Advice Please! Card Holder

[elkhunter]

   I was pulled over for going 77 on I75 in mid Sept by MSP near Gaylord. Officer approached my passenger door and asked if he could open the door. I said hold on a second I have to reach over to roll window down. reg cab pick up truck. Handed him my perfectly valid vehicle registration, Insurance, and drivers lic. He then asked me the normal routine questions. When asked if I had any marijuana in the vehicle I stated that I did not. Which I didn't! (It was sealed in my travel bag in bed of truck being I was heading to the U.P for some fishing.) I did not state that to him at this point of stop.

 

 He then asked me to step out of vehicle and I asked did I have to. He said it was just faster if I came back and stood by his patrol car while he verified papers. So I did. He was asking me a few questions through his passenger window. Which he then asked me if I had a medical card. I stated yes. I then presented it to him. Then he asked me again if I had any IN the vehicle. I said no.

 

2-5min later k9 unit pulled up. the k9 hit on my passenger door. Odd they never found anything near passenger door or in vehicle. After k9 hit I stated I had a small amount in my travel bag. which was in the bed of my truck. 2grms dry and 1.5grams wax. I handed it over after getting it out. I was then informed the wax is not protected by act. Handcuffed and arrested. Truck impounded. Which has my company logo all over it. taken in, printed and released 15min later with notice to appear within 10days. So I did so and at that time all that was in system was the speeding ticket which I paid. Then Mon I get notice of arraignment for Nov 2nd. possession of controlled substance.

 

I am a well respected member of my community and business owner. I am not a criminal, I was not intentionally breaking the law, It was my fault for not being informed at the time. But everything I'm reading it seems I was well within my rights.

 

They also left my dry and my pen and took the wax

 

Should this get dismissed? Is this normal procedure? Should I get a lawyer? about a 3 hour trip one way for me to get to Gaylord. If we don't stand up, Who will!

 

Thanks for your time!

Edited October 29, 2015 by elkhunter

[rockinlespaul]

Where you smoking in the vehicle? Wondering why he asked you right off the bat if you had weed...?

Edited October 28, 2015 by rockinlespaul

[t-pain]

yeah you should be protected by sec4.

 

you can plead guilty and probably lose the truck and get a felony (or maybe misdemeanor conviction) or you can fight and win. its really up to you (i suggest fight it.)

 

wax is def protected by the act, its a preparation thereof (dried leaves and flower).

 

call michael komorn or other lawyer very quickly. nov 2nd yikes! they want to railroad you man.

 

Komorn Law

24901 Northwestern Hwy

Suite 700

Southfield, MI 48075

CALL 800-656-3557

http://www.komornlaw.com

 

and after you win the case, sue the gentlemen for wrongful arrest!!!!

[elkhunter]

Where you smoking in the vehicle? Wondering why he asked you right off the bat if you had weed...?

 

He didn't just ask. it was part of the normal do you have any weapons, etc that they say normally.

[elkhunter]

I feel I was harassed and embarrassed and that the officer had a personal vendetta about card holders. I was not smoking in truck. I had an 8hr drive on an hour of sleep over 24hr period because I was busting butt so I could take my 1st vacation in 6yrs. I would of been sleeping had I smoked lol. It was a very odd stop. They had A trap set and were pulling cars over left and right. Had me on side of 75 for an hour while people drove by my company truck. once I stated I had my card... He called for k9 which showed up immediately

[trichcycler]

wax=preparation thereof, and you were well under your limit of 2.5 ounces of meds. I am so sorry you've been treated this way. The program is supposed to protect you from this very harassment. you can thank bad cops, bad courts, and dispensary owner negligence for the misunderstanding.

if all else fails first offenders maybe qualify for a 7411. I hope your job is not in danger.

 

bestoffortunetoyou

[Indigro]

Elk... Iv been screwed w by the msp... Only le group (ever, anywhere) that has caused a problem for me. You have to realize that scheutte (state ag) instructs them to enforce federal drug laws over state mmj laws whenever possible... Even though iv been given the impression that the troopers dont actually like this guy very much. Seems as if their dept is charged specifically to screw w mmj patients, legal or otherwise.

