Michael Komorn

Nearly two years ago I traced the history of why Marijuana was banned in the United States. Time magazine has researched the same origin of Marijuana prohibition and has come to the same conclusions. The plant Cannabis Sativa is only called Marijuana because it sounds spanish/Mexican. Cannabis prohibition laws were enacted to specifically criminalize otherwise lawfully abiding adult immigrants from Mexico, fleeing the violence of the Mexican Revolution in 1910. This racist policing has continued from 1910 to this very day , even after legalization has passed in a few states. Arrest rates are still disproportionate when you look at race statistics. 109 years of racist prohibition laws against a plant! http://time.com/5572691/420-marijuana-mexican-immigration/ With legalization comes expungements also known as clearing your criminal record. No other crime gets this special treatment. Everyone already knows cannabis prohibition laws are nonsense. After legalization passes, legislatures, judges and prosecutors are fine with clearing your name and record of marijuana crimes. Call my office today 800-656-3557 to get your record cleared of these racist marijuana crimes. It does not matter how long ago the crime occurred either. Whether you are 21 or 91, marijuana convictions can be undone in Michigan after legalization. Se habla español.

The new Governor Gretchen Whitmer says she supports expungements for past marijuana crimes. Might be an option for you if you want to get into the marijuana business.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/11/27/state-wont-close-medical-pot-shops-year/2123932002/ Lansing — Nearly 100 temporarily operating medical marijuana businesses seeking their state licenses can continue operating at least through the end of the year. The state Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs agreed Tuesday that it would not shut down any pot shops before Dec. 31. The commitment from Bureau of Medical Marihuana Regulation Director Andrew Brisbo came just prior to the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules approving the state’s permanent rules for the medical marijuana industry.

Try not to talk about your pending case in public, the prosecution could use any posts you make as evidence against you. In the details you provided, it will come down to a Time and Place , and whatever utterances or alleged statements made by you / your patient. If the house was locked, that's a locked and enclosed facility. But it will be a fight. Call me if you want to fight. There is established case law on this, and it is not good. in people v redden the court found that a patient could not possess more plants than their card allowed for. http://komornlaw.com/mmma-court-case-library/ http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/People-v-Redden-295809.pdf Further in People v Bylsma they said that caregivers could not grow in the same room either. http://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/People-v-Bylsma-302762.pdf The courts have come to the conclusion that this language in the MMMA defining an enclosed locked facility means a patient OR caregiver can have access , not both. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-Initiated-Law-1-of-2008 See the bold and underlined part above. Prosecutors will continue to prosecute these kinds of cases. Call me at the office and my lawfirm can defend these charges. 1-800-656-3557 or visit http://www.komornlaw.com

Hi Steve, Contact my office and we can put you in touch with other investors and business owners to network with, as well as news on events and conferences across the state. 1 800 656 3557

After the legalization of marijuana in Michigan, some patients are thinking they could stop paying the state $100 for the special mmp card , and just use the recreational marijuana law to grow their medicine. A patient with a registered card can use the ultimate defense and immunity to avoid a driving under the influence charge. Only adults 21 or over are protected by the new legalization law, but no one yet knows how the new law will affect driving privileges. Is the zero tolerance of THC in your blood law still in effect for adult use marijuana ? The new law is similarly worded to the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. Whereas the MMMA says While the meaning of "under the influence" was not decided within the MMMA until 2012, with People v Koon, that was 4 years of police arresting patients for driving with marijuana in their blood. The court in People v Koon came to the conclusion: Ignoring that for a minute, the Michigan State Police have been tasked with sampling saliva during road side stops for a task force on marijuana driving. The task force was created in order to find a nanogram limit for THC in blood, even though 50 years of scientific research on the subject has consistently said marijuana does not affect driving. http://komornlaw.com/35-years-research-reports-driving-cannabis-marijuana/ http://komornlaw.com/mmma-court-case-library/ So my advice is, if you are a patient, keep the patient card active until the courts either give up on all marijuana issues, or at least this driving issue , or it is decided by the Michigan Supreme Court. Basically, until non-patients get a similar "People v Koon" ruling from the Michigan Supreme Court, it is advised that any patients keep their cards to protect them fully under the MMMA. "Don't be the first person to test this in court."

