Michigan Supreme Court Refuses To Review Cop’S Use Of Fake Marihuana Card To Trick Legitimate Caregiver

[bobandtorey]

Michigan Supreme Court Refuses to Review Cop’s Use of Fake Marihuana Card to Trick Legitimate Caregiver

Court follows Court of Appeals denial of application for leave after trial court denies caregiver all defenses.

Saint Joseph, MI -- The Michigan Supreme Court denied Jeffery Miller’s Application for Leave to Appeal, leaving undisturbed the trial court’s opinion denying him all of his medical marihuana defenses at trial. The case has since been assigned an new trial court judge, and he will rule on the prosecution’s renewed motion on April 25, 2014. It is anticipated that the trial court will rule that Mr. Miller will be stripped of all defenses at trial, and precluded from mentioning medical marihuana. Miller’s “crime” is that an undercover cop entrapped him, pretending to be a suffering patient with no access to marihuana. The officer tricked Miller to sell him marihuana after showing him a forged patient card and a matching drivers license.

“The increasingly common law enforcement practice of using falsified medical marijuana registry patient cards to entice law abiding citizens is unconscionable,” said Daniel W. Grow, lawyer for Miller. “When officers entrap lawful registered caregivers into making transfers of marijuana for medical use, Michigan’s citizens must not be deemed felons.” In light of the prior trial court judge’s ruling and the failure of the appellate courts to reverse the trial court, it is anticipated that the trial court judge will rule that Miller will not even be able to mention that the only reason he sold marihuana to the officer was that he lied about his status and lied about his medical condition.

After Defendant filed his application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals but before the Court of Appeals denied his application, this Court issued its opinion in People v McQueen, 493 Mich 135 (2013). Following McQueen, he asked the Court of Appeals to reconsider their denial of his application for leave. After that application was denied, he sought leave to the Michigan Supreme Court.

The sole basis for the trial court’s decision was its reliance on the now overturned determination of the Court of Appeals version of McQueen, i.e., the mistaken determination that “sales” of marijuana are per se illegal. The entire analysis pertaining to the denial of Defendant’s motion to dismiss has been invalidated by McQueen.
“The actions of law enforcement in this case are morally reprehensible and legally impermissible, and that those actions deprived the Mr. Miller the ability to purse a Section 8 hearing,” said Mr. Grow. “Further, but for the lengthy and elaborate inducement by deception (including repeated false verbal affirmations of patient status and by the production of a counterfeit medical marijuana patient registry card), a law abiding citizen was led into entering a transaction that he believed was legally protected.” Now it appears that the jury will not be allowed to know that but for the deception of law enforcement, the transaction would NOT have taken place.

The deception was by an officer with the Berrien County Narcotics Unit. The officer made the initial conduct with Mr. Miller, contacting him on Facebook. Johnson caused him to believe he was a qualifying patient participating in Michigan’s registry program, and tricked Mr. Miller into thinking he needed assistance with the medical use of marihuana. He advised Mr. Miller that he was having a hard time getting the marihuana he needed for his medical condition and that he might need a new caregiver. He told Mr. Miller that that he had started to grow a little bit and that he had friends that had grown, but they were now afraid to grow. It was undisputed that Mr. Miller provided Johnson medical marihuana only after verifying Johnson was a registered patient. The officer even told Mr. Miller that he wanted to establish a patient-caregiver relationship with him. The two met on two occasions, and in total, Miller provided the “patient” about 1/2 ounce of marihuana.

The hearing on the motions that will prevent Mr. Miller from even mentioning any of the reasons what the transfer of marihuana took place will occur on April 25, 2014, in the Berrien County Courthouse in St. Joseph, Michigan, at 1:30 P.M. The public is invited to attend.

Further information:
Order denying leave:

[bobandtorey]

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/sct/public/orders/20140326_s147751_30_147751_2014-03-26_or.pdf

[motorcitymeds]

This shiiyat is out of control rogue cops are so busted up and in need of work that they are being reduced to onloine stalking of legit CG's.

 

WTF is wrong with these cops..???????????????????????????

 

These narc cops should be stripped of their jobs.  Meanwhile some good ole cartel gang bangers are pushing pounds of crystal meth bythe kilo to methheads...never ceases to amaze me what these cops will do to keep job security.

 

 

GO stop these freakin heroins addicts from robbing to get a fix....but that requires work. 

[Kingdiamond]

Because of instances like this I refuse to even bring any cannabis when meeting new patients a few times it has not gone well which is understandable but I'm not worried about hurting people feelings I'm more concerned about following the letter of the law that is 21 business days( Weekends don't count) without receiving a rejection letter that's the soonest I can start providing medicine .

[bobandtorey]

i knew you where going to go crazy on this one 

Peace and i hope the word gets out to the rest of  the pt/cg

[bobandtorey]

Because of instances like this I refuse to even bring any cannabis when meeting new patients a few times it has not gone well which is understandable but I'm not worried about hurting people feelings I'm more concerned about following the letter of the law that is 28 business days without receiving a rejection letter that's the soonest I can start providing medicine .