 

I was curious if your card status popped up on their computer while running your info...? Did he already know u were a patient when asking? Or was he digging for more info to possibly escalate the situation, such as calling in a k9 unit? Did it feel as if the officer w the dog prompted a signal/hit at the passenger door?

 

Im just curious. Thanks in advance. And for what it is worth, my personal opinion is to fight it all the way, even though that will be a pretty penny for such a trivial matter. The more people fight back, the less such behaviors will persist.

[garyfisher]

fight this tyranny.  they have nothing on you

[Spartyon]

Arrrrg makes me so mad. Where was the probable cause for dog in the 1st place. Because you where a card holder. If they ask me if i have a card my i would respond with a question why? And then i would be calling my lawyer and asking officer if he needs to talk to my attorney

[GregS]

Next time you will want to keep quiet about anything not having to do with the violation you are subject to. Ticketing you for driving 77 mph in a 70 mph speed zone is just chickenschit. Were you in a construction zone? Furthermore, you had your dope stored as is required by an unconstitutional law that requires it be out of reach from the driver.

 

Your wax is a form of chemically extracted usable marijuana within the definition in the law. It is a constituent of the dried leaves and flowers:

 

Sec.3(k) "Usable marihuana" means the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks, and roots of the plant.

 

Sec 4 states:

(d) There shall be a presumption that a qualifying patient or primary caregiver is engaged in the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act if the qualifying patient or primary caregiver:

(1) is in possession of a registry identification card; and

(2) is in possession of an amount of marihuana that does not exceed the amount allowed under this act. The presumption may be rebutted by evidence that conduct related to marihuana was not for the purpose of alleviating the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition, in accordance with this act.

 

You were not afforded that presumption, but were instead illegally searched. Did he bother to get the required search warrant? It would state what probable cause he used to get it. That officer is what is wrong with policing. You will take it in the shorts for an attorney, but in some cases the prosecutor refuses to take these cases to trial and dismisses them. Maybe you will want to both write to and call the prosecutor to lay the law out for him/her before hiring a lawyer, although they almost certainly know. Good luck. What remains is to have his superiors compel him to enforce the law, and not engage in this unprofessional behavior, and to somehow discipline him. Fat chance.

Edited October 29, 2015 by GregS

[elkhunter]

_{I've called a few lawyers, Komorn being one of them. Seems like a lot of run around. I didn't notice any hand signal or any sort as for dog. I own a german shepard and really enjoy a well trained loyal dog. So I was very interested in keeping a close eye on dog and handler. I read the law like most of you. Basically his view of the law was incorrect. He was stalling for the k9 unit to get there the entire stop. The arresting officer was 2014 motor carrier officer of the year. I greatly respect what they do and was respectful the entire time. Even had all 3 officers laughing here and there and was friendly even after arrest. I think by the time we got to the station he was actually feeling bad. I wanted to make sure I represented the med marijuana community the best I could.}

 

_{It was like he knew I was coming. He picked me out of the middle of 3 or 4 cars in the right lane. Already pulling out as I broke the crest of the small hill. As I thought back I remember a early 2000s chevy silverado white that was passing cars and then slowing down and letting them pass then repeating. I remember when that truck passed me the driver made eye contact with me that felt odd for eway travel.}

 

_{After I turned around and came home. 3.5hrs instead of continuing on my fishing trip in the U.P. I would of spent money the entire 8hr trip along the way. Which isn't that what the pure Michigan campaign is all about?}

Edited October 29, 2015 by elkhunter

[Wild Bill]

 _{I would of spent money the entire 8hr trip along the way. Which isn't that what the pure Michigan campaign is all about?}

 

Well, you'll still be spending money. That's definitely what it's all about.

 

[GrowGoddess]

Unfortunately, when it comes to concentrates because they work so well, you are being framed. (Pharmaceutical/money)

 

There is nothing illegal about concentrates except for them using our cards and medicine to frame us.

