MICHIGAN ASSAULTIVE CRIMES OUTLINED & EXPLAINED

Rather than citing each individual statute throughout this article (or a guide for assaultive crimes) it is best to review the black-letter law for assaultive crimes here in the State of Michigan.

Assaultive crimes vary substantially here in the State of Michigan, meaning there are multiple classes or categories of assaultive statutes. The basic definition of an assaultive crime begins with an assault. An assault is simply the unlawful and intentional threat of bodily harm to another attached with the ability to carry out the act. Moreover, the victim needs to recognize the threat intended by his or her “attacker.”

The more common assaultive crime attaches to it another element of assault, which is known as battery. Battery exists when an individual makes willful and intentional contact with a victim and is made against the victim’s freewill or consent. Therefore, an assault is an attempted assault and batery (or battery).

Here in Michigan, either crime carries, if convicted, the same punishment, which includes a misdemeanor on the defendant’s criminal record, a maximum 93-days in jail, and/or a $500.00 fine, plus court costs, probation, and other possible mandatory fees, requirements, mandates [Probation is always possible whenever a defendant pleas or is convicted of a crime]. If an individual has a prior conviction of assault, assault and battery and/or domestic violence on his or her record then the defendant could face up to 1-year in jail and/or a fine of $1,000.00.

The trend continues for those with 2 or more of the assaultive crimes just mentioned and will attach a 2-year felony, if convicted, and/o a $2,500.00 fine. In these situations where subsequent (more than one) assaultive crime convictions come into play, it is imperative to recognize the importance and impact a sentence enhancer has on an individual’s case.

The term domestic violence (another assaultive crime), as mentioned above, falls under the statutory definition of a “dating relationship.” If the individual committing an assault or assault and battery on his or her spouse or former spouse, an individual with whom he or she has or has had a dating relationship, an individual with whom he or she has had a child in common, or a resident or former resident of the same household then he or she is in a “dating relationship.” See MCL § 750.81a(3). See above paragraphs for subsequent domestic violence convictions and punishments.

There is also a diversion program for first-time offenders convicted of or who plea guilty to a domestic violence charge. The individual can receive an automatic expungement of the charge from his or her record upon successful completion of probation and the court’s sentencing terms or orders. Moreover, in order to qualify for the diversion program the individual must not have a prior assaultive conviction on his or her criminal record.

Also falling under the assaultive crime umbrella is obstructing, resisting, and assaulting or battering a police officer (or a person performing his or her lawful duty). This crime is charged as a 2-year felony with a possible $2,000.00 fine attached, if convicted. Also seen in practice is the attempted obstructing and resisting charge, which carries with it a maximum 1-year jail sentence. Even though this charge is more of a compliance crime, meaning comply with police officials’ order or directives, it is still categorized and charged as an assaultive crime.

It is never advisable to resist, pull, disobey, argue, fight, or otherwise fail to comply with lawful command. Resisting and obstructing crimes come when there is police involvement; therefore, whenever there is police involvement compliance with their demands is critical, but so is remaining silent. This does not mean a conversation between an individual and police must or must not occur nor does it mean that officers should be allowed into an individual’s home or car without having probable cause or a warrant. Rather it mean that if a crime has been committed and an individual does not wish to speak, then he or she does not have to, and if the police then arrest him or her or want to arrest him or her, then he or she should allow for the arrest, remain silent, and call an attorney. Finally, whenever there is a possibility or there is an actual moment where the individual is about to or could make an incriminating statement he or she should remain silent and ask that counsel be present. If an individual is unsure concerning what is and what is not incriminating, simply invoke the right to remain silent and ask for counsel to be present.

The State of Michigan also has statutory enhancements for assaultive crimes involving certain circumstances, locations, or what have you. Felonious assault involves the use of dangerous weapons including, but not limited to, a gun, brass knuckles, revolver, pistol, knife, iron bar, and/or club. This type of crime does not involve a defendant who intended to murder or inflict great bodily harm on an individual, which is regardless of whether he or she used a dangerous weapon. If that kind of intent were present then the defendant would be charged or convicted of assault with the intent to murder or do great bodily harm. See below.

