Studies Say Stoned Drivers Are Safer Than Drunk Drivers

Recently on Feb. 11, 2015 in a news article published by 9 news it was reported that stoned drivers are safer than drunk drivers according to new studies by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). One of the studies reveals that “drivers with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 are 400 percent more likely to get into a car crash than a sober driver.” However, “[d]rivers testing positive for THC are about 25 percent more likely to crash. But, when you factor in demographic information like age and gender, that number drops to about five percent.”

It is obvious from some of these results that the impact THC has on the individual while operating a motor vehicle could potentially be vastly different than an individual with alcohol in his or her system. Even lawmakers are pointing out the possible flaws in evaluating an individual on THC. They believe that the level of THC in an individual’s blood may only be one factor in determining whether the individual is actually stoned. Again, this points to the fact that stoned drivers are safer than drunk drivers according to these studies.

The State of Colorado currently has a statutory level of intoxication for individual using marijuana, which is set at a level of 5 ng of THC per milliliter of blood. However, this too may be difficult to prove whether an individual is stoned or sober. Here in the State of Michigan, the law on driving with THC in an individual’s system is fairly black and white. This statement stands true when discussing recreational marijuana; however, this is not so when speaking to medical marihuana users.

Whenever you are charged with driving while “high” you need a criminal defense lawyer who understands the law and the process. Josh Jones is your Michigan Marihuana Lawyer and specializes in marihuana defense. He always has your back, especially in the days where stoned drivers are safer than drunk drivers, according to recent studies.

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.

Criminal Trespassing – MCL 750.552

Here in the State of Michigan it is a misdemeanor if an individual is convicted of criminal trespassing. Criminal Trespassing is a 30-day misdemeanor if convicted, meaning the individual could spend 30 days in the county jail and/or be fined $250.00. MCL 750.552. This may not be the most severe criminal charges; however, criminal trespassing is still nonetheless a crime here in Michigan. This means that an individual, if convicted, will have a criminal record.

In order to be convicted of criminal trespassing, MCL 750.552, the state or prosecutor must prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the individual charged had

  1. Entered the lands or premises of another without lawful authority and after having been forbidden to do so by the owner or occupant or the agent of the owner or occupant;
  2. Remained without lawful authority on the land or premises of another after being notified to depart by the owner or occupant or the agent of the owner or occupant; or
  3. Entered or remained without lawful authority on fenced or posted farm property of another person without the consent of the owner or his or her lessee or agent. It is important to note that the factual basis for a criminal trespassing charge under this specific provision does not require a request to leave the premises nor  does it not apply to a person who is in the process of attempting, by the most direct route, to contact the owner or his or her lessee or agent to request consent.

Again, as it becomes apparent after a careful reading of the above statutory requirements to prove a criminal trespass charge, an individual prosecutor does not require much in order to obtain a conviction under a criminal trespass charge. Essentially, the individual must have entered the land of another and been told to leave or provided with a lack of authority to enter in the first place. This is the crux of a criminal trespassing charge, meaning that simply entering a land of another does not fulfill criminal trespassing. Something more needs to be included, which is the rejection of authority to enter either before or after the entry has occurred. It will be at that time that a criminal trespasings charge can maintain water within a criminal court of law.

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.

Decriminalization Charter – City of Grand Rapids

Michigan in recent years has become a marijuana friendly state, or so it seems. There have been numerous cities, municipalities, and towns that have passed local laws decriminalizing or legalizing the use and possession of recreational marijuana. These laws are separate and apart from those controlling the use, possession and delivery of medical marihuana here in the state. The City of Grand Rapids, through an amendment of its City Charter, has decriminalized marijuana throughout the city, creating a decriminalization charter.

Shortly after the amendment became effective, and officially modified the city charter, the Kent County Prosecutor filed a suit against the city in an attempt to stop the use and enforcement of the new decriminalization charter found with Grand Rapids. The prosecutor’s main argument regarding the decriminalization charter involved state preemption, meaning that a city could not create a law that would directly conflict with an overriding state law. The change in the city charter was very similar to that language used within the City of Ann Arbor, which has decriminalized marijuana for over twenty years.

The prosecutor lost at the Circuit Court level, and then filed an appeal. That appeal eventually create a ruling by the Court of Appeals, which brought about an unpublished written opinion. The opinion by the Court of Appeals was very straight forwarded and outlined the numerous arguments presented by the Kent County Prosecutor. The Court ultimately held that the amendment to the city charter was not unconstitutional nor did it conflict with preexisting state law. The new decriminalization charter did not stop, hinder, or otherwise interfere with the enforcement of the state law criminalizing marijuana. The court further noted that if the amendment would have been a new ordinance rather than modifying the city charter then the outcome of the case could have ended differently. It also explained that the decriminalization charter does not prohibit a local city officer from enforcing state law, but rather provides for discretion when performing his or her duties and whether the duties will involve enforcing state law.

What the Court of Appeals’ opinion does for those in the City of Grand Rapids is allow them to “have power to adopt resolutions and ordinances relating to its municipal concerns, property and government, subject to the constitution and law.” Preemption will only occur when there is a direct conflict between local and state law; however, and again, the charter does not make the state law ineffective or hindered in any way. State law enforcement are able to enforce, just as they did prior to decriminalization charter, state law as it is written. This means that at the state level and when confronted by a non-City police officer, within the City of Grand Rapids, an individual can and will still be charged for the illegal possession of marijuana, unless other circumstances and defenses apply. But in the end, when an individual is found within the City of Grand Rapids with marijuana they can be charged with a civil infraction rather than a criminal misdemeanor.

Remember, these situations require certain acts within certain areas, and this is still true even though the City of Grand Rapids has decriminalized marijuana within its borders. Only Grand Rapids City officers will be enforcing this amendment and new decriminalization charter. If you are interested in understanding the limitations and possible consequences with marijuana inside Cities or Towns with decriminalized law, please refer to the explanation and article on Marijuana Decriminalization. Josh Jones available 7-days a week, and he handles all criminal matters (felonies and misdemeanors) and specialized in marijuana defense.

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.

Purchasing A Pistol In Michigan

Those individuals purchasing a pistol in Michigan should read the following:

The State of Michigan requires that a person shall not purchase, carry, or transport a pistol without first obtaining a license for such pistol. These licenses can be obtained at the local police department or the sheriff’s department. However, there is an exception to the general rule requiring a license for purchasing a pistol in Michigan.

Those individuals who already have a concealed weapon permit or are a federally licensed firearms dealer are not required to obtain a license prior to purchasing a pistol in Michigan. This exception can be seen as being pre-registered. Meaning, they have already obtained clearance to carry and possess this type of firearm.

Individuals who are not residents of Michigan may not have to obtain a license if all of the following apply:

The individual is licensed in his or her state of residence to purchase, carry, or transport a pistol; the individual is the owner of the pistol he or she possesses, carries, or transports; the individual has in his or her possession the license from the other state, as discussed above; the individual possesses the pistol for a lawful purpose as defined by MCL 750.231a; and the individual is in this state for a period of 180 days or less and does not intend to establish residency in Michigan.

If there is a showing, through probable cause, that the applicant is a threat to him- or her-self or another individual then he or she will not be granted a license for purchasing a pistol in Michigan. This is looking at protecting those individual who may have an outburst in the future. Even though Michigan is one of the more liberal state here in America when it comes to firearms and firearm possession, Michigan is still concerned with protecting its citizens from individuals who should not possess or own a firearm.

Moreover, the following will also bar an individual from purchasing a pistol in Michigan or obtaining a license to purchase such a firearm:

  • Under indictment for or have been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
  • Fugitive of justice
  • Unlawful user of, or addicted to, any controlled substance (convicted, of possession within last year, multiple arrests for possession within the past five years if most recent arrest occurred within the past year, or positive drug test within last year)
  • Adjudicated as mental defective or been committed to any mental institution
; Alien and is illegally or unlawfully in the U.S. (alien without permanent residence status) Dishonorably discharged from the military
Formally renounced U.S. citizenship
  • Subject to a court order prohibiting harassing, stalking, or threatening of an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner or from engaging in other conduct that would place the partner or child in reasonable fear of bodily injury.

If you are charged with a criminal misdemeanor or felony involving a firearm or any other circumstance contact Josh Jones today for your free consultation. He is available 7-days a week and handles all criminal matters and specializes in marijuana defense. Know the law, maintain your rights, and lawyer-up.

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.

Permitting Another To Drive Drunk (OWI)

Here in the State of Michigan it is illegal and a criminal misdemeanor, generally, if an individual is convicted or found guilty of permitting another to drive drunk. See MCL 257.625(10)(a). This means that an individual convicted of permitting another to drive drunk could face 93-days in jail and/or a fine of up to $500.00 plus other probation terms, conditions and requirements.

