Ann Arbor Criminal Defense Blog

The Internet Privacy Protection Act, going into effect today, was enacted by the Michigan legislature following several nationally publicized stories of employers demanding that job applicants hand over facebook or twitter account passwords on the spot in order to get the job.

The law prohibits employers from demanding employees or job applicants to provide an internet account password. Colleges may also not ask students or prospective students the same question. Any information on an internet account that is available in the public domain is fair game for the employer or college to look at, however. This prohibition would not apply to internet accounts that are provided by the employer or school.

The law enables a person who is the subject of a violation to bring a suit for up to $1,000 and injunction against further similar actions.

In the November election several cities in Michigan voted to amend marijuana possession ordinances.

This does not mean that marijuana possession is now legal in these cities. People may still be charged and prosecuted under Michigan state law. Marijuana possession under state law is a misdemeanor that carries a penalty of up to one year imprisonment, a $2,000 fine, or both.

It remains to be seen how police officials will react to the new laws in those cities.

The Michigan Court of Appeals in People v. Brown held that police are not obligated to to determine whether a person suspected of using or growing marijuana is doing so legally under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act before applying for a search warrant.

In 2007, Defendant Brown’s former roommate informed police authorities that Brown was manufacturing marijuana in his residence. The police conducted a search of his garbage bins left for pickup, finding pieces of fresh marijuana. Based on this evidence the police executed a search warrant of the residence and seized eight marijuana plants and two grams of marijuana.

During the investigatory process the police did not look into whether Brown was a qualifying patient or a primary caregiver under the MMMA (he was neither). Brown was charged and convicted of manufacturing marijuana.

In the cases of People v. Kolanek, King the Michigan Supreme Court decided several important issues regarding the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act in a win for medical marijuana users and advocates.

The Court ruled that a defendant asserting the Section 8 defense is not required to establish the requirements of Section 4. The defendant may raise the Section 8 defense at trial after losing on a pre-trial motion. Also, in asserting the Section 8 defense the defendant must show that the physician’s statement was made after enactment of the MMMA but before the commission of the offense.

The MMMA permits qualifying patients to possess and use marijuana for debilitating medical conditions and for caregivers to grow and provide marijuana for up to five patients. A limited exception in the law is created for these activities, not a general right.

In People v. Kiel, the police discovered marijuana plants growing on defendant Kiel’s property after a routine aerial surveillance. The police found 66-69 plants and seized 30 plants after Kiel produced medical marijuana cards for three people. Kiel was ultimately convicted for manufacturing marijuana.

In a pretrial motion, the Kiel sought dismissal of the charge based on the immunity provided in Section 4 and the affirmative defense in Sections 8 of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.

Section 4 provides patients and caregivers immunity from prosecution where the defendant possessed a registry card, possessed no more than the permitted amount of marijuana, and kept the marijuana plants in an enclosed, locked facility.

The Freedom of Information Act does not apply to firearms records. I cannot go to my local township and finds who owns a gun in my town. This law protects the privacy of firearms owners.

MCL 28.421b makes it a civil infraction for a peace officer or an authorized system user to disclose a firearms record to anyone except a peace officer or authorized system user. The disclosure must also be for one of the following purposes;

• The individual whose records are subject to disclosure poses a threat to him or herself or others, including a police officer,
• The individual whose records are subject to disclosure has committed an offense that is a violation of a law either in this state or elsewhere,
• The pistol itself that is the subject of the records firearms search could have been used in the commission of an offense,
• To ensure the safety of a peace or police officer,
• For the purposes of this law, or
• A police or peace officer may make the search in the course of lawful duties as an officer. The officer or authorized system user must record the specific reason for the search.

A person who intentionally discloses a firearms record without one of the above reasons is subject to a civil infraction with the maximum penalty of $500. MCL 28.421b

In the case of Miller v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court in an opinion authored by Justice Kagan ruled that the Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders.

The combined cases of Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs both involved 14 year old defendants convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Both sentences were mandated by state law. The sentencing authorities had no discretion to alter the sentence.

In 1999, 14-year old Jackson accompanied two boys to a video store which they had decided to rob, though it is nor clear that Jackson knew at first that the robbery was the plan. At first, Jackson stayed outside the store, but at some point entered before another of the boys shot and killed the clerk after she threatened to call the police. Arkansas law provides that prosecutors may charge 14-year olds as adults when the crime alleged is a serious offense. Jackson was charged and convicted as an adult with capital felony murder and aggravated robbery. In Arkansas, a defendant convicted of capital murder must either be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without parole.