4/12 Court Support for Steven Sanderson Bay County Sec 8 Trial

TheMan13

Well-Known Member


When: 08:30 Tuesday, April 12

Where: Bay County 18th Circuit, 1230 Washington Ave, Bay City, Michigan 48708

"My name is steven sanderson I am from bay county my family and I are victims of the police raids. On 2/10/15 over a year ago my door was kicked in by baynet. I broke no laws I am a registered card holder. The police came into my home threw me around almost shot my dogs scared my family and took our things and medicine. I was fully with in the law I only had a ounce and a half of medication. But the police continued to take our things. 5 months after that I was arrested on two felonys. I have been fighting on my own since then with my attorney josh Covert. I have won my sec 8 defense so I'm going into trial with that. Now that I'm at trial I think it's a good idea to put a call out for court support any help will be greatly appreciated thank you"

https://www.facebook.com/events/1540679549566778/
 
Last edited:

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
"
BAY CITY, MI — A 40-year-old Bangor Township man is charged with two felonies due to police alleging he misused a medical marijuana grow operation to illegally sell weed.

In the early morning of Monday, Feb. 9, a Bay County Sheriff's deputy searched two garbage cans in the 100 block of Lagoon Beach Drive in Bangor Township after receiving information that drugs were being sold from a house there, according to court records. The deputy found approximately 36 grams of suspected marijuana, a half-rolled joint and related paraphernalia, court records show.

The next morning, officers with the Bay Area Narcotics Enforcement Team, or BAYANET, and the Michigan State Police Emergency Services Team executed a search warrant on the house in question. Inside at the time was resident Steven M. Sanderson, his girlfriend and their 5-year-old son, court records show.

Officers found a marijuana grow room in the garage and numerous burned joints throughout the house, as well as a glass jar containing about 50.1 grams of marijuana, court records show.

The woman provided officers with documentation that she is a licensed medical marijuana caregiver with four registered patients, one of whom is Sanderson, court records show.

Under the state's Medical Marihuana Act, caregivers can grow up to 12 plants producing 2.5 ounces of usable marijuana for each of their five patients and themselves. Caregivers can receive "reasonable compensations for services provided to assist with a qualifying patient's medical use of marihuana," according to the state's website.

Sanderson was adamant to police that the grow room, containing 24 plants, was solely his and that his girlfriend had no involvement in the crops' cultivation. He also said he was only a medical marijuana patient and not a caregiver, court records show.

The woman told police she ran the grow room, but did not know how many plants were in it or what their strain was, court records show.

Police seized a cellphone that contained text messages implicating Sanderson in illicit marijuana sales, according to court records. They also seized $2,312 in cash and the woman's 2009 Jeep Wrangler, purchased a month beforehand with $13,000 in cash, court records show.

Sanderson told police he is unemployed but receives about $800 per month in disability payments, court records show.

Authorities issued a warrant for Sanderson's arrest on April 24. He voluntarily appeared for his arraignment in Bay County District Court on Tuesday, May 12, on two counts of delivering or manufacturing between 5 and 45 kilograms of marijuana. The charge is a seven-year felony.

Sanderson is to appear for a preliminary examination before District Judge Timothy J. Kelly at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 23."

http://www.mlive.com/news/bay-city/index.ssf/2015/06/bangor_township_man_charged_wi_12.html
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
If he won his section 8, what are they charging him with???
Two counts of delivering or manufacturing between 5 (approx 180 ounces or 11 pounds) and 45 kilograms of marijuana (a seven year felony) 333.7401(2)(d)(ii)

"333.7401c Manufacture of controlled substance; prohibited acts; violation as felony; exceptions; imposition of consecutive terms; court order to pay response activity costs; definitions.

Sec. 7401c.

(1) A person shall not do any of the following:

(a) Own, possess, or use a vehicle, building, structure, place, or area that he or she knows or has reason to know is to be used as a location to manufacture a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

(b) Own or possess any chemical or any laboratory equipment that he or she knows or has reason to know is to be used for the purpose of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

(c) Provide any chemical or laboratory equipment to another person knowing or having reason to know that the other person intends to use that chemical or laboratory equipment for the purpose of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

(2) A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony punishable as follows:

(a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) to (f), by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

(b) If the violation is committed in the presence of a minor, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

(c) If the violation involves the unlawful generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of a hazardous waste, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

(d) If the violation occurs within 500 feet of a residence, business establishment, school property, or church or other house of worship, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

(e) If the violation involves the possession, placement, or use of a firearm or any other device designed or intended to be used to injure another person, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

(f) If the violation involves or is intended to involve the manufacture of a substance described in section 7214(c)(ii), by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or both.

(3) This section does not apply to a violation involving only a substance described in section 7214(a)(iv) or marihuana, or both.

(4) This section does not prohibit the person from being charged with, convicted of, or punished for any other violation of law committed by that person while violating or attempting to violate this section.

(5) A term of imprisonment imposed under this section may be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed for a violation of law arising out of the same transaction.

(6) The court may, as a condition of sentence, order a person convicted of a violation punishable under subsection (2)(c) to pay response activity costs arising out of the violation.

(7) As used in this section:

(a) “Hazardous waste” means that term as defined in section 11103 of the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.11103.

(b) “Laboratory equipment” means any equipment, device, or container used or intended to be used in the process of manufacturing a controlled substance, counterfeit substance, or controlled substance analogue.

(c) “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, propagation, compounding, conversion, or processing of a controlled substance, directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Manufacture does not include any of the following:

(i) The packaging or repackaging of the substance or labeling or relabeling of its container.

(ii) The preparation or compounding of a controlled substance by any of the following:

(A) A practitioner as an incident to the practitioner's administering or dispensing of a controlled substance in the course of his or her professional practice.

(B) A practitioner, or by the practitioner's authorized agent under his or her supervision, for the purpose of, or as an incident to, research, teaching, or chemical analysis and not for sale.

(d) “Minor” means an individual less than 18 years of age.

(e) “Response activity costs” means that term as defined in section 20101 of the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.20101.

(f) “School property” means that term as defined in section 7410.

(g) “Vehicle” means that term as defined in section 79 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.79.

History: Add. 2000, Act 314, Eff. Jan. 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 310, Eff. Apr. 1, 2004
Popular Name: Act 368"

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(dn2yymdfzkfc5v35fs3apsfa))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-333-7401c
 
Last edited:

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
@Dr. Bob Can you make it over to the 18th Circuit in Bay City on Tuesday (4/12) and get us the scoop? You could wear a roberttownsendfor97.com - "Put a doctor in the house" shirt :bigjoint:
 

passmethelid

Well-Known Member
If he won his section 8, what are they charging him with???
you should know tut wick ruling said sec8 has two faces now. prima facie means he can present it at trial, if no question of fact remains he gets dismissed.

if question of fact remains, then he can present it to a jury
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Case # 15010206 FH is a jury trial in Judge Sheeran's courtroom starting at 8:30am.


Judge Joseph K. Sheeran - 18th Judicial Circuit Court - Bay City, Michigan
Appointed by Governor Jennifer M. Granholm in 2006

"Sheeran, of Essexville, served as Bay County prosecuting attorney starting in 1993 and served as city attorney for Bay City from 1985 to 1987. His professional and civic involvement includes serving as president of the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan from 2001 to 2002, serving as chairperson of the Michigan Crime Victims Services Commission, serving as a board member of the Bay Area Narcotics Enforcement Team, and being a founding member of Mentor Michigan. He earned his law degree from the Detroit College of Law and graduated from the University of Notre Dame."
 

Motorbuds

Well-Known Member
Well, honestly they fucked up their stories. If she's the caregiver and he's one of her patients then why doesn't she know how many plants are in the room or what strains they are? Also, why does he have access to other patients medicine and plants that are supposed to be secured from anyone but the caregiver?

This is the reason people on the outside are skeptical about patients and the law in general.

How does it go from them finding 36 grams in the trash and 50 grams in the house to a 5-45kg charge? There something we're not being told here. Just based on the above, this guy doesn't seem like the victim he's being portrayed as.

I just have a feeling that there's a lot of information being left out of this story.
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Well, honestly they fucked up their stories. If she's the caregiver and he's one of her patients then why doesn't she know how many plants are in the room or what strains they are? Also, why does he have access to other patients medicine and plants that are supposed to be secured from anyone but the caregiver?

This is the reason people on the outside are skeptical about patients and the law in general.

How does it go from them finding 36 grams in the trash and 50 grams in the house to a 5-45kg charge? There something we're not being told here. Just based on the above, this guy doesn't seem like the victim he's being portrayed as.

I just have a feeling that there's a lot of information being left out of this story.
It seems clear Mr. Sanderson has been obscenely overcharged in an attempt to force a plea agreement devoid of MMMA consideration or the state rights granted therein. You'd be shocked by what a common practice this is if you cared to look. Most cannot afford this game and they know it. A defense lawyer will charge you thousands up to a plea agreement and tens of thousands for a trial. FYI 2x 45 kilos is over 200 pounds.

As for the lawyer math of exploiting arbitrary numbers (2.5oz/12 plants) found within MMMA Section 4: Protections for the use of medical marijuana to emancipate themselves from those directives clearly directed at them (NOT patients/caregivers), it neither logically or ethically adds up. Those arbitrary numbers (2.5 ounces and/or 12 plants) have nothing to do with my legitimate medicinal needs or right to maintain an uninterrupted supply as my doctor and I (NOT the courts) see fit. We have a medicinal law (MMMA), not simply a 2.5 oz flower and 12 plant exemption as the courts would like you to believe ...

Let's pay attention, get educated and fight back, as this has been going on for nearly a decade now ...

@Motorbuds Show up and learn something :confused:
 
Last edited:

NurseNancy420

Well-Known Member
Well, honestly they fucked up their stories. If she's the caregiver and he's one of her patients then why doesn't she know how many plants are in the room or what strains they are? Also, why does he have access to other patients medicine and plants that are supposed to be secured from anyone but the caregiver?

This is the reason people on the outside are skeptical about patients and the law in general.

How does it go from them finding 36 grams in the trash and 50 grams in the house to a 5-45kg charge? There something we're not being told here. Just based on the above, this guy doesn't seem like the victim he's being portrayed as.

I just have a feeling that there's a lot of information being left out of this story.
Us or Them?? Pretty simple to me.

They are victims
 

Motorbuds

Well-Known Member
Us or Them?? Pretty simple to me.

They are victims
If I claim I'm a caregiver for several people and the police come here and find out that I'm just letting someone else run my grow how am I a victim? Just because someone is a MMJ "patient" I'm not going to automatically let them off the hook and call them a victim.

The main thing making legitimate patients look bad and lots of people laugh at MMJ is people like this. They think that you go to the doctor, get your card and now the laws no longer apply. You have carte blanche to do whatever you want. I have friends like this that I expect sooner or later are going to be in police custody.

Everyone in this forum knows by now that if you don't follow the law to a tee, they will drop the hammer on you hard. Then everybody acts surprised or cries foul when it happens.

You guys need to pick your battles and the people you want to fight for better. Every time I see a case like this the person is always doing something they shouldn't be doing.

It's just tiring seeing things like this and wondering why no one takes us seriously and looks at all patients as losers and stoners.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member


When: 08:30 Tuesday, April 12

Where: Bay County 18th Circuit, 1230 Washington Ave, Bay City, Michigan 48708

"My name is steven sanderson I am from bay county my family and I are victims of the police raids. On 2/10/15 over a year ago my door was kicked in by baynet. I broke no laws I am a registered card holder. The police came into my home threw me around almost shot my dogs scared my family and took our things and medicine. I was fully with in the law I only had a ounce and a half of medication. But the police continued to take our things. 5 months after that I was arrested on two felonys. I have been fighting on my own since then with my attorney josh Covert. I have won my sec 8 defense so I'm going into trial with that. Now that I'm at trial I think it's a good idea to put a call out for court support any help will be greatly appreciated thank you"

https://www.facebook.com/events/1540679549566778/
What needs to be stopped are the roving bands of fucking thugs with badges, violating our constitutional rights with impunity!
 
Top