Furthermore, there are statutory enhancements if the individual driving the motor vehicle injuries or kills another individual. Of course, the individual driving must be intoxicated beyond the legal limit; however, the individual who is being charged with permitting another to drive drunk and an injury or death occurs from the incident the owner faces a felony (two or five years maximum in jail) and has statutory fines and costs ranging from $1,000 and $10,000.00. See MCL 257.625(10)(b-c).

The positive side of a conviction under permitting another to drive drunk is that licensing sanctions do not attach to an individual convicted of such a crime, whether injury or death was involved or the individual was simply intoxicated. Furthermore, a conviction of permitting another to drive drunk does not count towards or contribute to an enhancement under the traditional Michigan drunk driving or OWI statute. For more on traditional drunk driving law read our Overview of Michigan Drunk Driving.

It is important to note and mentioned that in 2013 the statute was updated and modified to include, into the element of intoxication of the crime, other intoxicating substance. Therefore, this allows the prosecuting official to incorporate or charge based upon other substances, such as marijuana, prescriptions, and the like.

Whenever you are facing a drunk driving charge or a charge of permitting another to drive drunk, you should contact a criminal defense lawyer. Josh Jones handles all drunk driving matters, including permitting another to drive drunk. He is available 7-days a week and handles matters in Metro-Detroit (Macomb, Wayne & Oakland Counties), Genesee County, Livingston County, Washtenaw County, and Lapeer County.

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.

Improperly Passing Police Officer Or Emergency Vehicle

Improperly passing police officer or an emergency vehicle is a criminal misdemeanor here in the State of Michigan. When an individual is driving on roadways within the state and there is an emergency vehicle (i.e. police officer, fire department, etc.) stopped or parked on the side of the they must take caution when they are approaching or passing said emergency vehicle. MCL 257.653a(1) states that “[u]pon approaching and passing a stationary authorized emergency vehicle that is giving a visual signal by means of flashing, rotating, or oscillating red, blue, or white lights as permitted by MCL 257.698, the driver of an approaching vehicle shall exhibit due care and caution.” Otherwise this would be considered improperly passing police officer or emergency vehicle.

Due care and caution has been statutorily explained, therefore, when an individual is “[o]n any public roadway with at least 2 adjacent lanes proceeding in the same direction of the . . . emergency vehicle, the driver . . . shall proceed with caution and yield the right‐of‐way by moving into a lane at least 1 moving lane or 2 vehicle widths apart from the stationary authorized emergency vehicle, unless directed otherwise by a police officer.” MCL 257.653a. However, “[i]f movement to an adjacent lane or 2 vehicle widths apart is not possible due to weather, road conditions, or the immediate presence of vehicular or pedestrian traffic in parallel moving lanes, the driver of the approaching vehicle shall . . . reduce and maintain a safe speed for weather, road conditions, and vehicular or pedestrian traffic and proceed with due care and caution, or as directed by a police officer.” MCL 257.653a. Again, if found to be violating this statute it would be considered improperly passing police officer or an emergency vehicle.

LEGAL NOTE: There are multiple statutory driving requirements regarded as right-of-way, such as improperly passing police officer or an emergency vehicle. The possible punishments, fines, and sanctions for each crime can and will vary among the variety of traffic infractions.

When looking whether an individual is found to be guitly of improperly passing police officer or emergency vehicle, the elements must be shown in order for a conviction can occur:

(1) Defendant drove a vehicle;

(2) Defendant approached a signaling emergency response vehicle; and

(3) while on a two‐lane public roadway,

(a) defendant did not approach the emergency vehicle with caution and yield the right‐of‐way by moving into a lane at least one moving lane or two vehicle widths apart from the emergency vehicle; or

(b) without at least two adjacent lanes proceeding in the same direction as the emergency vehicle, or if the movement by the driver of the vehicle into an adjacent lane or two vehicle widths apart is not possible, the defendant failed to reduce and maintain a safe speed and proceed with due care and caution.

Under MCL 257.653a(2), if convicted, an individual faces the possibility of imprisonment for not more than 90-days and/or a fine of not more than $500.00. Furthermore, four points will be placed on an individual’s driving record, which also reportable to the secretary of state. MCL 257.320a(1)(k). It should be noted that if any individual causes death while violating MCL 257.653a the possible punishment increases to a 15-year felony and $7,500 fine.