The punishment for felonious assault involves a 4-year felony and a possible $2,000.00 fine. If a felonious assault is committed within a weapon free school zone then there is a scenario of things that can happen occur at sentencing. A felony is placed on the individual’s criminal record, and he or she could get up to 4-years in prison,, serve not more than 150 hours, and/or a a fine of $6,000.00.

Assault with the intent to murder is a felony and an individual a possible sentenced that consists of any term of years in jail, depending on his or her sentencing guideline’s score.

This is a good place to speak briefly on sentencing guidelines and the State of Michigan. When an individual, in Michigan, is convicted or pleads to a felony he or she will have his or her conviction(s) scored pursuant to Michigan’s Sentencing Guideline Manual (or Statutory Code). The range calculated will consist of two numbers (one high and one low), which will be generally be used by a judge to determine an appropriate sentenced for a convicted defendant.

An individual’s sentencing score is based upon two variables that are broken down into multiple categories (or points) [which we will leave for another day and another time]. The two main variables are the defendant’s criminal history–Prior record Variable–(PRV) and the factual basis–Offense Variable (OV). These two will be cross-referenced on the appropriate sentencing grid, after adding up the appropriate categories and points, which will then provide you with the applicable sentencing range for a defendant. To properly score a defendant’s sentencing range an individual must take his or her time and walk through the directions and scoring as set forth in the sentencing guidelines manual. Click for Michigan’s 2012 Online Sentencing Guidelines Manual.

It is important to be on the look out for charges that consist of multiple assaultive crimes, meaning individual’s charged with crimes such as assault with the intent to murder and intent to do great bodily harm. These are lesser-includeds and become important during sentencing, plea negotiations, and trial. Make sure to review the elements of each crime to ensure that any plea agreement or advice includes the possible consequences of lesser-includeds.

Moreover, Michigan also recognizes an assault with the intent to do great bodily, and anyone convicted can receive up to 10-years in jail and/or a fine of $5,000.00 fine. Other assault crimes will include, but are not limited to Torture, Assault with intent to maim, Assault with intent to commit a felony (within burglary or other felony otherwise not indicated in act), assault with intent to rob and steal (armed or unarmed), sexual intercourse under pretext of medical treatment, enhancements for assaults against women who are pregnant, and those circumstances involving government employees. Each of the crimes just listed has statutory section and language which lists the possible or mandatorily required punishment. It is imperative to look carefully at the language of the statute before proceeding with any assault case.

For those individuals older than 17 but younger than 21, they are able to qualify for a diversion program called the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA), but only for some of the crimes discussed above and listed within the criminal code. In order to better understand whether an individual would or does qualify for HYTA, research and possible advise should be sought.

Whenever you are charged with an assaultive crime make sure you contact and obtain a criminal defense attorney. never rely on a blog or other information available on the internet when attempting or trying to represent yourself in a criminal court. You must and should always contact or obtain an attorney when charged with any Michigan criminal felony or misdemeanor, including assaultive crimes.

Michigan Criminal Lawyer – Serving All Of Michigan

When an individual is need of a Michigan criminal lawyer they rarely know who to contact. In many instances the individual has no idea how to hire a Michigan criminal lawyer because they have never been involved in a criminal matter. Hiring a Michigan criminal lawyer can be difficult at times because of the varying numbers of individuals in the profession. Add on the fact that Michigan criminal lawyers are numerous throughout the individual counties, making it even more time consuming to find the right lawyer for you and your case.

Hiring a Michigan criminal lawyer does not need to be difficult, finding the right individual can be simple and stress free. Josh Jones maintains a full-service Criminal Defense firm for all those charged with a criminal misdemeanor or felony here in the State of Michigan. He is truly your Michigan criminal lawyer, handling all misdemeanors and felonies, civil infractions, traffic tickets, criminal expungements, driver’s license restorations and probation violations.

Therefore, when you have a question about that speeding ticket or criminal citation you need to contact Josh Jones today. He always has your back and is here for your 7-days a week. Josh Jones specializes in Marihuana Defense (both medical and non-medical), and can help you stay smoking carefree. Josh Jones provides his services throughout those individual in Michigan, but he primarily practices in Oakland County, Macomb County, Wayne County, Livingston County, Lapeer County and Genesee County.

