LANSING, MI — People committing similar large-scale marijuana crimes face very different penalties in Michigan.
Dealers are eligible to serve up to 15 years in prison, while illegal growers of any size may only be charged with a misdemeanor, the state Court of Appeals clarified this week.
The Michigan Court of Appeals surprised many when it ruled in October 2023 that the harshest crime a Tuscola County man accused of operating an illegal 1,100-plus-plant marijuana grow could face is a misdemeanor.
Related: Illegal marijuana grow of any size only a misdemeanor in Michigan, court rules
Meanwhile, the same court on Monday, Oct. 7, said Julia Soto of Niles, who is accused of possessing with intent to deliver at least 20 pounds of marijuana, could face up to seven years in prison.
The drastic discrepancy in punishments, the appeals court said, lies in the difference between illicit large-scale cultivation and dealing.
Soto’s defense attorney, Daniel Grow, called the competing appellate court rulings inconsistent and said he will appeal to the state Supreme Court.
In the first case, police in 2020 raided an unlicensed Tuscola County grow operated by Shaaln M. Kejbou. Police found 1,156 marijuana plants in various buildings, hydroponic equipment, agricultural chemicals, surveillance cameras, suspected guard dogs and a shotgun in Kejbou’s bedroom.
The charges were serious: operating a criminal enterprise, manufacturing with the intent to deliver more than 200 marijuana plants; receiving or concealing more than $1,000 in stolen goods; misdemeanor animal cruelty and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
However, the case was challenged. The state Court of Appeals struck down the 1978 felony drug crimes, citing precedence of the newer, voter-passed Michigan’s 2018 Marijuana Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act (MRTMA), which limits penalties for illegal grows to a misdemeanor, “unless the violation was habitual, willful and for a commercial purpose or the violation involved violence.”
The harsh 1978 law, the court said, no longer applies, at least in the case of cultivation.
“The unlimited manufacture of marijuana plants, which results in only a misdemeanor sanction, clearly obliterates much of the stated purpose of the act,” Tuscola County Prosecutor Mark Reene said following the decision. “It decimates legitimate businesses and license holders and fuels the illicit market and criminal enterprises. … The unintended consequences are far reaching with countless adverse dynamics associated therewith.”
Reene’s office dismissed all charges, except for a count of animal cruelty, to which Kejbou pleaded guilty and served three days in jail.
Soto’s attorney argues the same punishment limitations should apply to his client, but the court disagreed.
On Oct. 26, 2022, Illinois state police stopped a rental truck hauling 85 pounds of marijuana destined for Michigan, according to details in the appellate opinion. In coordination with the truck driver and Michigan State Police, the shipment proceeded to Soto’s home where police arrested the named recipient, Chad Boylen, and Soto.
Police then searched the home and seized nearly 20 more pounds of marijuana and $10,000 in cash, the appellate opinion said. Charged with possession with intent to deliver marijuana, Boylen accepted a plea deal in March 2023 and received a 15-day jail sentence.
Berrien County prosecutors charged Soto under the 1978 law with operating a drug house and possession with intent to deliver between 5 and 45 kilograms of marijuana, punishable by up to seven years in prison.
Soto’s attorney appealed, claiming the possession with intent charge should be trumped by the new, friendlier marijuana law.
The appellate judges in their unanimous opinion said the marijuana law addresses small amounts of marijuana, demonstrating “the intent to penalize possession with intent to deliver lesser quantities of marijuana with the lesser penalty … ”
But the same doesn’t apply to amounts more than twice the legal limit, 10 ounces of harvested marijuana per person in a home. On that, the new law is silent.
The opinion said “the electorate’s deliberate exclusion of possession with intent to deliver larger quantities” forces the court to rely on the previous drug laws and penalties.
“Possession with intent to deliver large quantities of marijuana for compensation and outside of state regulation implies an illicit dealing for profit or a contribution to the illicit market,” the appellate opinion said. “Such conduct subverts the express purpose of the act.”
The court returned the case to the Berrien Circuit Court for resolution, although it could be further stalled if Soto’s attorney files an appeal with the state Supreme Court.
Dealers are eligible to serve up to 15 years in prison, while illegal growers of any size may only be charged with a misdemeanor, the state Court of Appeals clarified this week. Read More