It is important always follow the rules of the road, not only for your own safety and the safety of others, but to also protect your driving and criminal records. Contact Josh Jones today for your free consultation. He always has your back when you are facing criminal matters (all misdemeanors and felonies), all marijuana matters (medical and non-medical), traffic citations, expungements, and drivers license restorations.

UPDATED Michigan Arson Statute(s)

The Michigan Arson Statutes ranges from 1st to 5th Degree and vary in punishment with 1st being the most severely punished and 5th being the least. 

MCL 750.72 – First Degree Michigan Arson Statute:

(1) A person who willfully or maliciously burns, damages, or destroys by fire or explosive any of the following or its contents is guilty of first degree arson:

(a) A multiunit building or structure in which 1 or more units of the building are a dwelling, regardless of whether any of the units are occupied, unoccupied, or vacant at the time of the fire or explosion.

(b) Any building or structure or other real property if the fire or explosion results in physical injury to any individual.

(c) A mine.

(2) Subsection (1) applies regardless of whether the person owns the dwelling, building, structure, or mine or its contents.

(3) First degree arson is a felony punishable by imprisonment for life or any term of years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property damaged or destroyed, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

MCL 750.73 – Second Degree Michigan Arson Statute:

(1) Except as provided in section 72, a person who willfully or maliciously burns, damages, or destroys by fire or explosive a dwelling, regardless of whether it is occupied, unoccupied, or vacant at the time of the fire or explosion, or its contents, is guilty of second degree arson.

(2) Subsection (1) applies regardless of whether the person owns the dwelling or its contents.

(3) Second degree arson is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property damaged or destroyed, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

MCL 750.74 – Third Degree Michigan Arson Statute:

(1) Except as provided in sections 72 and 73, a person who does any of the following is guilty of third degree arson:

(a) Willfully or maliciously burns, damages, or destroys by fire or explosive any building or structure, or its contents, regardless of whether it is occupied, unoccupied, or vacant at the time of the fire or explosion.

(b) Willfully and maliciously burns, damages, or destroys by fire or explosive any of the following or its contents:

(i) Any personal property having a value of $20,000.00 or more.

(ii) Any personal property having a value of $1,000.00 or more if the person has 1 or more prior convictions.

(2) Subsection (1) applies regardless of whether the person owns the building, structure, other real property or its contents, or the personal property.

(3) Third degree arson is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property damaged or destroyed, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

MCL 750.75 – Fourth Degree Michigan Arson Statute

(1) Except as provided in sections 72, 73, and 74, a person who does any of the following is guilty of fourth degree arson:

(a) Willfully and maliciously burns, damages, or destroys by fire or explosive any of the following or its contents:

(i) Any personal property having a value of $1,000.00 or more, but less than $20,000.00.

(ii) Any personal property having a value of $200.00 or more if the person has 1 or more prior convictions.

(b) Willfully or negligently sets fire to a woods, prairie, or grounds of another person or permits fire to pass from his or her own woods, prairie, or grounds to another person’s property causing damage or destruction to that other property.

(2) Subsection (1)(a) applies regardless of whether the person owns the personal property.

(3) Fourth degree arson is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $10,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property damaged or destroyed, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

MCL 750.77 – Fifth Degree Michigan Arson Statute:

(1) Except as provided in sections 72 to 76, a person who intentionally damages or destroys by fire or explosive any personal property having a value of $1,000.00 or less and who has 1 or more prior convictions is guilty of fifth degree arson.

(2) Subsection (1) applies regardless of whether the person owns the personal property.

(3) Fifth degree arson is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $2,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property damaged or destroyed, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

(4) As used in this section:

(a) “Personal property” includes an automobile, van, truck, motorcycle, trailer, and other personally owned property.

(b) “Prior conviction” means a prior conviction for a violation of this chapter (Michigan Arson Statute) that arises out of a separate transaction from the violation of this section.

Civil Infraction Procedure Explained

Here in the State of Michigan individuals committing simple traffic violations will find themselves being issued a civil infraction for the particular violation. Once a civil citation is issued, the individual will have a limited amount of time, as noted on the ticket, before the individual must pay the civil infraction or enter a plea of responsible. See MCL 257.744.