 

It's all politics and it is bull s*hit http://fox17online.com/2015/10/30/a-non-stop-political-game-former-msp-forensic-science-director-on-false-marijuana-reporting-allegations/

 

 

Here is an article that shows you are being discriminated as a US citizen, which is illegal in a courtroom. Also, it points out clearly that there is favoritism, which is also illegal in a courtroom The favoritism goes to pharmaceutical companies and the MSP for money. Concentrates are fully legal in Colorado and in other places in MI. We have dispensaries right here in MI selling them legally. If the state of MI wants to improve the economy then they should start following what is stated in this article. Locking people does not improve the economy. It is time for MI to get with the program instead of framing people. What's next, start arresting patients because it is indica and not sativa? Or because your marijuana is not green but purple or pink? These frootloops are geeking for anything they can get!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/smallbusiness/after-mines-jail-closed-town-turns-to-cannabis-to-boost-economy/ar-BBmCyCD?li=BBgzzfc

Edited October 31, 2015 by GrowGoddess

[Dalbert]

Being a patient, these laws changing all the time confuse me. I sent my money in and the State of Michigan took it and sent me a card. I have to follow their rules but it seems like they can change the rules at any time without informing me. It's just not fair.

 

My point is that most cops don't really know the basic rules for MMJ. They feel if they search a citizen (legal search or not) and find MMJ, they're supposed to take it away. When presented with a legit card, they think it's illegal to give the meds back. Like it's an illegal transfer or something.

 

Meanwhile we have an entire country of zoned out citizens addicted to opiates. All perfectly legal as well as encouraged by the stockholders of big pharma. I saw a special on

Drugs, Inc (a TV show) about how most of the newer heroin addicts start out on opiate pills from the doctors but end up on much, much cheaper street drugs.  Pretty disgusting that basic human kindness comes with a price tag on it.

 

<rant over>

[Highlander]

Being a patient, these laws changing all the time confuse me. I sent my money in and the State of Michigan took it and sent me a card. I have to follow their rules but it seems like they can change the rules at any time without informing me. It's just not fair.

 

My point is that most cops don't really know the basic rules for MMJ. They feel if they search a citizen (legal search or not) and find MMJ, they're supposed to take it away. When presented with a legit card, they think it's illegal to give the meds back. Like it's an illegal transfer or something.

 

Meanwhile we have an entire country of zoned out citizens addicted to opiates. All perfectly legal as well as encouraged by the stockholders of big pharma. I saw a special on

Drugs, Inc (a TV show) about how most of the newer heroin addicts start out on opiate pills from the doctors but end up on much, much cheaper street drugs.  Pretty disgusting that basic human kindness comes with a price tag on it.

 

<rant over>

 

What a farce.  The idea of LEO giving-back meds is simply an obfuscation by LEO.  LEO can lie to anyone all day long to try to buy drugs, under the protective cloak of "I did it for law enforcement purposes." 

 

LEO can take your MMJ and be protected from legal harm.  Why?  Why do LEOs think that it is perfectly legal for them to force a transfer of meds from patient to LEO, and that's protected under the law, but, suddenly, if LEO has to give the meds back, it a big, huge deal? 

 

If I, as a patient, get stopped for a traffic violation and LEO finds meds in my trunk, he is perfectly OK TAKING POSSESSION of the meds.  He can weight them, look at them, smell them, etc.  A transfer is a transfer, and possession is possession.  It is a ludicrous JOKE that LEOs say it is OK to take possession of your meds (illegal transfer from patient to the non-patient LEO) but, suddenly, if the LEO has to give the meds back, its a big deal? 

[Greg Rx]

Make sure you read and UNDERSTAND this post http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/49656-bill-schuette-asked-about-unknown-origin-lab-reports/

[rindalorinda]

Hold on, now I'm very confused! I thought consentrates were all illegal? A ruling with an individual with brownies or cookies? It was ruled not usable? No one else remembers this?

Edited November 11, 2015 by rindalorinda

[trichcycler]

^ that is a misunderstanding shared by some LEO. Keep your total weights below your allowed and "any preparations of marijuana thereof" is allowed as stated in our Act.  I make sure there is always visible marijuana flowers within my concentrates to avoid any misunderstanding. Besides, the majority of dispensaries  in the state are

selling it right under their counter tops without any LEO problems.