Civil Asset Forfeiture is a cruel and unusual as it is executed without due process. Police have superhero power and authority to seize anything and everything they decide is part of a drug crime. The plethora of documented abuses are widespread, persistent and the majority are for seizures under $1,000 in value. Found within the 2018 Michigan Asset Forfeiture report, the majority of asset forfeiture is without judicial oversight. Without a warrant. Just police taking anything of value. https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/nearly-1000-people-not-charged-or-found-not-guilty-lost-their-property-through-forfeiture You say asset forfeiture is needed to fund our police? Fine. Let the police seize property of the rapists and murderers too. Why should they get special treatment? What about people who commit assaultive crimes? Commit a crime, lose your car? That is one reason why asset forfeiture is unconstitutional, because certain criminal’s assets are seized while other criminals retain their assets.

In the middle of a debate on the legalization of marijuana, the opponents to legalization made the claim, without any details or statistics, that legalizing marijuana would cause auto insurance to rise. This is another bogus claim, in a long line of bogus claims, used to continue prohibition of a plant. In the long line of false claims made by prohibitionists, the theories seem to be getting weaker and weaker as time goes by. Looking back through the claims made over the last 100 years, it is foolish to continue believing these, or anything else the prohibitionists throw at us. Marijuana causing Mexicans go "loco" and murder everyone like they were assassins. Based upon a fictional story in a book published in the early 1900's. Jazz musicians seducing white women with marijuana. Seems kind of racist against blacks and Mexicans so far. The war on drugs is also, currently to this day, even in legalized states, used to prosecute and arrest more blacks and latino's than whites. Marijuana causing murders and suicides (See Reefer Madness movie) Marijuana causing brain cell death. Marijuana causes you to be a lazy no good beatnik and or a motivational syndrome tree-hugging hippie. Marijuana causing testicular cancer. Marijuana causing lung cancer. Marijuana gateway theory to hard drugs like heroin or crack cocaine. Marijuana causes addiction to marijuana. Marijuana funds terrorism. Marijuana causing drop in IQ points. Legalizing marijuana will not stop the cartels and black markets. Marijuana causes man-boobs. Marijuana turns straight people into homosexuals. Marijuana makes you have lower sperm counts and more trouble conceiving. Marijuana makes you drop out of school and if you ever smoke marijuana you will never become President of the USA (See Bush, Clinton and Obama.) Marijuana makes you crazy and prone to psychosis (We circled back to the 1920's again) Marijuana gives you a heart attack because it increases your pulse temporarily. Marijuana suppresses your immune system. Marijuana causes crime. (Back to Reefer Madness) Legalized/Medical Marijuana stores cause crime. Prohibition of marijuana (or Alcohol) works. Cannabis causes traffic accidents ( not according to NHTSA's largest ever study on marijuana drivers http://komornlaw.com/35-years-research-reports-driving-cannabis-marijuana/ ) Car Insurance rates increased in Colorado, where marijuana is legal, although it was due to the incredible population increase and a settling of the market after Colorado repealed no-fault insurance. https://www.denverpost.com/2018/02/27/colorado-car-insurance-premiums-rise/ Have you been charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or drugs? Remain Silent and Contact Komorn Law Immediately to protect your rights and freedom 800-656-3557. Similarly, in Washington, Insurance studies show that the state has some of the worst drivers in the nation. https://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/article147026734.html https://quotewizard.com/news/posts/the-best-and-worst-drivers-by-state 2012 rates: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/03/08/states-with-the-highest-and-lowest-auto-insurance-rates/ https://www.thezebra.com/insurance-news/3232/states-cheapest-car-insurance/ In 2016, the zebra compared car insurance rates across the USA. By checking legalized states before and after legalization and comparing them to states that do not have legalization , we can compare if legalization of marijuana changed car insurance rates. https://www.insure.com/car-insurance/car-insurance-rates.html Since each website lists a different criteria and price range for nation wide insurance rates, its better to use a consistent data set. https://www.obrella.com/news/will-marijuana-use-impact-car-insurance-rates/ So there you have it. Car insurance rates are dictated by bad drivers, distracted drivers, uninsured drivers, alcohol and prescription drug impaired drivers and the weather. Marijuana is not a factor for any increase in insurance, according to the federal government and the reality of a lot of people smoking marijuana who do not get into accidents.

