Pubdate: Fri, 28 Sep 2012
Source: Grand Rapids Press (MI)
Copyright: 2012 Grand Rapids Press
Contact:  http://www.mlive.com/grand-rapids/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/171
Author: John Agar

GRAND RAPIDS LAWYER: MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROVIDERS TARGETED, NOT
PROTECTED BY MICHIGAN LAW

GRAND RAPIDS, MI - In a medical marijuana case before the state
Supreme Court, Grand Rapids attorney Bruce Block said the law, rather
than offering protection to responsible users and growers, has instead
put them at risk of arrest.

"Too many have complied with the plain language of the MMMA (Michigan
Medical Marihuana Act) only to have the proverbial carpet yanked from
beneath them after they were raided by SWAT teams in riot gear and
automatic weapons and charged with serious drug felonies," Block wrote
in a 47-page filing before the high court.

He argued that the medical marijuana law, approved overwhelmingly by
63 percent of voters, "must be construed in its most limiting form
against the state. =C2=85 This Act was clearly intended to change the
attitude of the legislative, administrative, and judicial branches of
the State of Michigan.

"The people of Michigan wanted a fundamental attitude change towards
marijuana," Block wrote. "This court is now faced with being the final
protector of the will of the people in this regard."

Block, who specializes in medical marijuana cases, is representing
Ryan Michael Byslma, a licensed medical marijuana caregiver who set up
a grow operation in a Grand Rapids commercial warehouse at 470 Market
Ave. SW

The trouble came on Sept. 15, 2010, when a city water inspector saw an
orange extension cord going into Bylsma's unit. He had the building
maintenance manager cut the lock to investigate the "illegal
electrical line."

The open door revealed marijuana plants in various stages of growth,
and police responded with a search warrant.

Authorities seized 88 plants and they also took five ounces of usable
marijuana, fertilizers, grow lights and security system with cameras.
Bylsma maintained that he only possessed 24 plants, the number he was
licensed to grow. The rest belonged to other licensed growers.

After a two-day hearing, in which the other growers showed they were
licensed, and owned the plants, a Kent County Circuit Court judge
denied Bylsma's motion to dismiss under the law because it contains a
requirement that each of the 12 plants permitted a medical marijuana
user be kept in an "enclosed, locked facility that can only be
accessed by one person."

While secure, Bylsma's operation had a single lock, and was accessible
to other growers.

The state Court of Appeals ruled he "possessed" all 88 plants, and
lost immunity under the state law.

Block, challenging the definition of "possession" under the state
medical marijuana provision, doesn't dispute that his client was not
the designated caregiver for others with marijuana in the shared grow
area.

He said Bylsma didn't possess the plants. At most, he had custody of
plants owned by others. He had no intent to violate the law.

"Can definitions formulated over the last 72 years when all marijuana
was per se illegal still be applied to medical marijuana cases, such
as (Bylsma's)? Restated, did the voters intend the MMMA to supplant
the existing definition of 'possession' in the context of medical
marijuana? The answer is 'yes.'"

"The traditional definition of possession of marijuana must be
replaced with a workable definition, which incorporates notions of
physical possession, exclusive dominion, and control =C2=85 . The spouse
who retrieves a prescription from the pharmacy would =C2=85 be surprised 
to
learn that they possess the controlled substances in the medicine bottles
=2E"

Block said too many have faced drug charges even though they believed
they were following the law. That includes his client, he said.

"Instead of playing the game of 'aha-gotcha' and charging citizens
with serious drug felonies because they failed to comply with some
heretofore unknown requirement of a simple law, the legal system,
including law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges need to use wide
discretion when evaluating medical marijuana cases such as the present
one."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt