Thursday, May 3rd the Michigan Marijuana Facilities Licensing Board met and approved all three of the pre-qualification applications that were presented.
Two of the applications passed unanimously and the other passed on by a 4-1 vote with Pickard being the only vote for denial.
Illinois Senate Bill 336 was passed by a staggering 44-6 vote. The measure is intended to allow flexibility in obtaining a medical marihuana in the state of Illinois by recognizing the use of cannabis as medicine in the fight against the opiod crisis.
As amended, the bill allows persons with an active prescription for opiods to have legal access to medical marihuana as an alternative medicinal option for palliative relief. Persons who qualify will also be able to apply for a medical marihuana card. The medical marijuana program in Illinois is rather restrictive in terms of qualified applicants. Currently, Illinois has issued approximately 30,000 cards to its residents.
The expansion and formal recognition of the use of marijuana as medicine in Illinois something to take note of as many states continue to progress in their efforts to regulate medical marihuana. The bill heads to the House for approval.
Illinois is not the only state seeking to expand the availability of medical marihuana. Michigan has introduced a list of 22 proposed medical conditions to be added and recognized under the Medical Marihuana Act as qualifying conditions. The list includes anxiety, depression, diabetes, panic attacks, and a myriad of other medical conditions for approval consideration. The Review Panel is scheduled to make their recommendations to the Department Director at a public meeting on May 4, 2018 in Lansing, Michigan.
For those who are committed to staying up-to-date on Michigan’s marijuana laws, call (517) 512-8364 to contact the Michigan Cannabis Lawyers.
If you are Michigan Marijuana caregiver you might want to know that many local municipalities are creating conflicting local ordinances and the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act (MMMA Michigan).
This case is a court of appeals case in which a conflict between local ordinances and medical marijuana laws were at issue. The Charter Township of York ordinance was found to have violated the protections provided by the MMMA. The township started the legal proceeding with legal action to prevent the defendants from growing their medical marijuana. A local home occupation ordinance was sited as well as the local ordinance regulating medical marijuana grows.
The Charter Township of York started the legal proceedings by seeking a declaratory judgment which would have prevented the Defendants from growing their medical marihuana because it violated the local home occupation ordinance and the local ordinance regulating medical marihuana grows.
The issues the Charter Township of York had with the marihuana grow are that it violated the home occupation ordinance because the registered caregiver (the person possessing and cultivating the marijuana plants) did not live at the address and the grow was an outdoor building and not attached to the main residence. These were both violations of the home occupation ordinance. Further, the Charter Township of York also had passed a local ordinance to regulate medical marihuana caregivers. This ordinance did not allow outdoor grows and required all necessary permits to be obtained.
The trial court did not grant the declaratory judgment and held that the local ordinance directly conflicted with the MMMA. This meant that the local ordinances as applied in this case were not applicable to local residents who were registered qualifying caregivers under the MMMA Michigan.
The Charter Township of York appeal this decision to the Michigan Court of appeals and argued that the zoning law “permitted it to regulate medical marijuana and restrict registered caregivers’ marijuana growing to indoors in areas zoned residential” Charter Township of York v. Miller, 335344, 2018 WL 472187, at *2 (Mich. App. Jan. 18, 2018).
The Michigan Court of appeals in a published decision disagreed with the Charter Townships arguments and the MMMA was ruled to have preempted the local ordinance.
“A person shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for providing a registered qualifying patient or a registered primary caregiver with marihuana paraphernalia for purposes of a qualifying patient’s medical use of marihuana”
Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 333.26424 (West)
The result, in this case, is that only the regulations contained within the Medical marihuana act will apply to your grow. The home occupation ordinance, in this case, was void as applied to MMMA caregivers and patients and preempted by the MMMA. The regulations prohibiting outdoor grows or growing in unattached buildings were also preempted by the MMMA. The defendants were though required to abide by and obtain the required permits for the construction code and building permits.
This case is important for all caregivers because many local municipalities are creating local ordinances that conflict with the MMMA. If your local township has a local ordinance that you believe conflicts with the MMMA, call the Michigan Cannabis Lawyers at 517-512-8364.
See Also:
Michigan Cannabis Automobile Search Rules 2020
Does smoking marijuana impair your ability to drive?