Yes, It looks like they will be ready with the new online system very soon.

report the post and a moderator will delete it for you. you can also edit the post and delete the content yourself.

Patients and Caregivers are discriminated upon in many facets of life, be it employment, housing, education, student loans, banking, travelling, medical care, prescription medical care, parental rights... and in this case, Emergency Medical Care! My client is a Michigan Medical Marijuana patient who was having an emergency. An ambulance picked him up, and against his hospital preference, the ambulance took him to the U of M Ann Arbor Hospital. While at the hospital, the patient, my client, in response to the standard medical care question of "list any other medications you are currently taking", was honest and replied that he uses a topical marijuana oil. He used the oil at the recommendation of his primary care physician to help with his cancer and chronic pain. He had the oil in his belongings when he was brought to the hospital. The Registered Nurse at the hospital then called the Hospital Security Officer, who then confiscated the patients medical marijuana oil and called the police. Why is the Physician - Patient privileged relationship being violated like this? My client told his nurses that he was a MMMA patient, those same nurses told the HSO and police officer he told them he was a MMMA patient as well. So what gives? The police have the discretion to investigate or talk to people instead of making a case out of something. Why waste time on investigating a medical marijuana patient? The police officer sent the topical marijuana oil to the Michigan State Crime Lab for testing, coming back positive for THC. The police officer forwarded the lab report to the Washtenaw County Prosecutors Office for prosecution. The WCPO then filed charges against this MMMA patient. All for .5 oz of topical oil marihuana-infused product that the patient had in his bag. Of course the prosecutors office did not blink an eye, nor did they use prosecutorial discretion. They issued the charges and sent the warrant to me so that I could have my client turn himself in. This is called a pre-arrest investigation at my office. If you ever have a police interaction but are not arrested, it means they are waiting on lab results. After they get the lab results back , they send out the warrant and arrest you wherever they can find you. Be it at your Home, work, school or driving on the road. When they arrest you at Home, they search your house. When they arrest you at work, you may have to explain to your boss what happened. When they arrest you at school you will be embarrassed. When they arrest you on the road, either you have to get someone to pick up your car or they will tow it. They will search your car as well. Then you have to post bond to get out of jail too. So hiring an attorney that will handle all of that, so you can turn yourself in, not speak to the police, and be arraigned and have usually a personal recognizance bond (meaning you don't have to pay anything, just have to show up at your next court date) is helpful in avoiding a bad situation. This is happening in Ann Arbor of all places? The city that decriminalized Marijuana down to a $25 civil infraction fine? U of M is state property, since it gets state funding. My Advice? If you are a Patient or Caregiver (or not a patient/caregiver) , never admit to anyone that you are possessing marijuana. Marijuana is currently still illegal and currently there are still people who WILL CALL THE POLICE ON YOU for having marijuana. In this case the patient did not have his card at the time he was hospitalized, but registered with the state afterwards. We prepared a Section 8 defense to the crime of possession of marijuana and were ready to battle in court. Instead of our Section 8 evidentiary hearing, instead of the prosecutor wanting to cross examine my client's physician, instead of testifying and all of the pain of a Section 8 defense, we went with a quick Section 4 dismissal. The prosecutor was SHOCKED that my client could not be prosecuted due to having his card now. Judge agreed and the case is dismissed. If you were charged with marijuana possession or manufacture, give me a call. I will fight to get the charges dismissed. 18006563557 http://www.komornlaw.com

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/06/20/canadas-official-marijuana-legalization-set-october-17/ TORONTO — Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Wednesday marijuana will be legal nationwide on October 17. Trudeau said in Parliament that the government is committed to better protecting Canada’s youth and hopes to take money away from organized crime.