 

Free The Weed!

Peace

[t-pain]

Hold on, now I'm very confused! I thought consentrates were all illegal? A ruling with an individual with brownies or cookies? It was ruled not usable? No one else remembers this?

just keep your brownie weight under 2.5oz and dont answer any questions by police and you will be better off than most people.

[Alphabob]

This misunderstanding by LEO has arisen from the people v carruthers case combined with state attorneys blatantly misinterpretating the laws/rulings. The individual in this case had made edibles with extracted cannabis butter, and thus it was not directly prepared from the buds or flowers. If he were to have made the edibles directly from the bud or flower itself, he would have been covered.

Some tips to stay safe:
1. It doesn’t matter if extracts are legal or not, because MSP and others are treating them as illegal.
2. If you must use extracts, try not to travel with them. Keep them out of the open even on your own personal property.
3. I carry a copy of the MMMA with me ever since being targeted for “improper transportation” and charged with “drug paraphernalia” and “marijuana possession” (even though I had my card and less than 10% of limit).

People v Carruthers (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1638420.html)
“A brownie was tested by a forensic chemist and found to contain Delta 9 tetrahydrocannibinol (‘THC’), a schedule I controlled substance. The chemist could not determine how much THC was in the brownie, nor could the chemist detect any plant material in the brownie by examining it microscopically.”

“At his preliminary examination, defendant acknowledged that THC was extracted from marijuana and infused into the brownies. Defendant's counsel at the preliminary exam also stated that the brownies were ‘not made from ground up leaves [of marijuana]’ but rather were made with a THC extract called ‘Cannabutter.’”

“Rather, and in stark contrast to the MMMA's definition of ‘marihuana,’ it includes only ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof.’ [MCL 333.26423(k) (emphasis added).] The word ‘thereof’ as used in this definition refers back to the immediately preceding phrase ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant.’ Therefore, to constitute ‘usable marihuana’ under the MMMA, any ‘mixture or preparation’ must be of ‘the dried leaves or flowers’ of the marijuana plant.”

“By excluding resin from the definition of ‘usable marihuana,’ as contrasted with the definition of ‘marihuana,’ and defining ‘usable marihuana’ to mean only ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof,’ MCL 333.26423(k) (emphasis added), the drafters clearly expressed its intent not to include resin, or a mixture or preparation of resin, within the definition of ‘usable marihuana .’It therefore expressed its intent not to include a mixture or preparation of an extract of resin. Consequently, an edible made with THC extracted from resin is excluded from the definition of ‘usable marihuana.’ Rather, under the plain language of the MMMA, the only ‘mixture or preparation’ that falls within the definition of ‘usable marihuana’ is a ‘mixture or preparation’ of ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant.’ Id.”

Edited November 11, 2015 by Alphabob

[t-pain]

alpha, i think your reading of the case is pretty good. most people dont bother reading that far into it.

 

but i'd go a step further and say the coa was trying to make a distinction between "resin" from the stalks vs resin from the leaves and flowers.

 

e.g. brownie made from stalk resin wouldnt be covered by usable marijuana definition. you see?

 

its a very complicated and dumb ruling.

[trichcycler]

Maybe the reason the lab and its directors are fraudulently reporting their evidence as synthesized, ...because they know damnedd well it is a preparation thereof and our most valuable medicine has always been prepared in a similar fashion.... Its a last ditch effort to justify their over employment possibly.

 

A real report finding would obviously contain plant material, duh.

[Wild Bill]

The main reason they do it is because they want a conviction at any cost. The facts are irrelevant if they can distort them or the wording of the law in such a way that the accused is found guilty.

[Alphabob]

alpha, i think your reading of the case is pretty good. most people dont bother reading that far into it.

 

but i'd go a step further and say the coa was trying to make a distinction between "resin" from the stalks vs resin from the leaves and flowers.

 

e.g. brownie made from stalk resin wouldnt be covered by usable marijuana definition. you see?

