No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
On October 11, 2024, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued a decision in the case People of the State of Michigan v. Blake Anthony-William Barton.
The case involved a drunk driving investigation following a car accident in Britton, Michigan.
The incident occurred on September 10, 2022, at approximately 2:00 a.m. Officer David Low of the Raisin Township Police Department responded to a car accident at the intersection of Sutton Road and Ridge Highway. He found a vehicle in a wooded area off the roadway, with the driver, later identified as Barton, partially pinned underneath the car.
Barton admitted to consuming alcohol earlier in the night and claimed he was on his way to a rodeo. However, it was already 2:16 a.m., well past the time any rodeo would have ended.
Barton was transported to ProMedica Toledo Hospital in Toledo, Ohio, for treatment. While there, medical staff drew his blood for medical purposes, not under arrest.
Two days later, the prosecutor’s office requested the chemical analysis of Barton’s blood from the hospital.
The prosecutor’s office sent a letter to Toledo Hospital requesting that it provide Barton’s chemical analysis from September 10.
The Prosecuting Attorney for Lenawee County signed the letter. Specifically, he requested:
Please provide to the Raisin Township Police Department the complete chemical analysis of the above-named subject that was performed on or about September 10, 2022.
This request is submitted in accordance with Ohio Revised Code, 2317.02, which is attached for your reference.
This is an open and pending investigation. Please mail the records to the Raisin Township Police Department . . . (emphasis omitted).
The letter did not attach a copy of Ohio Rev Code 2317.02 as it stated.
Instead, the prosecutor’s office provided a Michigan Attorney General opinion detailing the enforceability of MCL 257.625a(6)(e) prior to a person’s arrest.
In response, Toledo Hospital sent the chemical analysis results to the police department. The chemical analysis disclosed that Barton’s blood and urine samples, which indicated a blood alcohol level of 0.23 and the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).
The Lenawee Circuit Court initially granted Barton’s motion to suppress the blood evidence due to a perceived technical noncompliance with Michigan Compiled Laws (MCL) 257.625a(6)(e).
(e) If, after an accident, the driver of a vehicle involved in the accident is transported to a medical facility and a sample of the driver’s blood is withdrawn at that time for medical treatment, the results of a chemical analysis of that sample are admissible in any civil or criminal proceeding to show the amount of alcohol or presence of a controlled substance or other intoxicating substance in the person’s blood at the time alleged, regardless of whether the person had been offered or had refused a chemical test. The medical facility or person performing the chemical analysis shall disclose the results of the analysis to a prosecuting attorney who requests the results for use in a criminal prosecution as provided in this subdivision. A medical facility or person disclosing information in compliance with this subsection is not civilly or criminally liable for making the disclosure.
However, the prosecution later submitted evidence showing that the court’s decision relied on a factual error.
Consequently, the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s decision and remanded the case.
This goes to show you can still fight a case even when you think all is lost.
If you are interested in more in depth detail read the Opinion here.
Disclaimer: This article provides a general overview, or opinions and does not substitute for legal advice. As with any law it can change or be modified and research should be done before you rely on any information provided on the internet. Although we make all attempts to link relevant laws these laws can often be gray and corrupted to fit a narrative. Anyone charged with any alleged crime should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance. Articles may be 3rd party or contain opinions and information that do not reflect the current stance of Komorn Law.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Haley Butler-Moore sped up to pass a semi on the highway when she suddenly saw the police lights.
She’d left Albuquerque hours earlier, heading to a Halloween party in Denver. Tired from the long drive, she recalled being nervous as she pulled out her paperwork. The trooper asked Butler-Moore to come sit in the patrol car.
“Do you use any recreational drugs?” asked the officer, as captured on the body camera.
“No,” said Butler-Moore.
“OK, because your eyes are saying something completely different. So how much have you used today?”
At the police station, the DRE officer, one of more than 8,000 scattered in departments across the country, asked Butler-Moore to recount everything she did that day.
“If there is no impairment, it will come out here,” the officer told her, the entire evaluation recorded on bodycam.
But the officer had concerns. Butler-Moore had put the wrong date, from the day before. That’s because, Butler-Moore said, she didn’t realize it was already after midnight.