Komorn Law PLLC is proud to report another complete dismissal of all charges for our client. These past few months we have attained a high rate of dismissals of our client’s cases. In this case our client was charged with allegations of felonious marihuana conduct; the case involved the definition of a medical marijuana plant in the law. More specifically, whether or not the plant was producing food from photosynthesis and was “living”. Of course, the prosecutor wanted to fight about the definition of “usable marihuana” too. With a splash of Manual and Mansour mixed into the fray. Much to my surprise the Court was very familiar with the conflicts of law that currently exist within the MMMA and the court, and the issues that were created by the Mansour opinion. The court was prepared to grant a stay in the proceedings until that mess of an opinion gets worked out. Today the Court heard arguments from the parties regarding the warrantless search of my clients home and whether the government could constitutionally validate the warrantless search. In Michigan, we have found that the courts go to great lengths to destroy the 4th amendment protections, going so far as to have a “good faith” exemption to unconstitutional search warrants. As is often the case in warrantless searches regarding drug task forces investigating marijuana tips this case dealt with a “knock and talk". The knock and talk is a tool used by law enforcement agencies which allows them to traverse on to a citizen’s property, to question and even investigate a person or citizen. The knock and talk however is not absolute and there are specific limitations. The best way to describe is that the police would be allowed to come into a person's property in the same manner or method that a Girl Scout would or some other person soliciting something. Knock and talks are generally legal assuming that the police limit their interactions to the areas of the property that a citizen would not have an expectation of privacy. Examples of this limited to walking up the driveway to the front door. Nothing more nothing less. There is some significant case law recent years in Michigan that lays out specific details of some of those limitations and also when an officers’ knock and talk goes too far. People v Frederick and Van Doorne is a case involving Kent County Sheriff's officers that baked marijuana butter. The case went to the Michigan Supreme Court, which describes those limitations and the proper analysis for when and how officers can conduct knocks and talks. The court did not take issue with the police detectives/investigators in this case, ignoring the fact that they were not in police uniform when they did their knock and talk. The court ruled that it didn’t matter if the police were undercover, because that fact did not violate the knock and talk rules. Even though I disagreed with the court in this tiny issue, this was not the ultimate legal issue that was dispositive in this case. The legal issue that was dispositive in this case was that once the police officers, who were conducting a lawful knock and talk, and who were lawfully on the porch of my client's house, and were lawfully ringing the doorbell to interact with my client, with the intent of trying to establish probable cause to search possibly get a search warrant, it is what happened in that situation that was the ultimate dispositive issue to which the court ruled in our favor. As we have been finding more and more, police agencies in Michigan have an additional tool to trick patients and caregivers from the immunities from arrest, prosecution, and penalty of any kind. Police make offers to do a “compliance check”. Police will ask very politely if the homeowner will show them around their medical marijuana garden to ensure compliance with the MMMA. This was the ultimate issue in this case. As I mentioned this case involving search and seizure of evidence without a search warrant. The U.S. Constitution and the Michigan Constitution expressly prohibits the searching and seizures without a warrant. That in fact warrantless searches and seizures are per se invalid. The government must make an allegation to justify the warrantless search in order for the search warrant to be constitutionally valid. In this particular case, the government's theory of why the search and seizure was constitutionally valid, was because according to them my client consented to the search of his house. Today the government in this matter argued my client consented to a search of his house, offering the testimony of the officers who said my client consented to search and therefore the government did need a search warrant. While this theory may be true in other circumstances, a warrantless search and seizure is justified if the homeowner consents to a search and seizure. However this was not the testimony that supported the charges, this is not the way in which testimony came out at the prelim exam during cross-examination. Had the testimony in the preliminary examination been that they requested consent of the homeowner/my client to search his house and asked if they could come into search the house for illegal contraband or whatever arguably that would've made for a constitutionally valid search and seizure. As I argued today and in contrast to the states position I relied on the testimony at the prelim exam where I had locked the officers into admitting that they did not follow proper procedure, but upon encountering my client at the front door during the “lawful knock and talk”, that they indicated the reason to which they were there. That reason according to the officers was that there was a tip that they had received that there was an illegal marijuana grow that occurred was occurring at that location. As I got the officer to admit that when you explain to my client the reason why you were there when you're doing your knock and talk that he responded by telling you that he was a medical marijuana patient and that there was no illegal substances within the house. The officer answered yes. I said then what did you say next that ultimately resulted in you gaining access to the house the officer said “well I told him that he needed to check whether or not he was in compliance with the Michigan medical marijuana act”. During this colloquy I said to the officer please explain to me, please direct me, please show me what is your legal authority for doing a compliance check of any individual regarding their medical marijuana behavior? It is here at this juncture that the state’s case against my client fell apart. There is no legal authority for any drug task force team to do a medical marijuana compliance check. The specific section of the MMMA that prohibits this is section 333.26424G, possession of, or application for, a registry identification card shall not constitute probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor shall it be used to support the search of a person or property of the person possessing or applying for the registered indication card, or otherwise subject the person or property of the person to inspection by local county or state government agencies. At the hearing today it was this compliance check issue that was flushed out and ultimately the constitutional violation the resulted in the court holding that the consent to search was not valid. Because of that issue, the court found that the police did not constitutionally validate the warrantless search. The issue of consent to search has an abundance of jurisprudence both in Michigan and the federal court system. The concept of consent has been written about often, and raises various issues, charges, defenses etc. regarding police officers interactions with citizens. The States intrusions of citizens rights, or what would be described as unconstitutional, is of no consequence if the citizen, suspect or accused consents to that government behavior. However, consent must be unequivocal. It can’t be wishy washy and it can’t be based upon false or misleading information. Consent must be unequivocal and it must be given knowingly, voluntarily without threat or coercion. The capitulation to the government’s request can’t be based upon trickery or a lie. The circumstances of my client’s case today were about the consent, or shall i say consent that was not unequivocal or constitutionally valid. I read from the transcripts from the preliminary exam ( quoting from the testimony of the officers) where the officers had testified that the last statement made to my client before entering his house was that they the investigator/ detectives needed to do a medical marihuana compliance check. These same officers admitted they were not part of the MMFLA task force or investigators ( and were not even sure that they were even aware of the existence of that agency). I pointed out to the judge that there exists no legal authority by these officers to do a compliance check. A compliance check is not the same as consent to search. By asking, suggesting even implying that they had this legal authority is obtaining consent by trick, by misrepresentation or whatever you may want to call it, it was not “ knowing, voluntary and or without duress” consent. It was this behavior by the government actors the Court found to be the constitutional violation. The court found that my client’s consent, which was allegedly obtained, was invalid, and the warrantless search of the residence and the seizing of the property and “evidence” was unconstitutional. Thus the evidence seized was done so illegally and the court suppressed the evidence and all the charges were dismissed. The lesson learned here, and the take away is simple. 1. Don’t be fooled into believing that there exists a legal authority for police officers or drug task force officers to check or determine you compliance with the MMMA 2. Never, Ever, Ever consent to a search. The often forgotten 4th amendment got some love today, and my joy is that this Court today had the courage and wisdom to make the correct ruling.