 

 

thanks 

 

but i think the point here with the ruling  is what won't leo do to get someone and people like me and you would never fall for this kind of meeting

 

and it's the rest i/we will try to teach 

[t-pain]

without being able to see the appeal, its hard to tell what the problem is.

 

but the MSC makes it quite clear that the lawyer asked the court to review the wrong question.

hopefully he'll have a better question to appeal with. i guess?

[flowerspice420]

I read about the appeals court... but at what level ?? michigan appeals for the supreme court is the same court basically... it needs to go the the 

6th circuit court of appeals...in ohio. and nip this in the bud dad!       about 18 months to that level been there done that on an unrelated

lawsuit and won. it is completly handled by the attorneys you don't have to show at that court.

 

Peace

[bustedinclintontwsp]

the "fictitious paperwork" gota stop there is a petition to stop MSP from doing it at change.org. I think the best chance for fake paperwork case is the new curruthers case

[GregS]

I read about the appeals court... but at what level ?? michigan appeals for the supreme court is the same court basically... it needs to go the the 

6th circuit court of appeals...in ohio. and nip this in the bud dad!       about 18 months to that level been there done that on an unrelated

lawsuit and won. it is completly handled by the attorneys you don't have to show at that court.

 

Peace

You are aware that the 6th Circuit is a Federal Court? It is entirely separate from Michigan State Courts.

[MiMedical]

I'd do some intense background checks on potential patients if I were a caregiver, this may be a back door to eliminate a lot of CG's. if that's all police have to do is make up some fake patient cards to get a conviction.. Insane.

[trichcycler]

I think its wrong what leo did. There's no way fake cards or a cop could bust me illegally supplying them. I only work with previously carded patients, and I don't even meet with a patient until 21 days after a cert mailing. I call lara and ask them if accepted. I meet with first delivery. All courting is done via email for as long as it takes. I wont supply anyone else. Cops can stalk all they want, if cg suppliers would follow the law, nobody would be getting caught doing anything illegal.

[outsideinthecold]

What is really sad about this is when the former Berrien County PA Cherry was dying of cancer his only effective way to combat his loss of appetite during chemo was ----- pot. Or cannabis, or weed, or whatever you want to call it.

 

His wife, Judge Toland was a raving alcoholic who once wrecked her car several minutes after leaving the bench----drunk.

 

The COA judge in this venue is 'hangin' Angie Pasula. Her replacement on the bench after her elevation to the COA by election is the former Berrien County PA, Judge Cotter.

 

There is no compassion for mmj in Berrien County.

 

The sheriff's department does have a lot of boats, horses, motorcycles, armored cars and other wonderful toys that were 'free' thanks to forfeiture.

 

Fknrepublicans. Oops, I didn't mean that.  Fkn donkey-lochs- or whatever the word for hole is in auf Deutsch.

Edited April 4, 2014 by outsideinthecold

[Highlander]

I think its wrong what leo did. There's no way fake cards or a cop could bust me illegally supplying them. I only work with previously carded patients, and I don't even meet with a patient until 21 days after a cert mailing. I call lara and ask them if accepted. I meet with first delivery. All courting is done via email for as long as it takes. I wont supply anyone else. Cops can stalk all they want, if cg suppliers would follow the law, nobody would be getting caught doing anything illegal.

 

That is good policy.  I also don't take any comfort in waiting 21 days on a Change Form.  I was told first-hand by LARA (MDCH at the time) that a Change Form is not an "Application," and therefore, the department does not see where an automatic approval exists for caregivers based on a waiting period when a Change Form is submitted.

 

© The department shall verify the information contained in an application or renewal submitted pursuant to this section, and shall approve or deny an application or renewal within 15 business days of receiving it. The department may deny an application or renewal only if the applicant did not provide the information required pursuant to this section, or if the department determines that the information provided was falsified. Rejection of an application or renewal is considered a final department action, subject to judicial review. Jurisdiction and venue for judicial review are vested in the circuit court for the county of Ingham.

 

(b) If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to this act within 20 days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

Reading the entire Act, one will see that a "Change Form" is never mentioned.  And if you read the administrative rules where notice of a change is mentioned, the process does not include the word, "application."

 

R 333.119 Changes in status; notifications; requirements.

Rule 19. (1) In order to update registry information for a qualifying patient or

primary caregiver, the registered qualifying patient, registered primary caregiver, or

registered qualifying patient's parent or legal guardian, as applicable, is responsible for

notifying the department of a change in any of the following:

(a) The registered qualifying patient's name.

(b) The registered qualifying patient's address.

© The registered qualifying patient's primary caregiver.

(d) The registered qualifying patient's legal guardian.

(2) The department may notify a registered primary caregiver by certified mail at the

address of record within 14 days of any changes in status including, but not limited

to, both of the following:

(a) The registered qualifying patient's termination of the individual's status as primary

caregiver or designation of another individual as the registered primary caregiver.

(b) The end of eligibility for the registered qualifying patient to hold a registry

identification card.