If you are in need of a Michigan criminal lawyer connect with Thumbtack.com to obtain quotes and connect with professionals throughout Michigan, including licensed lawyers and attorneys. Josh Jones provides professional and exceptional criminal defense services at affordable and reasonable prices. He is always on call, here for you, and can be contacted via email, text or phone at 734-355-0424.

Make the right choice. Lawyer-up with Josh Jones today! He always has your back and is your Michigan Criminal Lawyer.

Dog Sniff Search Limited by SCOTUS

The Supreme Court of the United States wrote an opinion on April 21, 2015, where it explained that police officers are limited in time and cause when executing a dog sniff search on a motor vehicle. In Rodriguez v United States, the Court was faced with a case involving a routine traffic, which perpetuated into a criminal arrest and prosecution for drug activity. The individual defendant was stopped for a routine traffic violation, went through the short process with the officer where the defendant was issued a traffic ticket, and before parting ways, the officer asked if he could allow his “drug dog” to perform a search of the defendant’s vehicle. The defendant declined. The officer, however, ignored the lack of consent and made the defendant wait and for a secondary officer to arrive at the scene so the primary officer could perform a search of the vehicle.

The whole situation was reported to last approximately 30-minutes, while the stop was extended approximately 7-8 minutes to bring in the “drug dog.” A dog sniff search is not unreasonable nor uncommon; however, in order for the officer to properly execute such a search there must be some reasonable suspicion in order for the officer to extend the stop so he or she can perform the dog sniff search. Typically, when an officer stops a motor vehicle for a specific reason, such as a traffic violation, he or she is limited based upon the reasoning for originally stopping the vehicle. This is not to say, as the Supreme Court explained, that an officer is precluded or unable to extend a traffic stop beyond the original intended purpose. However, in order for the officer to extend the stop beyond the original reasoning for the stop, to include for argument sake a dog sniff search, the officer must have reasonable suspicion to do so.

The main crux of the argument in this case was the fact that the officer had issued the defendant a traffic ticket and then extended the stop to perform a dog sniff search. The traffic stop had ended at the time of the officer giving the defendant the traffic ticket, and at that particular moment the officer had not collected any more evidence to articulate reasonable suspicion to continue and extend the stop in order to legally perform the dog sniff search. This case was fact specific and incorporates the basic understanding of the scope of a vehicle search, which is an exception to the requirement of first obtaining a warrant in order to search an individual or an individual’s property.

Knowing the law, maintaining your rights, and then lawyering-up with a criminal defense attorney is essential in every criminal matter. The Rodriguez case shows why my previous statement is so essential. When the defendant maintains his constitutional rights, denying consent to search and forcing an officer to perform his or her investigatory obligation, he or she is in a better possession than an individual who freely and voluntarily consents to police confrontation and investigation. Josh Jones, Michigan Criminal Lawyer, has your back 7-days a week.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

SCOPE OF MOTOR VEHICLE SEARCH

When an individual motorist is stopped by a police officer for a traffic violation or for another reason bringing about a reasonable suspicion that a crime is occurring or about to occur a police officer can detain the individual motorist on the side of the roadway. But how long cans this detention last? Or what is the scope of motor vehicle searches? The Scope of motor vehicle searches will rests upon the various circumstances and facts found within a given case.

The amount of time an officer can detain an individual is not specific or certain, but rather the amount of time is based upon the initial stop. What this means is that an officer can detain an individual for an amount of time that it takes for the officer to determine whether the individual motorist is capable of operating the vehicle and the police officer has issued a warning or citation. However, this does not limit the officer to simply ask the driver for his or her paperwork, but it still limits the scope of motor vehicle searches, generally speaking.

In fact, an officer can remove the driver from the vehicle, question the driver about unrelated issues, wait for another patrol car to arrive, and check the driver’s driving record and criminal history, to name a few. The scope of motor vehicle searches is again limited to the articulable facts and suspicion raised by the police officer and the situation.

