Pleading - mlive
STATE OF MICHIGAN
SEVENTH DISTRICT COURT (VAN BUREN COUNTY)
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
V Case No. 13 001746 FY
SCOT DAVID GRANKE,
Defendant.
______________________________________/
PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION
BEFORE THE HONORABLE ARTHUR H. CLARKE, III, DISTRICT JUDGE
South Haven, Michigan - Wednesday, December 18, 2013
APPEARANCES:
For the People: Ms. Susan Zuiderveen, P76985
Mr. Eric Jenkins P77863 Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
1007 East Wells
South Haven, Michigan 49090
(269) 637-5258
For the Defendant: Mr. John Frost P71389
Mr. Caleb Grimes P77551 Attorney at Law
401 Center Street
South Haven, Michigan 49090
(269) 637-2000
Recorded and transcribed by: Laura M. Canaan CER-3535
Certified Court Reporter
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WITNESSES: PEOPLE: Page
Marlene Granke
Direct examination by Ms. Zuiderveen 4
Cross-examination by Mr. Frost 14
Redirect examination by Ms. Zuiderveen 22
Recross-examination by Mr. Frost 24
Trooper Evan Hauger
Direct examination by Ms. Zuiderveen 27
Cross-examination by Mr. Frost 49
Redirect examination by Ms. Zuiderveen 64
Exhibits Marked Admitted Withdrawn
Exhibit 1 35 37
South Haven, Michigan
Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - 1:39 p.m.
(Court, counsel, and all parties present)
THE COURT: I have file 13 001746 in the name of Scot Granke. Is that you, sir?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes sir.
THE COURT: Mr. Granke, you are present with your attorney, Mr. Frost. Mr. Frost, are you ready to proceed today?
MR. FROST: I am, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
Ms. Zuiderveen, are you ready to proceed?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Yes, we are, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
Any preliminary matters that the Court must address prior to beginning?
MR. FROST: It is my understanding that the prosecutor intends to call two witnesses in this matter, Mrs. Granke and Detective Trooper Hauger. As long as Mrs. Granke is called first, I won't need to sequester witnesses here.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: And the People are actually calling her first so there shouldn't be an issue, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. And under sequestration we always allow the investigating officer to be present in the courtroom. With that concept in mind we are happy to proceed. Anything else, Mr. Frost?
MR. FROST: No, Your Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: Ms. Zuiderveen?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You may proceed then, ma'am.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you. The People call Marlene Granke as our first witness.
THE COURT: Thank you.
Ma'am, if you would come over to the chair. Before you have a seat, if you would stop, raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
THE WITNESS: I do.
THE COURT: Thank you. If you would have a seat there, please, ma'am. Ma'am, that microphone just records your voice, it doesn't make it any louder. So if you would speak loud enough so the individuals at the two tables can hear you. Thank you.
Marlene Granke
(At 1:42 p.m., sworn as a witness, testified as follows)
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q Can you state your name and spell your last name? Would you spell your first and last name for the record?
A My name is Marlene Granke. M-a-r-l-e-n-e Granke, G-r-a-n-k-e.
Q Thank you. And where do you live, Mrs. Granke?
A Currently living in Kalamazoo.
Q Where did you live actually when this incident occurred on August 21?
A I lived in the marital home in Bangor.
Q And do you know that address?
A 27035 County Road 215, Bangor.
Q Is that Arlington Township?
A Yes, it is.
Q Van Buren County?
A Um-hum.
THE COURT: Did you say yes to that?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Van Buren County, is that in Van Buren County?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q And then how long did you live there prior to moving?
A I believe it was six or seven years.
Q Okay. And then when did you move?
A On October 31st.
Q Of this year, correct?
A Correct.
Q And then do you know the defendant?
A Yes, I do.
Q And how do you know the defendant?
A He is my husband.
Q And you are still currently married legally at this time?
A At this time, yes.
Q And did you call the police on August 21st of this year?
A Yes, I did.
Q And can you tell the Court why you called the police?
A I can't remember which situation that was.
Q On the 21st. It would have been, it would have been right before Detective Trooper Hauger came to your home?
A Because I had concerns about what was in my home.
Q And can you tell the court what was in your home?
MR. FROST: Your Honor, at this point I would like to log an objection. Mr. Granke wishes to invoke the doctrine of spousal privilege here, spousal immunity. They are still currently married.
THE COURT: Ms. Zuiderveen.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: They are estranged and at this point Mrs. Granke would like to testify and actually was part of this in calling the Trooper and I do feel that she is an integral part of the entire incident.
MR. FROST: That may be, but Mr. Granke has an ability to invoke that privilege, Your Honor.
