Kent Co. Prosecutor clarifies stance on marijuana cases

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. – The Kent County Prosecutor says his office will likely no longer be prosecuting any pending cases specifically focused on use of or possession of marijuana since voters approved legalizing recreational use on Tuesday.

Chris Becker told FOX 17 that his office staff discussed the issue and made the decision Thursday.

Becker says that pending marijuana cases of 17 to 20-year-olds may still be prosecuted because Proposal 1 applies to people 21-years-old or older.  Also, people accused of Marijuana Possession with Intent to Deliver will still likely be prosecuted because that also was not included in Proposal 1.

Becker says that driving offenses will be treated in the same way as before Proposal 1. If you are driving and impaired you still face driving charges.

“If you have marijuana in your system, we are going to take a look at everything to see if you are impaired,” Becker said.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

13 comments

  • steve

    What the hell? This idiot should look at when the offense occurred. What was in effect at that time? My message to him would be simple. ‘You don’t make the laws. You uphold them’.

    • good one steve

      How pissed would you be if you got charged a felony for driving 75mph on 131 the day before they bumped the speed limit from 70mph to 75mph? Are you telling me that under these hypothetical conditions, you wouldn’t expect the charges to be dismissed?

        • Good one steve

          If you pay $1000 for a TV from Meijer and it goes on sale the next week for $200, are you just going to accept the fact and be totally cool with it? I would definitely go back to Meijer and get a refund.

          • C

            If I were the Meijer employee, I’d remind you that there are other stores in town that sell TVs. And, when you get your shorts in a wad, I’d gladly hold the door for you when you stormed out. There are some types of customers Meijer doesn’t need or want.

      • steve

        Good One Steve, if that was the law that was in place at the time I broke the law, the only person I could be pissed at would be me. Get it? I follow the laws, and if I break them I may not like the outcome, but when I grew up, you follow the rules or pay the price.

        • Michael

          While in theory I agree with you it just doesn’t make sense to do it that way. In the current climate what do you think the chances are to get a guilty verdict from a jury? If you are almost guaranteed to get a “not guilty” at trial there’s no reason to waste taxpayer money.

    • Hmmm...

      You are what is wrong with this world. Calling a good man an idiot. Wishing to ruin complicate people’s lives and spend taxpayer dollars for what??? So that you can uphold a law that no longer exists?

      My message to you is this: laws are in place to protect people… spirit of the law > letter of the law… who is being protected and what is gained by punishing people for something that is now allowed and deemed acceptable by the majority of the population? No one, except you get to feel better about yourself.

  • Justin Case

    Hey Chris……have you looked at ALL the pending cases? How about those still in violation of the law. Glad I do not live in your county – you are not good at your job!