NEWS RELEASE: USSC Adopts 2023 Amendments

NEWS RELEASE: USSC Adopts 2023 Amendments

WASHINGTON, D.C. ― Equipped with a quorum of Commissioners for the first time since 2018, the bipartisan United States Sentencing Commission voted today to promulgate amendments to the federal sentencing guidelines. “The Sentencing Commission is back in business,” said Chair Carlton W. Reeves. “Today, we are listening to Congress and the public by increasing first steps toward second chances, taking targeted action on gun trafficking and fentanyl, and expanding alternatives to incarceration. The policies issued today are common-sense ideas that will increase public safety while strengthening our communities.” Watch the public meeting.

During the pandemic, federal judges saved lives using their authority in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) to reduce sentences for incarcerated people facing “extraordinary and compelling” circumstances like certain risks posed by COVID-19. Responding to the First Step Act’s directive to increase the use and transparency of this tool, the Commission updated its guidelines to reflect lessons learned since the pandemic, ensure judges can continue to take first steps toward second chances for those who deserve them, and reunite families through appropriate reentry. “Judges are in the best position to decide if someone deserves to have the length of their sentence revisited,” said Chair Reeves. “This policy trusts courts to continue doing what is right.”

Since the Commission last had a quorum, communities across the country have struggled with the ills of gun trafficking and fentanyl. Congress directed the Commission to act on gun trafficking through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022, while the Drug Enforcement Administration asked the Commission to evaluate possible action on fentanyl. In response, the Commission voted to take targeted action on both issues. “The problems of gun trafficking and drug overdoses demand a comprehensive response,” said Vice Chair Claire Murray. “I am proud to say the Commission is doing its part by ensuring we have proportional sentences for serious offenses.”

The Commission is also revising guidance to courts regarding people facing their first federal conviction. Relying on data and extensive analysis about recidivism, the Commission is acting to maximize public safety and encourage consideration of alternatives to incarceration. “Our new policies revise the sentencing guidelines based on empirical research and experience,” said Vice Chair Laura Mate. “This careful, evidence-based approach will increase fairness in sentencing and keep our communities safe.”

Among the many other policies issued by the Commission are those that seek to address ghost guns, sexual abuse of incarcerated people by correctional employees, clarify acceptance of responsibility points for defendants, and implement criminal justice legislation passed by Congress. “The policies issued today reflect the wide spectrum of views we received through public hearing testimony and tens of thousands of letters,” said Chair Reeves. “The policies issued today prove, beyond a doubt, that when you speak to the Commission, you will be heard.”

While the newly reconstituted Commission concludes its first policymaking cycle, there is more work to do. In the year to come, the Commissioners will continue to study a number of proposed policies, including those regarding how the guidelines treat acquitted conduct and the “categorical approach” to the career offender guideline. In the meantime, the Commission will send final amendments to Congress by May 1, 2023. If Congress does not act to disapprove the amendments, they will take effect on November 1, 2023. Visit the Commission’s website for more information about the amendment process and the changes approved today.

More Posts

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

A Southfield lawyer alleges the Michigan State Police crime labs have “falsified lab reports on marijuana statewide” and he’s asking a judge to dismisses charges lodged against a client.   Michael Komorn, who also represents defendants in Livingston County, said...

read more
Komorn AVVO Reviews

Komorn AVVO Reviews

Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...

read more
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more
Bad Ranking For Transparency in the Michigan Justice System

Bad Ranking For Transparency in the Michigan Justice System

by Wes Smith, president, MPA Board of Directors
Publisher View Newspaper Group

When there was a change in leadership in Michigan’s legislature earlier this year, hope rose again in the hearts of citizens who want a more transparent state government.

Maybe, it was thought by those citizens, the time has finally come for Michigan to join almost every other state in expecting their legislature and Governor to be subject to our open records law. Maybe, they thought, adding hope upon hope, new laws would be passed requiring other government officials to respond to records requests in a timely manner without outrageous fees. But, alas, it’s nearly November and there has not been even a small ray of sunshine in our state house or governor’s mansion.