Therefore, the scope of motor vehicle searches can be extended by an officer if the officer discovers more facts revealing another infraction or crime beyond the reason for the initial stop. This ideal is founded in the United States Constitution. Michigan’s Constitution seems to provide an officer from questioning an individual motorists on unrelated issues not connected to the initial stop unless the officer is able to demonstrate reasonable suspicion for extending the scope of his or her questioning. But again the scope of motor vehicle searches, even under Michigan case law, will be fact determinate and based upon the officer’s observations and testimony. However, this does not mean that the scope of motor vehicle searches are simply at the whim of an arresting officer, rather it will be based upon what the officer can articulate into reasonable suspicion and then probable cause.

To conclude if an officer does exceed the scope of motor vehicle search allowed within  a criminal investigation it could lead to the suppression or dismissal of specific evidence obtained during that investigation. In order to ensure your constitutional rights within a criminal trial or within a criminal court, contact a Michigan criminal lawyer today. It is beyond important to look at every stage of a traffic stop to determine the necessary legal scope and boundaries police officer must uphold. Josh Jones maintains a full-service criminal defense firm for those in Genesee County, Lapeer County, Livingston County, and Metro Detroit (Oakland, Wayne & Macomb Counties).

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

MMMA Criminal Acts Identified & Outlined

The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (aka MMMA) has enumerated criminal violations listed within the statute, brining about MMMA criminal acts. Some of the MMMA criminal acts are not found specifically within the MMMA, but rather within the Michigan penal code, which makes for an interesting discussion.

However, there is one enumerated MMMA criminal act within the statute. If convicted, an individual faces a two (2) year felony if an when found guilty of selling medical marijuana to a non-cardholder. MCL 333.2624. This means that an individual who has a valid and designated MMMA card, which allows them to use and possess medical marijuana (whether a caregiver or patient); however, it does not allow them sell to another individual not certified or designated under the MMMA to use or possess medical marijuana as instructed by the statute. Therefore, one of the MMMA criminal acts strictly forbids the selling or transferring for monies to someone outside of the MMMA.

One of the other MMMA criminal acts, as mentioned above, is found outside the MMMA. The statute provided that patients and/or caregivers are to transport their medical marijuana in accordance with MCL 750.474. The statute states that caregivers and patients must transport their medical marijuana in a case inside their motor vehicle’s trunk, or if the vehicle does not have a trunk then the individual must have their marijuana inside a case and placed in an area of the vehicle that is not accessible to that person. However, there are numerous defenses against this particular charge. There have been positive trial court decisions and opinions indicating that this may be an improperly enacted statute, and thus it is imperative to contact a Michigan Marihuana Lawyer whenever you are charged with improper transport of marijuana.

These are two of the MMMA criminal acts; however, what is not found within the MMMA are those criminal acts involving traditional marijuana. The difference between medical marihuana and marijuana is slight, but when speaking outside the MMMA there are numerous other criminal acts that can or do theoretically involve the MMMA, i.e. MMMA patients and caregivers are charged under traditional marijuana statutes. Remember, the MMMA also has Section 7, which specifies specific things a patient and/or caregiver can and cannot do, such as smoking marijuana in public or on public transportation. See MCL 333.2647 for a list of do’s and do not’s.

Marijuana can create numerous problem, and sadly these problems do not always disappear when obtaining a MMMA card here in the State of Michigan. However, that does not mean there is no way to smoke care free. Avoiding the MMMA criminal acts, as discussed above, is the first step to carefree smoking. The next? Knowing the law, maintaining your rights, and remembering to lawyer-up. Josh Jones is here for you 7-days a week and always has your back.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. WE HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON. 

Probable Cause To Search MMMA Cardholder

The Court of Appeals has recently determined that a Magistrate is allowed to issue a search and seizure warrant without the police officer first determining whether the individual is a Michigan medical marihuana cardholder. Yes, that was a confusing sentence. Let’s see if that idea of whether probable cause to search MMMA cardholder exists can be expressed in simpler terms.