Read the whole story here at MLive
Disclaimer: This article provides a general overview, or opinions and does not substitute for legal advice. As with any law it can change or be modified and research should be done before you rely on any information provided on the internet. Although we make all attempts to link relevant laws these laws can often be gray and corrupted to fit a narrative. Anyone charged with any alleged crime should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance. Articles may be 3rd party or contain opinions and information that do not reflect the current stance of Komorn Law.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
The recent theft of over 1,000 pounds of marijuana from 305 Farms, a corporate cannabis grower in West Michigan, has raised serious concerns in the industry.
This incident, which involved more than $600,000 worth of product, occurred at the farm’s expansive 39-acre facility in Lawrence, located about 30 miles west of Kalamazoo.
Investigations suggest that individuals with insider knowledge may have played a role in the crime. Like many cultivators across the state, 305 Farms has been facing significant challenges in this competitive market.
In July 2024, a group of employees filed a lawsuit against the company, claiming that it had failed to compensate them for thousands of dollars in wages owed.
The oversaturation of Michigan’s legal cannabis market has led to historically low prices, creating significant hurdles for cultivators trying to thrive in this challenging landscape.
A few days later and this happens…
Oct 28, 2024 – The general manager of 305 Farms is currently under scrutiny for possible criminal charges related to the sale of over 660 pounds of cannabis, with nearly $270,000 in proceeds allegedly utilized to pay his employees for outstanding wages.
Employees allege that the company indicated termination would be a consequence for not returning the funds from the sale as 305 Farms has faced a considerable reduction in its workforce over the past year.
Allegedly they have been enduring a work environment characterized by threats, humiliation, lack of compensation, and excessive stress.
Via hearsay it is alleged that the company owed more than an estimated $1 million in unpaid wages beforethe GM’s defiant sale.
There will be more to come.
Disclaimer: This article provides a general overview, or opinions and does not substitute for legal advice. As with any law it can change or be modified and research should be done before you rely on any information provided on the internet. Although we make all attempts to link relevant laws these laws can often be gray and corrupted to fit a narrative. Anyone charged with any alleged crime should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance. Articles may be 3rd party or contain opinions and information that do not reflect the current stance of Komorn Law.
Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...
Inside the Chinese-funded and staffed marijuana farms springing up across the U.S.During a farm inspection, New Mexico state special agents discovered an excessive number of cannabis plants in violation of state laws. Subsequent visits revealed dozens of underfed and...
Oakland County Sheriff's deputy fatally shot in 'ambush' while following stolen carA deputy investigating a stolen car was shot to death Saturday night in Detroit in what Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard called an ambush. Oakland County Sheriff's Deputy Bradley...
State AGs And Former DEA Leaders Push Agency To Hold Public Hearing On Marijuana Rescheduling ProposalIn a filing with the federal government ahead of a key deadline this week, a group of former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) leaders is asking the agency to...
This illicit drug will eat your flesh, turn your skin green, scaly and it's in MichiganWe did not post any pictures depicting the results of abuse because it is horrifying. If you must see - Google for images of Krokodil.Authorities are warning to be cautious of...
Attorney General Nessel Reaches $700 Million Settlement Against Johnson and JohnsonYour mom and your dad have been covering you with Johnson and Johnson powder since you were a baby. There was always a cloud of powder in the air as they slapped it on you. It got all...
The Rights of NatureSeattle settled a lawsuit brought by the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe on behalf of salmon harmed by dams on the Skagit River. This is one of the first "rights of nature" cases in the US, and the tribe argued that the lack of fish passage measures violated...
It's their corner now“This punishment should serve as a clear warning for all unlicensed cannabis stores in the state: we will enforce the law and shut down your operations,” state Attorney General Letitia James saidThe owner of seven unlicensed cannabis shops in New...
IRS 280E and Cannabis BusinessesWhat is IRS Section 280E? Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code restricts businesses from deducting typical business expenses from their gross income related to the distribution of Schedule I or II substances per the Controlled...
Summary from the official government website (Link Below)The Use of Tetrahydrocannabinol Is Associated with an Increase in Survival Time in Palliative Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort StudyThe study, conducted by researchers in Germany, analyzed...
If you own or are a member of an LLC.
You have a deadline of January 1, 2025
The new Beneficial Ownership Reporting requirements for LLCs and other corporations come under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and will go into effect on January 1, 2024.
The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) of 2021 was enacted to combat financial crimes such as money laundering, tax evasion, and terrorist financing. It requires corporations, limited liability companies (LLCs), and similar entities to disclose their beneficial owners—the individuals who own or control these entities—to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
Under the CTA, businesses must provide information such as names, addresses, and identification numbers of beneficial owners.
The goal is to prevent criminals and politicians from using anonymous entities to conceal their identities. Criminals that use entities using their real name still have to register.
Most small and privately held companies are subject to this law, although there are exemptions for heavily regulated entities.
The law became effective in 2021, with reporting requirements started in 2024.
Failure to comply can result in fines and even imprisonment.
Penalties: Failure to report can lead to penalties of $500 per day for non-compliance, and could even result in fines up to $10,000 or imprisonment for up to two years.
Legal Counsel and Your Rights
When facing legal challenges, particularly in criminal cases, it is advisable to seek legal counsel immediately.
An experienced attorney can provide guidance on how to navigate interactions with law enforcement while safeguarding your constitutional rights.
Since 1993 our expert legal defense in navigating criminal law matters and protecting your constitutional rights are what we eat for breakfast everyday.
Contact Komorn Law PLLC if you’re ready to fight and win.
Research us and then call us.
Other Articles
"Data show these programs strengthen communities by reducing crime, boosting employment"LANSING, MI, October 24, 2024 (Substance Abuse Prevention Month) – The Michigan Supreme Court announces that the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) has awarded $18,823,910...
Michigan House Bill 5451 of 2024: A Step Toward "Safer Communities"Michigan House Bill 5451, introduced by Representative Sharon MacDonell in February 2024, aims to enhance firearm safety in homes with children. The bill mandates that the Department of Health and...
Step by StepMichigan House Bill 5450 of 2024 is a bill that was introduced by Representative Sharon MacDonell on February 14, 2024. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Education and was reported with a recommendation with a substitute on May 14, 2024. The...
You work hard. Now get ready to work harder to prepare to give more.President Biden's administration has proposed the reclassification of marijuana from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule III drug, which recognizes its medical benefits. This significant...
Compounding charges refer to the illegal act of accepting or agreeing to accept a benefit in exchange for not prosecuting a crime. In Michigan, this is considered a serious offense, and the law specifically prohibits it under Michigan Laws.
Compounding occurs when a person involved in or aware of a crime chooses not to report it or prosecute it in exchange for something valuable. Essentially, it’s a way of “settling” the matter privately instead of going through the legal system, often through money, services, or other forms of compensation.
According to MCL 750.122, it is illegal for someone to:
This law applies to both the person who might report the crime (such as the victim) and the person who offers the benefit (such as the offender). The law makes it clear that the proper way to handle any crime is through the court system, not private arrangements.
The penalties for compounding can vary based on the severity of the underlying crime. Under MCL 750.122(7), if the crime being “settled” is a felony, then compounding the charge is also treated as a felony. If the crime is a misdemeanor, compounding becomes a misdemeanor. This ensures that compounding is not an easy way out of legal consequences.
The reason compounding charges are treated so seriously is to ensure justice. When someone allows a crime to be hidden in exchange for personal gain, it undermines the justice system and can allow criminals to avoid punishment.
In Michigan, the law against compounding charges is clear and strict. It is never legal to accept or offer benefits in exchange for not prosecuting or reporting a crime. The courts are the proper avenue for handling all criminal matters.
For more details, you can view the specific law on the Michigan Legislature website (MCL) Section 750.122.
In Michigan, there are no exceptions that allow for compounding charges under MCL 750.122.
The law is strict in prohibiting any agreement to accept compensation in exchange for not reporting or prosecuting a crime.
This means that regardless of the circumstances, a person cannot legally accept money, services, or other benefits to refrain from involving the legal system in a crime.
Unless you are rich and famous or a politician.
However, while MCL 750.122 prohibits private settlements or agreements to avoid prosecution, there are legal alternatives within the justice system itself, such as plea bargains and restitution agreements.
These are formal processes, overseen by courts or prosecutors, where a defendant may agree to plead guilty to a lesser charge or make amends to the victim. Importantly, these arrangements are part of the legal system and are monitored to ensure fairness and justice.
“The best we can do is an educated guess.”
Note: This article provides a general overview and does not substitute for legal advice. Anyone charged with an offense should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance. Don’t forget the internet is full of “Misinformation”
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.