|
|
Sunday, July 29, 2012
By Michael Nichols
Categories: Drug Crimes
The Michigan Supreme Court recently vacated the Court of Appeal’s judgment in People v Anderson and sent the case back to the court of appeals for reconsideration in light of Supreme Court cases King and Kolanek which were decided in May of 2012.
Anderson involved two issues. First, must a defendant who is using the affirmative defense as provided in section 8 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) provide an expert to testify regarding how much marihuana is reasonably needed for an uninterrupted supply? Second, can a defendant present the affirmative defense to a jury after a motion to dismiss involving the affirmative defense is denied by the trial judge?
The defendant in Anderson was not a registered medical marihuana patient and therefore was not protected under section 4 of the MMMA. The defendant instead opted to seek protection under section 8 which is available to those who have been recommended to use marihuana by a licensed physician to treat a qualifying condition. Because the Defendant in Anderson was using the section 8 affirmative defense, he was required to prove that he had a physician’s recommendation, that he did not possess more marihuana than was reasonably necessary and that he was using the marihuana to treat one of the qualifying conditions.
The King and Kolanek cases specifically dealt with the section 8 defense and as such Anderson was held in abeyance until King and Kolanek were decided. Now that King and Kolanek have been decided Anderson will be reconsidered. It now appears that Anderson may now have the chance to present his section 8 defense at trial.
If you are a MMMA patient or caregiver and have questions regarding the use of the section 8 affirmative defense call the Nichols Law Firm and speak with an attorney who understands the MMMA. Call (517)432-9000.