People v Tuttle Michigan Supreme Court Ordered Hearing
On June 11th, 2014, Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice, Michael F. Cavanagh, Stephen J. Markman Mary Beth Kelly, Brian K. Zahra, Bridget M. McCormack, David F. Viviano, Justices, provided the following order for the application of leave filed in People v Tuttle (Mich. COA 2014):
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 30, 2014 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether a registered qualifying patient under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), MCL 333.26421 et seq., who makes unlawful sales of marijuana to another patient to whom he is not connected through the registration process, taints all aspects of his marijuana-related conduct, even that which is otherwise permitted under the act; (2) whether a defendant’s possession of a valid registry identification card establishes any presumption for purposes of ? 4 or ? 8; (3) if not, what is a defendant’s evidentiary burden to establish immunity under ? 4 or an affirmative defense under ? 8; and (4) what role, if any, do the verification and confidentiality provisions in ? 6 of the act play in establishing entitlement to immunity under ? 4 or an affirmative defense under ? 8.
We direct the Clerk to schedule the oral argument in this case for the same future session of this Court when it will hear oral argument in People v Hartwick (Docket No. 148444).
Persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
It will be interesting to see what the Michigan Supreme Court does with People v Tuttle. The ruling in the Michigan Court of Appeals has drastically undercut the possible defenses available to individuals looking to qualify for a Section 8 Affirmative Defense. The decision will hopefully assist rather than hinder the Michigan Medical Marihuana community.
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. LAWYER-UP.