Michigan remains at the bottom of the bottom for government openness among the fifty states. The Center for Public Integrity gave the Great Lakes State an “F” grade in 2015. In 2020 Michigan ranked 47th out of 50 for anti-corruption measures for public officials according to the Coalition for Integrity.

News reports of former House Speaker Johnson convicted of accepting bribes and Inkster Mayor Wimberly indicted on bribery charges, along with numerous other accounts of unethical behavior on the part of elected officials in our state, illustrate the importance of openness and transparency in government. 

In 2022 Michigan voters overwhelmingly supported a ballot initiative to require state elected officials to provide financial disclosure statements. In a recent study, done on behalf of the Michigan Press Association, there was more data showing Michigan voters want more information about what their elected officials are doing. Nearly 9 out of 10 Michigan adults believe that taxpayers should have access to the meeting calendars of state representatives and their correspondence with outside organizations as well as the budgets of these office holders.

Read the rest here at LegalNews

“When you got something to hide… You got something to hide” DW

Copy, Paste, Legislate beta

Do you know if a bill introduced in your statehouse — it might govern who can fix your shattered iPhone screen or whether you can still sue a pedophile priest years later — was actually written by your elected lawmakers? Use this new tool to find out.

Spoiler alert The answer may well be no.

Thousands of pieces of “model legislation” are drafted each year by business organizations and special interest groups and distributed to state lawmakers for introduction.

These copycat bills influence policymaking across the nation, state by state, often with little scrutiny.

This news application was developed by the Center for Public Integrity, part of a year-long collaboration with USA TODAY and the Arizona Republic to bring the practice into the light.

Check it out here

https://model-legislation.apps.publicintegrity.org/

More Posts

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

A Southfield lawyer alleges the Michigan State Police crime labs have “falsified lab reports on marijuana statewide” and he’s asking a judge to dismisses charges lodged against a client.   Michael Komorn, who also represents defendants in Livingston County, said...

read more
Komorn AVVO Reviews

Komorn AVVO Reviews

Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...

read more
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more
Ohio voters say yes to legal recreational cannabis

Ohio voters say yes to legal recreational cannabis

Recreational marijuana has been legalized in Ohio as voters overwhelmingly approved State Issue 2 on Tuesday. This groundbreaking decision now enables adults in Ohio to legally experience the advantages of marijuana for recreational purposes.

“Marijuana is no longer a controversial issue,” said Tom Haren, spokesman for the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, which gathered petitions to put the issue on the ballot.“

Ohioans demonstrated this by passing State Issue 2 in a landslide. Ohioans are being extremely clear on the future they want for our state: adult-use marijuana legal and regulated.”

Issue 2 permits adults 21 and over to legally use and grow marijuana, starting on Dec. 7, according to Haren.

With all precincts counted, the final, unofficial results from the Ohio Secretary of State indicate that the vote was 56.97% in favor of the measure and 43.03% against it.

The new law expands legal use beyond the medical marijuana law approved by the Ohio Legislature in 2016.

Opponents of Issue 2 included public health and mental health advocates, law enforcement, business groups, and stakeholders who expressed concerns about the potential health risks associated with marijuana.

They argued that legalizing this drug could result in marijuana companies becoming unjustly enriched, while also exposing children to potential risks. Additionally, opponents highlighted concerns that legalization may heighten the likelihood of crime, workplace injuries, and dangerous driving conditions.