6 Defendants, 3 law firms, a "million dollars" of marijuana. The headlines write themselves. Were we in for a fight to the death? Not with me on the case. Other counsel were ready to fight this in circuit court, it was my idea that we should try to get this entire case dismissed at the district court level. The plan worked, all charges dismissed. The judge was also very smart, writing a complete thoughtful opinion so that if this case does get appealed, the issues will be clear. https://www.benzinga.com/government/18/07/12026544/detroit-judge-throws-out-1m-marijuana-case-in-the-interest-of-fairness Read more about how this all started. Why is Detroit raiding businesses that they licensed?? https://www.marijuana.com/news/2018/07/detroit-police-gang-unit-raids-black-owned-operated-marijuana-warehouse-and-arrest-6/

The University of Michigan is currently enrolling patients in two studies on cannabis and its use in the management of chronic pain to garner additional insights into how cannabis use affects pain management, quality of life, and the use of other pain-relieving medications. https://www.projectcbd.org/sobre-cbd/clinical-research/study-cannabis-and-chronic-pain-management https://oaksterdamuniversity.com/university-of-michigan-medical-cannabis-survey/ Study 1: In this study, you will be asked to complete an online anonymous, confidential survey. Eligibility: Anyone who uses cannabis for chronic pain and has a medical cannabis license OR who uses cannabis medically in a state with recreational cannabis can participate by clicking this link. The password is UMsurvey. Study 2: In this study, you will be asked to complete online anonymous, confidential surveys at baseline (within the next week), as well as 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the initial survey. Study participants will be compensated after completing each survey: $10 after the first survey, and $10 after each follow-up survey. Eligibility: You are eligible to participate in this study if all the conditions below are met: 1. You are 18 years of age or older. 2. You have a medical cannabis certification in your state of residence. 3. You either have been using cannabis for chronic pain main management for less than six months OR you plan to but have not started using cannabis for chronic pain management. If you think you will not be able to participate at all follow-up points, please do NOT participate in this survey. If you fulfill all these criteria and are interested in participating, please contact Dr. Kevin Boehnke PhD at kboehnke@med.umich.edu.