norml22 - Page 7
Page 7
Previous ,
Next ,
Original Image
Return to Index
°
opinion that incriminating evidence should have been excluded as
evidence obtained as a result of illegal entrapment; two judges
were of the opinion that incriminating evidence should have been
excluded as evidence obtained as a result of illegal entrapment;
and two judges were of the opinion that the minimum sentence of
nine and one-half years constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
The opinion of the courts written by Swainson, J.u declared:
Comparison of the effects of marijuana use on
both the individual and society with the
effects of other drug use demonstrates not
only that there is no rational basis for
classifying marijuana with the _hard
narcotics _' but6 alsog ____l_re ° v
__ r a t iQr_i____i S__ f_or___tr__, at//lq__ °_ a
an _r_u_g _rhea n a 19_o/L_i o
194 N.W.2d at 881 (Emphasis added)°
The court concluded: '_We agree with the Illinois Supreme
Court in _ v , _pra, that marijuana is improperly
classified as a narcotic and hold that [the Michigan statute
prohibiting possession of marijuana] in its classification of
marijuana violates the equal protection clause of the U.S.
Constitution... '* _d. at 887. Subsequent Michigan decisions
indicated that the _G__abe holding, j_e., that marijuana cannot
rationally be classified as a narcotic, has been adopted as a
matter of law. ___ _9-Q3_/_ v_axma_ 41 Mich. Appo 277_ 199
N.W.2d 884 (1972) _ r_v_Q3_ author_i_t_ Q____Q_i9 Vo S__ 338
Mich. 774, 200 N.Wo2d 322 (1972). _ee al___, _9_QP_le v. Griffin,
39 Mich. App. 464_ 198 N.W.2d 740 (1972).
In __tate v_____ar_GuS, 18 N.J. Super, 159, 286 A.2d 740 (1972),
C_ was convicted of violation of a motor vehicle statute
6
Previous ,
Next ,
Return to Index