove they did not purchase their property with proceeds from criminal activity and sue to get the property back.
In many cases, police raid a home where there clearly is no drug dealing happening; instead, residents are involved with medical marijuana, which voters stated is a legal use here in Michigan.
The following are a couple examples of how regular citizens were caught in the unjust web of forfeiture laws.
Gin Hency and Annette Shattuck describe themselves as soccer moms, active in their communities and in their children’s lives. Since July 2014, the St. Clair County women have shared another similarity: Both of their homes were raided by the St. Clair County Drug Task Force. Hency and Shattuck are registered medical marijuana caregivers. Among the things taken in the raid were their medical marijuana cards issued by the state, televisions, a bicycle and documents including driver’s licenses and insurance cards.
Another item reported taken was Hency’s vibrator (yes, a sex toy).
“It was devastating,” Shattuck said.
Hency and Shattuck were charged with marijuana-related counts several months after the raids. Three of the six charges against Shattuck were dismissed. Both charges against Hency were dismissed this month, but she has still been unable to reclaim her property.
Another example occurred with Thomas Williams, who was alone in November 2013 when police raided his rural St. Joseph County home wearing black masks, camouflage and holding guns at their sides. They broke down his front door with a battering ram.
“We think you’re dealing marijuana,” they told Williams, a 72-year-old, retired carpenter and cancer patient who is disabled and carries a medical marijuana card.
When he protested, they handcuffed him and left him on the living room floor as they ransacked his home, emptying drawers, rummaging through closets and surveying his grow room, where he was nourishing his 12 personal marijuana plants as allowed by law. Some had recently begun to die, so he had cloned them and had new seedlings, although they were not yet planted. That, police insisted, put him over the limit.
They did not charge Williams with a crime, though.
Instead, they took his Dodge Journey, $11,000 in cash from his home, his television, his cellphone and his shotgun — and are attempting to take his Colon Township home. And they plan to keep the proceeds, auctioning off the property and putting the cash in police coffers.
More than a year later, he is still fighting to get his belongings back and to hang on to his house.
“I want to ask them, ‘Why? Why me?’ I gave them no reason to do this to me,” said Williams, who says he also suffers from glaucoma, a damaged disc in his back, and COPD, a lung disorder. “I’m out here minding my own business, and just wanted to be left alone.”
We ask the same question: Why?
There’s no reason except that police have certain laws that allow for this type of forfeiture.
A bipartisan package of bills, approved by a House committee, would make changes including raising the standard for forfeiture to the highest in civil court, one of clear and convincing evidence rather than a preponderance of the evidence. The bills would also require detailed reports from local police to the state police on property forfeited.
It’s a good first step, and we hope to see it approved so residents don’t have to worry about property getting taken when they’re broken no crimes.
Annette SHATTUCK’s mother was clipping coupons at their Port Huron home when local law enforcement came rushing in wearing masks and camouflage on July 28, 2014.
The officers from the St. Clair County Drug Task Force were there to execute a no-knock search warrant. And Shattuck alleges that through civil asset forfeiture, the officers seized a wide variety of items from her house, including car seats, hammers, saws and $85 that was inside birthday cards for one of her children.
Although Shattuck says she and her husband weren’t even charged with a crime for five and a half months and they still haven’t been convicted, those items are still being held by the police.
“They leave you with nothing,” Shattuck said of her situation, in an interview today. Shattuck was one of a group of individuals who spoke out today in favor of reforms to the civil asset forfeiture process as the House Judiciary Committee voted to advance new reporting requirements and increased legal standards for forfeiture.
Lawmakers are also trying to determine whether stories like Shattuck’s are isolated anecdotes with debatable details or widespread problems that point to systemic issues.
Asset forfeiture allows law enforcement to punish suspected criminals by taking money and property that officers believe were obtained through or involved in illegal activity.
According to a 2014 report from the Michigan State Police (MSP), law enforcement agencies in the state seized some $24 million in assets in 2013 related to drug crimes.
The reporting requirements in HB 4500, HB 4503 and HB 4504 are meant to help the public better track the forfeitures. Other bills in the package, which includes HB 4499, HB 4506, HB 4507 and HB 4508, would increase the legal standard for forfeiture from a preponderance of the evidence to “clear and convincing” evidence.
Those who are most in favor of civil asset forfeiture reform say the bills are merely a step in the right direction to bigger reforms. Meanwhile, the law enforcement community has been somewhat quiet about the legislation.
Judiciary Chair Klint KESTO (R-Commerce Twp.) said today that reporting bills would ultimately help determine what needs to be done.
“Everybody has their opinion we should go in this direction or that direction,” Kesto said. “That’s premature. Let’s get the data.”
Shattuck and her attorney, Michael KOMORN, who testified today, said the reporting requirements are good first steps. But greater reform is needed. Komorn said he’s heard stories about individuals having all kinds of items seized under forfeiture, including a 1925 mandolin, Bridge cards and $37 out of a woman’s purse.
Many of the cases, like Shattuck’s, involve the state’s medical marijuana laws, which don’t fit with asset forfeiture, Komorn said.
The laws can be complicated and if a patient or grower isn’t following them exactly right, the person could be subject to forfeiture.
In an interview, he detailed a case of someone whose house was raided. Law enforcement kept the seized items for a year up until the start of the trial when they all of sudden gave the items back.
“You know why they do that? Because they can,” Komorn said. “There are no checks and balances.”
When Shattuck’s house was raided in July 2014, her children were home alone with Shattuck’s mother. Shattuck said the officers separated her mother from the children as the raid took place. Her children still talk about it, Shattuck said.
When they see a police car, the 9-year-old daughter asks, “Is it coming to my house?” Shattuck was eventually charged for crimes related to the manufacturing of marijuana. The case is ongoing.
Ginnifer HENCY, of Kimball, also shared her forfeiture story today. She said law enforcement raided her house, although she believes she was compliant with the state’s medical marijuana laws.
Police took iPads and phones, she said. “They have had my stuff for 10 months,” she said.
Thomas BUCKLEY, undersheriff of the St. Clair County Sheriff’s Office, said he read through the police reports of both Hency and Shattuck’s cases. “I don’t see anything in the report that anyone did anything improper,” he said.
The task force, which is funded through a millage, usually only seizes items that are involved in the crime itself or that can be directly tied to the crime, Buckley said.
And he said sometimes offenders store proceeds from drugs in unusual places. Because cases are ongoing, Buckley couldn’t provide many details about the situations. But he said the raids were part of a large investigation involving federal agents and multiple locations involved in drug dealing. “A lot of it was under the guise of legitimate medical marijuana,” Buckley said.
As for forfeiture overall, Buckey said he can’t speak for every law enforcement agency, but he believes it’s a positive. “It takes the profit out of the drug trade for a lot of people,” Buckley said.
In an interview earlier this year, Robert STEVENSON, a former law enforcement officer who now leads the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police, urged lawmakers to look beyond individual anecdotes when it comes to asset forfeiture.
Komorn had a different take. He said he has an office full of documents on cases where asset forfeiture was used inappropriately. “The system is broken,” he said, holding a stack of documents on other cases. “These are examples.”
Asked if stories like Shattuck’s and Hency’s are anecdotes or widespread problems, Kesto said he couldn’t answer that and he didn’t know the specific details of their cases. “These stories are anecdotal in nature,” Kesto said. “However, I think it’s unfortunate the way these woman told their stories. If that’s what happened, that’s a real, real problem and that cannot be tolerated. “That’s why we need the reporting bills to see what’s going on.”