If the individual chooses to plead responsible to a civil infraction then the individual can do so without having to appear in court. An individual has multiple options afforded to them if they choose to simply pay and plea responsible to the civil infraction issued. The individual may also appear at the designated court and offer a plea of responsibility. See MCL 257.745(2). However, it is important to appear before the time limit indicated on the civil infraction or appear on the specified date noted on the ticket. Various courts maintain different procedures and time allotments when issuing civil infractions and misdemeanors citations.

In some situations individuals can and will enter a plea of “responsible with explanation,” which is used in order to attempt to mitigate the civil penalty inflicted. THis type of plea or admission can be performed by mail and the judge has the option of accepting the plea simply based upon the mailed information and explanation or the judge could require the person to appear in person in order to offer a more complete explanation on the record. See MCL 257.745(3).

A judge or magistrate can not take a plea under advisement and cannot reduce the charge without the police or prosecutor’s permission nor can they take a plea of responsibility without imposing any points, as is often requested. However, if the individual chooses too he or she can deny responsibility and then the court will set the matter for a formal or informal hearing before the judge. If the individual is unrepresented by counsel the court will likely set the matter for an informal hearing; however, if specifically requested, then the court must allow a person to have a formal hearing. See MCL 257.745(5).

An informal hearing is one that is typically conducted before a magistrate, but sometimes a judge. Furthermore, and important to note, Attorneys are not allowed to represent an individual in an informal hearing. The hearing is also not required to be on the record because an appeal from an informal hearing is a formal hearing. Moreover, the rules of evidence are not allowed in an informal hearing, which allows those untrained in the practice of law not to be prejudiced by their ignorance to the rules of evidence and court procedure. However, individuals must still abide by standard courtroom decorum. See MCL 257.746.

If the individual decides to request a formal hearing the court must set the matter for such a hearing. This also occurs an attorney files an appearance on behalf of his or her client. The individual should and must notify the court in a timely manner before the scheduled informal hearing date. It’s important to remember that an individual is not required to be represented by an attorney nor are they entitled to a public defender. Furthermore, there is no jury in a formal hearing. If a formal hearing is held it will be infront of a District Court Judge and the rules of evidence are closely adhered to than an informal hearing. Any appeal from the verdict is by right not leave. Jeopardy does not attach in civil infraction hearings so either side may appeal a decision to the circuit court. See MCL 257.747.

In order to be found responsible in a formal or informal hearing the court must find by a perponderance of the evidence that the individual committed a traffic violation. Whenever you are cited for a traffic infraction it is important to contact an attorney. There could be consequences that you are unaware of, even though its a simple civil infraction. You may not be required or think that you need an attorney, but it’s always better to obtain a consultation before you risk your right to driver here in the State of Michigan. Josh Jones handles traffic matter and civil infractions throughout Michigan, including but not limited to, Genesee County, Metro Detroit (Wayne, Oakland & Macomb County), Livingston County, Washtenaw County, and Lapeer County.

Controlled Substance Classifications Outlined, Kind Of

A controlled substance is “a drug, substance, or immediate precursor that is included in schedules 1 to 5.” MCL § 333.7104. The Board of Pharmacy determines which drugs, substances, and immediate precursors are assigned to each of the individualized schedules or contolled substance classifications. As set forth in MCL § 333.7202, the following factors are to be used by the Board of Pharmacy in determining a controlled substance classification, and inevitably placing them in on one of the five schedules:

  1. The drug’s actual or relative potential for abuse.
  2. If known, the scientific evidence of the drug’s pharmacological effect.
  3. The state of current scientific knowledge about the drug.
  4. The historical and contemporary patterns of the drug’s abuse.
  5. The scope, duration, and significance of the drug’s abuse.
  6. The public health risk related to the drug.
  7. The drug’s potential for producing psychic or physiological dependence liability.
  8. Whether the drug is an immediate precursor of another drug already regulated under the Act.

Schedule 1:

MCL § 333.7211, requires that controlled substance classification for a schedule 1 drug must have a high potential for abuse and either:

  1. has no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, or
  2. lacks accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision, and it includes marijuana, opiates and opium derivatives (e.g., heroin), hallucinogenics (e.g., LSD, peyote, mescaline, and psilocybin), synthetic equivalents of the substance found in marijuana, MDMA (ecstasy), BZP, naphyrone (“rave”), mephedrone, methylenedioxypyrovalerone (“bath salts”), and other related substances.