Cannabis Drugged Driving: So if you eat enough turkey, that would be classified as a drug…
The article discusses his work as a Cannabis Lawyer and how he fights the drug war.
“I started thinking about my mom going to jail for using cannabis and that’s kind of like what spurred the thought about going to law school,” he said. “I decided to actually do that, to help keep people like my mom out of jail.”
–Joshua Covert, Michigan Cannabis Lawyers
Read the article Four people in the pot trade from the Lansing City Pulse.
Attorney Joshua Covert speaks at Unrig The System at 4-15-18 in Lansing Michigan.
On Sunday, April 15th attorney Joshua Covert spoke at an event in Lansing geared to sharing information about local activism and grassroots efforts to empower citizens to play a larger role in the political process.
The Bureau of Medical Marihuana Regulation (BMMR) began accepting applications for licenses under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Facility Licensing Act (MMFLA) in December of 2017. Hundreds of applications have been submitted to the BMMR but so far there have been only two applications submitted to the state board for approval.
This event that takes place each year in Ann Arbor, Michigan to celebrate and support the movement toward the legalization of marijuana in our great state. Ann Arbors Hash Bash is a great way to stick it to the man and celebrate cannabis.
John Sinclair was imprisoned for over two years after attempting to furnish a police officer with a marijuana joint. After his conviction was overturned by the Michigan Supreme Court, a 21-day period existed in Michigan wherein marijuana was technically legal, and the event now known as Hash Bash was born.
At a time when Michigan is in the midst of implementing a regulatory system to facilitate the cultivation and acquisition of medical marihuana, and with greater than ever support for the legalization of recreational use and possession of marijuana by Michigan citizens, this year’s Hash Bash may be the last of its kind, as activists and those alike have for so long gathered to advocate and educate for the push toward legalization of marijuana. Their efforts have not gone unnoticed, and may soon be celebrated as Michigan edges closer and closer to legalizing marijuana.
The Michigan Cannabis Lawyers attended the 2018 Hash Bash and were energized and inspired listening to the wonderful speakers. After the protest, The Michigan Cannabis Lawyers headed over to the Monroe Street Fair for a continuation of the good times.
We were excited to see that the Monroe Street fair was even bigger than previous years and yet the street was as packed as ever, certainly a good sign for both the legalization movement and Hash Bash.
The Michigan Cannabis Lawyers look forward to attending again in 2019 when hopefully marijuana is legal in Michigan.
If you are looking for attorneys who stay up to date on marijuana and cannabis issues, contact the Michigan Cannabis Lawyers at 517-512-8364.
2018 Hash Bash Michigan
Michigan has approximately 277,000 medical marihuana patients. Those individuals may find themselves having to travel a greater distance to purchase marihuana after Michigan issued cease and desist letters to over 200 medical marihuana provisioning centers, many of them located in Wayne County.
In an unpublished case, the Michigan Court of Appeals (People v Donaghy, No. 322677, 2015) interpreted the protections of section 4 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) in regards to the limitations of section 7(b)(4). The case involved an individual who was charged with what is commonly known as drugged marijuana driving, a violation of the motor vehicle code MCL 257.625 et. seq.
The facts show that the defendant had tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active substance in marijuana as well as alprazolam (Xanax), methadone, and zolpidem (Ambien) in his system. The defendant at trial requested a jury instruction regarding his medical marihuana use and registry card as a defense to the operating while visibly impaired charge one of the two counts he was facing. The trial court denied the jury instruction request and the defendant appealed the conviction on many grounds.
The Michigan Court of Appeals decided the case and said: “The MMMA’s protections are lost under § 7(b)(4) only when a person operates a vehicle “under the influence” of marijuana. This definition of “under the influence” is determined to be consistent with the phrase’s meaning as a term of art, operating a vehicle while visibility impaired under MCL 257.265(3) as a result of marijuana use, like operating a vehicle while any amount of marijuana is present in a person’s body under MCL 257.265(8), is too low of a threshold to deprive a person with protections under the MMMA that the person would otherwise be entitled to.” Unfortunately for the defendant, the ruling was not enough as the court upheld his conviction because the protections from a visibly impaired charge that the MMMA provides would not be relevant when the defendant also had the other controlled substances in his system.
Each applicant will be required to pay the MMFLA regulatory assessments after their respective license is approved by the Medical Marihuana Licensing Board.