Ultimately, the court concluded that an officer is allowed to obtain a warrant to search an individual’s home without first establishing whether that individual is legally cultivating, using or possessing medical marijuana as allowed under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA). This means that an officer could have probable cause to search MMMA cardholder even though the cardholder is technically committing a legal act. See People v Brown. The Court ultimately held that the officer does not need to be proactive in determining whether the individual suspected of illegal activity is a MMMA cardholder.

The court based its conclusion on the fact that cultivating, using and possessing marijuana is technically illegal, unless the individual was obeying the requirements set out in the MMMA. In Brown, the issue was whether the officer had probable cause to search MMMA cardholder or obtain a warrant based upon clippings and other materials found in the defendant’s garbage. The court indicated that such evidence constituted a reasonable conclusion that illegal activity was occurring in the defendant’s home, and thus the warrant issued by the magistrate was valid and the evidence entered into evidence during trial was not suppressed. Therefore, there was probable cause to search MMMA cardholder because the police did not know the individual was a MMMA cardholder prior to obtaining a search warrant.

When reading the opinion, it will be easily noticeable that facts were limited and not really discussed, so in order to discuss the actual impact on a medical marijuana cardholder more facts would be needed to determine is there is probable cause to search MMMA cardholder in another given situation or criminal case. But what can be said is that medical marijuana users will want to be careful and expressly show their medical marijuana card when confronted by police officers and engaged in the medical use of marihuana.

Anytime you are faced with legal issues that involve the MMMA, you need to contact an attorney that understands the Act’s limits. Do not hesitate or believe that the Act will simply protect you in every possibility. There is still a large amount of smoke that hovers of the rights of medical marijuana patients and caregivers. Make sure you have Josh Jones protecting those rights.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. WE HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON. 

Michigan Personal Protection Orders Explained

A Michigan Personal Protection Order (PPO) cannot be limited to any particular situation or set of circumstances. Michigan Personal Protection Orders are involved and issued in a variety of circumstances ranging from domestic violence situations to situations where the victim (or petitioner) does not even know the aggressor or accused. Michigan has three types of Michigan Personal Protection Orders:

  1. Domestic Relationship PPO—for victims of certain assaultive and threatening behavior and a domestic relationship does or did exist. MCL 600.2950
  2. Nondomestic Relationship PPO [aka a Stalker PPO]—for victims not in a dating relationship with the accused and two or more of the stalking acts have been found. MCL 600.2950a
  3. Sexual Assault PPO—for victims of a sexual assault. MCL 600.2950a

The domestic relationship Michigan personal protection order is very general and straightforward. One will be issued when there has been assaultive behavior or threatened harm has occurred so long as there is reasonable cause to believe a harmful act will occur. The court must find or the petitioner must show a specific incident of assault or threatened harm.

However, the stalking Michigan personal protection order will be issued if a reasonable person would feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed and actually causes such feeling for the victim. There must be a finding of two or more separate incidents of acts amounting to stalking as identified within the statute. These particular Michigan personal protection orders can be issued ex parte, meaning without the accused being present in court.

A sexual assault Michigan personal protection order can be issued who was convicted of a sexual assault involving the victim or against a person who has threatened the victim with a sexual assault. This type of PPO can also be issued for providing obscene material to a minor victim (or petitioner). MCL 750.142. The type of Michigan personal protection order may also be issued involving two individuals who are not in a dating relationship and two or more separate acts have not occurred.

A court’s power to limit or control an accused individual varies between the three Michigan Personal protection Orders. Moreover, the procedure for each PPO will also vary, which means that certain circumstances, facts and issues may and will control which Michigan Personal protection Order a court can or will order. Josh Jones can assist you if you are served with a Michigan personal protection order. He always has your back.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

Resisting Obstructing Assaulting Officer – A Minor Act With Huge Consequences

A very common crime that is charged when an individual is arrested is resisting obstructing assaulting officer. The one issue involved with resisting obstructing assaulting officer is that in order to be convicted very little action is needed. MCL § 750.479 (resisting obstructing assaulting officer) reads as follows: “A person shall not knowingly and willfully do any of the following [a]ssault, batter, wound, obstruct, or endanger” a police officer “acting in the performance of his or her [lawful] duties.”