Note: 11‐carboxy‐THC, “a byproduct of metabolism created when the body breaks down the psychoactive ingredient of marijuana,” is not a schedule 1 controlled substance because it fails to meet the requirements of a schedule 1 controlled substance classification as set forth under MCL § 333.7212. See also People v Feezel.

Schedule 2 


MCL § 333.7213 explains that a controlled substance classification for a schedule 2 drug must meet the following requirements:

  1. its potential for abuse is high,
  2. it has currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or it has currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions, and
  3. its abuse could lead to severe psychic or physical dependence.

Controlled substance classifications for schedule 2 drugs include opium and opiate and their derivatives (e.g., codeine, morphine, methadone, hydrocodone, and oxycodone), coca leaves and derivatives (cocaine and cocaine‐related substances), amphetamines, any substance containing methamphetamine, and central nervous system depressants (e.g., methaqualone and secobarbital).

Schedule 3

MCL § 333.7215, indicates that a controlled substance classification for a schedule 3 drug must meet all of the following requirements:

  1. it has less potential for abuse than the substances in schedules 1 and 2,
  2. it has currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and
  3. its abuse could lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.

Controlled substance classifications for Schedule 3 substances include certain stimulants and depressants, and materials, compounds, mixtures, or preparations containing limited quantities of certain listed narcotic drugs, which can be found in MCL § 333.7216.

While controlled substance classification for Schedule 4 and 5 drugs decrease in the amount of abuse that can be found with using the substances listed. The chemical compounds and substances on these lists are determined by MCL § 333.7218 and MCL § 333.7220

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 Statute Explained – Leaving Scene of Accident

Leaving scene of accident charge occurs more than individuals think.  Many drivers have been or will be involved in some kind of motor vehicle accident during their lifetime. Hopefully the accident is minor and nothing serious happens to either party. People need to not only worry about increased premiums, vehicle damage and possible injury, but they also need to worry about criminal charges in some cases.

Whenever an individual is involved in an accident state law requires him or her to remain at the scene of the accident until certain things have occurred (otherwise leaving scene of accident charge can and will ensue). Essentially, Michigan law requires the individual driver involved in a car accident to “immediately stop his or her vehicle at the scene of the accident” and remain at the scene up until he or she has satisfied the following requirements:

  1. Give his or her name and address, and the registration number of the vehicle he or she is operating, including the name and address of the owner, to a police officer, the individual struck, or the driver or occupants of the vehicle with which he or she has collided;
  2. Exhibit his or her operator’s or chauffeur’s license to a police officer, individual struck, or the driver or occupants of the vehicle with which he or she has collided; and
  3. Render to any individual injured in the accident reasonable assistance in securing medical aid or arrange for or provide transportation to any injured individual. See MCL 257.618.

It’s important to note that since an individual involved in the accident must know or have reason to believe that he or she was actually involved in an accident, it allows for the possible defense when the “accident” is so minor that it would be unreasonable to know of the accident. However, remember that such a situation will always be based upon the factual circumstances involved in the particular case and there is never a guarantee to know that particular outcome. Leaving Scene of Accident charges can maintain severe consequences depending upon the specific charge issued.

If convicted of leaving scene of accident, pursuant to MCL 257.618, an individual will have a misdemeanor placed on his or her record and face a maximum 90-days in jail and and/or $100.00 fine, and 6 points placed on his or her driving record. It should also be noted that individuals involved in an accident where personal injury occured and the individual with leaving scene of accident will face an enhanced criminal charge. See MCL 257.617a. The enhancement increases the leaving scene of accident charge to a 1-year criminal misdemeanor attaching a $1,000.00 fine, 6 points on the drivering record, and a 90-day suspension of the drivers license.

It should also be noted that this article does not include all leaving scene of accident charges possible here in the State of Michigan. There are numerous varitions of the cime due to the various types of actions and events that can occur in these types of situations. For example, when the individuals involved in an accident and it occurred on a main roadway they are required to remove or move their vehicles unless the the individual involved in the accident knows or reaosnable should know that serious impairment of a bodily function or death occured because of the accident. See MCL 257.618a. If violating this statute an individual will be issued a civil infraction.

Whenever you are involved in a criminal matter, whether a misdemeanor or a felony, you need to maintain counsel. The smallest incidences can have the largest impact on an individual’s life, especially in the criminal justice system. Individual’s must be aware of the fact that probation, license sanctions, fines, and jail time can all occur when facing a criminal charge. Josh Jones is here for you, and has your back no matter the situation.

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.