Issue 2 will:

  • Allow adults age 21 or older to buy marijuana from licensed dispensaries.
  • Allow people to cultivate six marijuana plants at a time, with a limit of 12 per household, without a license. It would be illegal to sell home grown marijuana.
  • Expand Ohio’s medical marijuana system, offering licensed cultivators and dispensaries the chance to sell recreational marijuana, and also offering licenses to new applicants, including through a social equity and jobs program.
  • Prohibit advertising to minors and mandate setbacks to keep recreational dispensaries away from schools.
  • Tax each purchase at 10%. That money would be split 3% to cover regulatory efforts; 25% toward a substance abuse and addiction services fund; 36% toward a fund to create loans, grants and technical assistance to minority or disadvantaged business owners in the industry; and 36% toward revenue for local governments where recreational businesses exist.

More Posts

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

A Southfield lawyer alleges the Michigan State Police crime labs have “falsified lab reports on marijuana statewide” and he’s asking a judge to dismisses charges lodged against a client.   Michael Komorn, who also represents defendants in Livingston County, said...

read more
Komorn AVVO Reviews

Komorn AVVO Reviews

Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...

read more
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more

Smell of Marijuana is Not Enough to Search Your Vehicle or is it?

Smell of Marijuana is Not Enough to Search Your Vehicle or is it?

The Smell of Marijuana and the Court of Appeals

Body camera footage is an invaluable resource for courts facing suppression motions, but it rarely serves as a stand-alone source of information about a warrantless search or seizure.

Here, the trial court was hamstrung in analyzing the validity of a warrantless search of defendant, Jeffery Scott Armstrong, and the subsequent seizure of a gun because the trial court was given no evidence other than body camera footage.

Despite that disadvantage, the trial court dutifully made findings of fact and ordered the suppression of the gun.

Because we conclude that the trial court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and its conclusions of law were sound, we shall affirm the trial court’s suppression order.

Background

On October 8, 2020, law-enforcement officers conducting a home-compliance check in the city of Detroit came upon a Jeep Cherokee parked on the street.

They spoke to a woman who was in the driver’s seat and to Armstrong, who was sitting in the front passenger’s seat. What piqued the interest of the law-enforcement officers at first was the scent of marijuana emanating from the Jeep.

Body camera footage shows the officers approaching the vehicle, speaking with both people in the vehicle, instructing Armstrong to get out of the vehicle, and ultimately finding a gun under the front passenger’s seat.

As a result, Armstrong was charged with carrying a concealed weapon, MCL 750.227, being a felon in possession of a firearm (felon in possession), MCL 750.224f, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (felony firearm), MCL 750.227b.

Aggressive Criminal Defense

Have you encountered legal issues related to DUI or lost your driving privileges in Michigan?

Call Our Office for a Free Case Evaluation

In response, Armstrong moved to suppress the gun as the fruit of a search that violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In the trial court, both parties several times declined an invitation to hold an evidentiary hearing, stipulating instead to the use of body camera
footage as the evidentiary basis upon which the trial court should resolve Armstrong’s suppression motion.

Additionally, although no police reports concerning the search and seizure were filed in the trial court, the parties included quotes from the police reports in their briefs, so the trial court considered those excerpts from the police reports.

Relying upon that limited record, the trial court described the factual background of the suppression motion in the following terms:

On October 8, 2020, Corporal Eaton and Officers Genaw, Saad, Scott, and
Krzyak were driving down Seneca street in the city of Detroit to conduct a home compliance check.

Corporal Eaton observed a black Jeep Cherokee parked on Seneca street, with a woman in the driver’s seat and Armstrong in the front passenger seat.

According to Corporal Eaton, she smelled the scent of burnt marijuana as she drove past the black Jeep Cherokee. She parked her vehicle then walked behind the black Jeep Cherokee, exited, and approached the car.

The prosecution’s brief in support alleges that when Corporal Eaton asked Armstrong about the scent of marijuana, she observed a black handgun lying on the floorboard of the vehicle directly in front of Armstrong.

Prosecution also makes note that Corporal Eaton noticed Armstrong’s hand shaking when he was being questioned.