Therefore, any intentional force, touching, pulling, or otherwise resisting a police officer’s attempt to arrest and/or detain an individual could be charged with resisting obstructing assaulting officer. Not only are the facts usually against an individual defendant in such a case, but so is the potential punishment. An individual convicted of resisting obstructing assaulting officer will have a felony on his or her record and can face up to 2 years in jail and/or a $2,000.00 fine. Moreover, probation will be ordered and a court, while on probation, will likely order other requirements.

Not only are the punishments for resisting obstructing assaulting officer fairly steep, but the statute also does not limit the prosecution from tacking on other crimes that were involved in the incident. Furthermore, if the incident involves bodily injury, serious impairment, or death the possible punishment increases, ranging from 5 years to a possible 20 years in jail respectfully.

Many courts take resisting obstructing assaulting officer seriously, along with the prosecution or the State. Make sure you have the right representation on your side whenever you are charged with resisting obstructing or assaulting officer. Josh Jones always has your back and is your Michigan Criminal Attorney.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON. 

Michigan Self Defense Act – Act 306 of 200

The Michigan Self Defense Act provides individuals two options when raising the self defense within a criminal trial. The Michigan Self Defense Act statutory identifies that “[a]n individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies: (a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual[; or] (b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.” MCL 780.972.

Furthermore, the legislature has also statutory identified under the Michigan Self Defense Act that “[a]n individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.” MCL 780.972.

The Michigan Self Defense Act continues on in MCL 780.972 that the affirmative defense of self defense found within common law is not eliminated, and thus pursuant to statutory codification an individual defense is allowed to forms of self defense under the Michigan Self Defense Act (that explained above and common law self defense). See MCL 780.973 & 780.974. The major differenced between the statutory version and the common law version of self defense rests on procedural grounds. Furthermore, the common law version specifically states there is no duty to retreat within an individual’s home or the curtilage of that home. See People v Riddle, 467 Mich 116 (2002).

Whenever someone is thinking of raising a self defense issue it is imperative to consider both the common law defense and the Michigan Self Defense Act. This makes it even more imperative to contact a criminal defense attorney whenever charged with a crime involving self defense. An attorney can make the difference between conviction and acquittal. Josh Jones is your Michigan criminal defense lawyer and understand the Michigan Self Defense Act, so whenever you are in need of a criminal attorney contact him today. He always has your back.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

 

Defining Drying Usable Marihuana – People v Randall

The Michigan Court of Appeals in January 2015 wrote an opinion involving the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) and the definition of drying usable marihuana, which provides insight on whether an individual would be drying usable marihuana after he or she had just harvested or was harvesting marihuana plants. See People v Randall, Docket No. 318740, Unpublished Opin. (Mich. App. 2015) This unpublished opinion provides insight into what is considered usable marihuana.

In many instances police officers will weigh or attempt to contribute drying usable marihuana within the overall weight for calculating whether the defendant is within his or her weight restrictions as required by MCL 333.26424. The court heard testimony from the officer that explaining that usable marijuana could include wet marijuana; however, it was not usable for purposes of the MMMA. Furthermore, it stated that dried is the past participle or tense of the verb “dry.”

The Court of Appeals explained that the trial court erred when it held that a certain amount of drying marijuana was usable, and thus that amount used in the calculation of usable marijuana should be decreased to a more logical and statutory amount. The Court also explained that the trimmings taken from marijuana plants in question were again calculated in the total amount of weight in error. The trimmings must be taken from the usable marijuana in order for it to become usable. It finally stated that the drying stems and leaves were to be considered under the any marihuana language found within MCL 333.26424.

In the end this opinion assists in moving the medical marihuana industry forward by outlining what is and what is not considered drying usable marihuana and thus what is and what is not usable marihuana as defined by the MMMA. This understanding assists both patients and caregivers in identifying what they can and cannot possess as drying usable marihuana. Whenever you are involved or possibly involved in medical marihuana activities and criminal charges you need to contact a Michigan Marihuana Lawyer.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. WE HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.