On July 9, 2013 the Michigan Court of Appeals decided a new case affecting the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act (โMMMAโ), MCL ยง333.26421 et seq.
In People v Jones, ___ Mich. App. ___ (2013), the Court concluded that whether immunity is granted to certain MMMA registry cardholders in MCL ยง333.26421 (commonly known as a โยง4 Defenseโ) comes down to a fact finding question for the trial court to decide.
The implications of this ruling are straight forward. For those asserting a ยง4 Defense in a criminal matter, the decision on whether the board immunity provisions of MCL ยง333.26424 apply to a defendantโs case is solely up to the Trial Court Judge, and will not be presented to a jury.
The decision in Jones is noteworthy, because with very limited exceptions only questions of law are to be decided by the Trial Court Judge, while questions of fact generally must be submitted to a jury. The Jones decision takes what would normally be a โjury questionsโ or a โfact questionโ and places it in the Trial Court Judgeโs hands.
Please be specifically aware that individuals convicted of drug crimes and โdrugged drivingโ crimes will face sanctions against their driving privileges through the Secretary of State in addition to any criminal sanctions handed down by the Court.
If you, a family member or a friend are facing drug or โdrugged drivingโ charges, please feel free to contact us for a free consultation.