With the parties’ consent to rely on the body camera footage as evidence of the initial interaction between Corporal Eaton, the driver of the vehicle, and Armstrong,

the dialogue is detailed below:

Conclusion

In sum, based on the limited factual record to which the parties stipulated in the trial court, no finding of fact made by the trial court is clearly erroneous.

Therefore, we shall uphold the trial court’s finding of fact that “the firearm was not visible until Armstrong had already been removed
from the vehicle.”

Because the gun was not in plain view before defendant was unconstitutionally seized, the prosecution has provided no exception to the warrant requirement that justifies seizure of the gun.

Accordingly, the trial court properly granted defendant’s motion to suppress the gun, thereby making dismissal of the charges against defendant appropriate.

Read it all here

COA People vs Jeffery Armstrong-Smell of Weed-20221122_c360693_48_360693.opn

Or is it?

It is headed to the Michigan Supreme Court for Oral Arguments

MSC-People vs Jeffrey Armstrong 11-2023 165233_58_01 (PDF Order)

courts.michigan.gov/c/courts/coa/case/360693 (MSC Page)

 

More Posts

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

A Southfield lawyer alleges the Michigan State Police crime labs have “falsified lab reports on marijuana statewide” and he’s asking a judge to dismisses charges lodged against a client.   Michael Komorn, who also represents defendants in Livingston County, said...

read more
Komorn AVVO Reviews

Komorn AVVO Reviews

Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...

read more
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more
Feds New Sentencing Guidelines for Past Cannabis Convictions

Feds New Sentencing Guidelines for Past Cannabis Convictions

The federal U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) has approved a revised amendment to sentencing guidelines, advising judges to adopt a more lenient approach towards prior marijuana possession offenses.

Members of the commission voted to approve a range of amendments to the current guidelines, incorporating a multi-part revision of criminal history.

This revised version now encompasses cannabis possession as a compelling illustration of an offense that typically necessitates contemplation for sentencing discretion.

As it currently stands, federal judges are instructed to consider previous convictions, which include cannabis offenses at the state level, as aggravating factors when determining sentencing for new cases.

But as legalization of marijuana expands to more states, advocates have been advocating for revised guidelines to prevent an individual’s marijuana-related record from contributing criminal history points that could result in harsher sentencing.

 

The proposal does not aim to completely eliminate marijuana convictions as a factor in criminal history. However, it suggests modifying the commentary within the guidelines to consider instances where a downward departure from the defendant’s criminal history may be appropriate, specifically mentioning sentences resulting from possession of marijuana offenses.

“While marihuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), subjecting offenders to up to one year in prison (and up to two or three years in prison for repeat offenders), many states and territories have reduced or eliminated the penalties for possessing small quantities of marihuana for personal use,” it notes.

The term ‘downward departure’ refers to situations where federal judges exercise their discretion to impose sentences that are below the recommended minimum under current guidelines.

It is crucial to recognize and explicitly acknowledge that mere possession of cannabis, without any intent to sell or distribute it to others, presents a compelling case that warrants leniency in sentencing.

By doing so, we uphold the principle of fairness and ensure that appropriate discretion is exercised in such circumstances.

USSC’s report in January exposed a disturbing reality: countless individuals faced harsher federal prison sentences as a consequence of their prior convictions on cannabis possession charges in states that have since enacted reforms to marijuana laws.

The revised guidance is on track to be presented to Congress by May 1 2023, and once accepted without opposition from lawmakers, the amendment will officially take effect on November 1.

Follow up…

ADOPTED AMENDMENTS (EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 1, 2023)

More Posts

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

Attorney: Crime labs ‘falsified’ marijuana reports

A Southfield lawyer alleges the Michigan State Police crime labs have “falsified lab reports on marijuana statewide” and he’s asking a judge to dismisses charges lodged against a client.   Michael Komorn, who also represents defendants in Livingston County, said...

read more
Komorn AVVO Reviews

Komorn AVVO Reviews

Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...

read more
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more