Medical Marijuana Card Protects You From Prosecution, Not "discovery"

[slipstar059]

Crazy...

[ozzrokk]

Hey Rory happy to hear that you are free........... Sorry  you had to plead guilty to something you were not guilty of..............

[MiMedical]

Happy for you, glad your done :-)

[mibrains]

very good news rory..

 

so glad you are satisfied with your outcome...

 

 

The end results of this case.

The Police didn't show up to the motion to suppress hearing.
My attorney said that the judge could accept our motion, or he could ask for an adjournment.
The Judge asked the prosecution why don't they just try to resolve this case and offer me a misdemeanor possession charge. My lawyer asked him how he would sentence me to that?

The judge said he would want to see my criminal record from Indiana.
I have a bad drug dealing and possesion record out of Indiana, so I said thats not good.
I understood that with this motion, they would have to admit that they had violated my 4th Amendment rights and that they were concerned about that, I could see how the judge in this case was trying to save the face of the State in this regard. So I told my attorney that I was interested in getting this put behind me.
If we have an adjournment, I would still have to take a urinalisis and I feel like the bond meetings every two weeks seemed just like probation to me. Even though I'm to be treated innocent until proven guilty.
I explained that I would only choose no jail time and no probation otherwise we need to go for the suppression. The lawyer went back to tell them what I had said.
He came back and asked if I would settle with a misdemeanor charge of marijuana use.
pay a $867 total fine no jail time no probation.
Then it will be done.
I took that deal and now its over and I'm free.
The system is crooked. And there is my proof.
So it is done.
I have a big record so another misdemeanor will not hurt it any.

I'm just glad that it's over.

[t-pain]

heres an interesting case related to what rory went thru

 

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20141028_C312530_46_312530.OPN.PDF

 

Rather, voluntary consent is the only asserted justification for the

officers’ intrusion on the core protection of the Fourth Amendment—the right a person to retreat

into his own home and be free from unreasonable searches and seizure. Id. at 558-559. For all

these reasons, we find that Forshee is not entitled to qualified immunity.

We reverse and remand for further proceedings. We do not retain jurisdiction. As the

prevailing party, appellant may tax costs pursuant to MCR 7.219.

/s/ Douglas B. Shapiro

/s/ Jane E. Markey

/s/ Cynthia Diane Stephens

 

a CoA MMMA case even! wow.

Edited November 16, 2014 by t-pain