(3) If the department is notified by a registered qualifying patient that the registered

primary caregiver for the patient has changed, the department may notify the initial

primary caregiver by certified mail at the address of record that the caregiver's registry

identification card is null and void and of no effect.

(4) If a registered qualifying patient's certifying physician notifies the department in

writing that the patient has ceased to suffer from a debilitating medical condition,

the department shall notify the patient within 14 days of receipt of the written

notification that the patient's registry identification card is null and void and of no

effect.

 

The widely-assumed 20+ day automatic approval for the Change Form is based on the weak assumption that the Change Form is an application.  Note that the Act only says that an "Application" is approved automatically, and not only is a Change Form not indicated as an application, there is no mention of a Change Form at all.  So it is a big stretch to try to fit a Change Form into the same boat as an Application.  This would be the equivalent of assuming or trying to add language to the law that doesn't exist - a big no-no in the world of statutory interpretation.

 

Notice also that in the administrative rules, only a patient is given the status of "Applicant" 

 

(2) "Applicant" means a qualifying patient applying for a medical marihuana registry

identification card on a form provided by the department of licensing and regulatory

affairs.

 

Again, based on the rules of statutory interpretation, you can't add anything to this definition, and the fact that "caregiver" is not included in the definition of "Applicant" means that the omission of a CG as an applicant is intentional.  It would follow that if you can't be an "Applicant" then you are not completing an application, and accordingly, any automatic approval of an "Application" cannot apply.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Highlander

[bobandtorey]

Thanks you make some great points and i do agree most do sell weed to people they don't even know 

[t-pain]

change form says its an application

"Did both the patient and the caregiver (if designated), sign and date this application in Section D below?...."

 

"WHAT TO EXPECT AFTER YOU SUBMIT YOUR CHANGE FORM:"

 

"If the patient has not received a new registry ID card or some form of notification within six (6) weeks from the date the MMP
receives your valid application, please contact our office at 517-373-0395 and select option #3. Please allow a full 6 weeks."

 

i mean, the form itself refers to itself as an application.

 

"

CAREGIVER DECLARATION: (REQUIRED)
I understand that it is necessary to secure a criminal conviction history as part of the screening process. I authorize this agency to use the information provided in this application"

 

are we splitting hairs about what an application is now ?

[bobandtorey]

I think its wrong what leo did. There's no way fake cards or a cop could bust me illegally supplying them. I only work with previously carded patients, and I don't even meet with a patient until 21 days after a cert mailing. I call lara and ask them if accepted. I meet with first delivery. All courting is done via email for as long as it takes. I wont supply anyone else. Cops can stalk all they want, if cg suppliers would follow the law, nobody would be getting caught doing anything illegal.

Thanks again 

 

someones  only as good as taking as much precautions they can levying a door open doesn't seam to justify taking people's stuff and keeping it even after the judge has dismissed a case  

[Highlander]

are we splitting hairs about what an application is now ?

Not splitting hairs. LARA said that wording on forms does not carry any weight because it isn't part of the law or promulgated rules. I just think people should know what the regulators are saying and make their decisions accordingly.

[t-pain]

"some guy" at LARA? or is this a written official statement from the head of LARA MMMP office ?

 

i'm not trying to argue , just curious. thanks for your info and analysis.

Edited April 4, 2014 by t-pain

[trichcycler]

I won't invite someone into my registry if I knew them previously. purposely. by the time they get through my micron screening they literally feel like old buddies, and usually say so if selected. A specific type of patient is attracted to my garden habits, and turns out those cats are super cool people, the ones I always knew were out there! The one's that don't like what I do, turns out I can't help them anyways. As long as I can tell the difference between the two before I meet them, it's been golden.

 

Do you think "most" get busted up in some criminal activity or another often as a result of involving their "friends" ?

..... most do sell weed to people they don't even know 

[Highlander]

"some guy" at LARA? or is this a written official statement from the head of LARA MMMP office ?

 

i'm not trying to argue , just curious. thanks for your info and analysis.

Was only a verbal from the director at the time. I think Melissa Peters.

 

My concern is that the 20-day matter isn't clarified in writing by any official, which invites LEO to arrest first and let the courts sort it out.

[bobandtorey]

Here say won't help someone in Court that for sure 

 

best to wait for a card if you are going to grow but using cannabis after the time limits 20 business days you'll be OK 

[bobandtorey]

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/sct/public/orders/20140326_s147751_30_147751_2014-03-26_or.pdf

a law abiding citizen was led into entering a transaction that he believed was legally protected ? we all know that you must be connected by the State to sell cannabis

[Restorium2]

a law abiding citizen was led into entering a transaction that he believed was legally protected ? we all know that you must be connected by the State to sell cannabis

Section 8 was clearly spelled out in the ballot language. What we all should know is that you need to see a doctor first.  Know the law. There's more than one way to theoretically be protected, therefore, unconnected sales are not exempt from entrapment laws.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Restorium2

[ozzrokk]

They say in their FAQ that there is no time limit on change forms..................