 

its a very complicated and dumb ruling.

 

That's another thing I noticed. You are allowed to have incidental amounts of seeds and stalk, but making resin from them is considered illegal. However, in court you would have to testify against yourself, so they probably wouldn't know that unless you told them. This is another problem I see with targeting extracts or resins like these, because you have no idea how it was prepared when buying from a dispensary. The thing is, the MMMA states in section 4,

 

(d) There shall be a presumption that a qualifying patient or primary caregiver is engaged in the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act if the qualifying patient or primary caregiver: (2) is in possession of an amount of marihuana that does not exceed the amount allowed under this act. The presumption may be rebutted by evidence that conduct related to marihuana was not for the purpose of alleviating the qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition, in accordance with this act.

 

So in order for LEO, MSP labs or PAs to claim that you were not engaged in the medical use of marihuana in accordance with the act requires some sort of evidence that you were not. This is precisely what the labs are ignoring; they claim that they can’t prove its marijuana, but the law says that they should assume it is unless evidence says otherwise.

 

I've also heard that one of the reasons was to increase revenue via civil and criminal forfeiture.

Edited November 12, 2015 by Alphabob

[phaquetoo]

   I was pulled over for going 77 on I75 in mid Sept by MSP near Gaylord. Officer approached my passenger door and asked if he could open the door. I said hold on a second I have to reach over to roll window down. reg cab pick up truck. Handed him my perfectly valid vehicle registration, Insurance, and drivers lic. He then asked me the normal routine questions. When asked if I had any marijuana in the vehicle I stated that I did not. Which I didn't! (It was sealed in my travel bag in bed of truck being I was heading to the U.P for some fishing.) I did not state that to him at this point of stop.

 

 He then asked me to step out of vehicle and I asked did I have to. He said it was just faster if I came back and stood by his patrol car while he verified papers. So I did. He was asking me a few questions through his passenger window. Which he then asked me if I had a medical card. I stated yes. I then presented it to him. Then he asked me again if I had any IN the vehicle. I said no.

 

2-5min later k9 unit pulled up. the k9 hit on my passenger door. Odd they never found anything near passenger door or in vehicle. After k9 hit I stated I had a small amount in my travel bag. which was in the bed of my truck. 2grms dry and 1.5grams wax. I handed it over after getting it out. I was then informed the wax is not protected by act. Handcuffed and arrested. Truck impounded. Which has my company logo all over it. taken in, printed and released 15min later with notice to appear within 10days. So I did so and at that time all that was in system was the speeding ticket which I paid. Then Mon I get notice of arraignment for Nov 2nd. possession of controlled substance.

 

I am a well respected member of my community and business owner. I am not a criminal, I was not intentionally breaking the law, It was my fault for not being informed at the time. But everything I'm reading it seems I was well within my rights.

 

They also left my dry and my pen and took the wax

 

Should this get dismissed? Is this normal procedure? Should I get a lawyer? about a 3 hour trip one way for me to get to Gaylord. If we don't stand up, Who will!

 

Thanks for your time!

Welcome to the site!

 

when he asked you to come back to his car because it would be easier, I would have said I prefer to sit in my own car.  If he said it again I would have asked him if I was under arrest for something!  Fricking cops just sit on their a sses all day any how, why should you make his job easier, he pulled you over!

 

When asked If you were an mm card holder, I would have said why?  I know personaly I would not have said yes unless they already found my stash!  some thing tells me you have been pulled over before and had an mj related incident, they do not know you are a card holder unless you telll them (at least that is how the law is supposed to work), was your dry in a jar and no way could have been smelled when he walked upto your truck?

 

I most def would have continued on my way to the u.p for fishing, unless your bond broke ya!

 

Its kinda funny how you use the word "we" when you ask if you should fight it in court!  do you have a mouse in your pocket? lol jk!

 

I would fight it tooth and nail, and I would rent a bus and bring every one you know with you to every hearing, because you will not get much help from members in here to show up for court, I will be there for you, But will you be there for me if I ever need support?  I know of several that will, because I was there for them!

 

Best of luck to You!

 

Peace