Opinion
No. 142850.
June 22, 2011.
Reported below: Mich App ___.
Leave to Appeal Granted June 22, 2011.
The parties shall address (1) whether the defendant was immune from arrest and prosecution for manufacturing marijuana under § 4(a) and (d) of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, MCL 333.26424(a) and (d), where he possessed a valid registry identification card and he was in possession of an amount of marijuana that did not exceed the amount allowed under the act; (2) whether the presumption under § 4(d) was rebutted by evidence that the defendant did not keep his 12 marijuana plants in an "enclosed, locked facility" under § 4(a), as defined in § 3(c), MCL 333.26423(c); (3) if (2) is answered in the affirmative, whether the defendant may independently assert an affirmative defense under § 8(a), MCL 333.26428(a); and (4) whether the language "[e]xcept as provided in section 7" in § 8(a) required the defendant to fulfill all of the conditions set forth in § 4 in order to have a valid affirmative defense under § 8(a).
The Attorney General, the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan, and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other 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.