THE COURT: He -- it is for confidential communications if I understand the privilege correctly and if we are going to get into conversations we may be able to invoke privilege and such as that, but if she wants to testify as to what she knows of her own free knowledge she may testify to that and there is no privilege communications. So, she may continue to testify.
MR. FROST: Thank you, Your Honor.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You are welcome.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q So, going back, you stated that you had concerns when you called the police. Can you tell me what the, tell the Court what the concerns were that you had?
A I was afraid that my husband had more marijuana than he was allowed.
Q At the house that you were living in?
A At the house that we were living in, yes.
Q So you say more than he was allowed. So you understood that he was allowed a certain amount and that he was over that amount?
A Yes.
Q And why did you feel that he could have a certain amount?
A Because I have heard that there is certain amounts that you are supposed to have and I just --
Q Because he had a medical marijuana card, is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Okay. And why did you think he was over?
A Because at one time I was able to be in the grow room.
Q Okay. Okay. And so did you participate in the growing of the marijuana or participate in this and that is how you saw it?
A At first, yes, I did.
Q Okay. You say at first, how long ago was that?
A I can't remember the exact date.
Q Can you give me an idea in terms of was it days, months, years?
A For a couple months.
Q Couple months? So you had, so you did it for a couple months or it has been a couple months since you were involved?
A It was done a couple months.
Q Total?
A Yes.
Q And then do you remember how long ago that was?
A No, I don't.
Q Okay.
A Exactly.
Q So you didn't have any involvement in what was at your home when you called the police at that time?
A No, I did not.
Q How long had it been since you had any involvement?
A Quite a few months.
Q Okay. Probably more than six?
MR. FROST: Objection. She answered the question, Your Honor, the prosecutor is leading the witness at this point.
THE COURT: I will let the prosecution ask if she has any idea what quite a few months terms out to be.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q So you think it was more than six months?
THE COURT: You don't have to ask specifics. Just can she put a definition to it.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Okay.
THE COURT: You said quite a few months. Do you have any idea what quite a few months means?
THE WITNESS: I am going to say at least six months.
THE COURT: You may continue.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q And so you called the police officers to your home and then they arrived on that day, on August 21st is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Okay. And then do you remember talking to them?
A Yes, I do.
Q What did you tell them at that time?
A I told them that I was afraid of the marijuana being in the home and that I didn't want it there anymore.
Q Did you show them the marijuana at that time?
A I was unable to because I was locked out.
Q So where was the marijuana located?
A It was in the garage.
Q On the property where your home was at?
A Correct.
Q It is attached to the house?
A No, it is not.
Q So, a detached garage and it was locked?
A Yes.
Q And you did not have any access to it?
A No, I did not.
Q Okay. And you did not have keys. Did the officer search any other parts of your house?
A Yes, they did.
Q Okay. And what were they searching for at that time?
MR. FROST: Objection. Speculative.
THE COURT: She can answer what she has to her own knowledge.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q Did you allow the troopers to search your home?
A Yes, I did.
Q What did you tell them to search for?
A I told them that there were weapons in the house and there wasn't supposed to be weapons where there was marijuana.
Q And so you gave them permission to search your home, is that correct?
A Yes, I did.
Q And did you give them permission to search any other area?
A I told them that they were allowed to go wherever they needed to go.
Q And so then they were able to go -- was there an outbuilding that they went to?
A Yes, there was.
Q Okay. But not the detached garage? Is that an outbuilding in addition to the detached garage?
A The detached garage was locked.
Q Okay. And then there is a separate outbuilding that they also searched, correct?
A A pole barn.
Q Okay. Okay. A pole barn. Okay. So were any of the guns yours in the home?
A Not in the home.
Q Any of the guns yours in the pole barn?
A No. It was not.
Q And then did you show the detectives the guns?
A Yes, I did.
Q Okay. And did you contact the detectives, so this was on the 21st of August on a Wednesday, so after they left did you contact them a few days later?
A Yes, I did.
Q Okay. And why did you contact them later?
A I can't remember if it was because there was more marijuana that was found or if there was more weapons that were found and I didn't want to be responsible for anything found in the house.
Q So, did they take the weapons on the first day, on the 21st when they came to your home?
A Yes.
Q And so then you had found additional --
A Yes.
Q -- either weapons or marijuana --
A Yes.
Q -- and then that is why you called? Okay. Okay. And then how did you discover that marijuana or those weapons? Do you remember?
A Trying to clean the house.
Q And then where was that located?
A The weapons?
Q Whatever you called them about the second time, the marijuana or the weapons, was that in the house?
A There was a couple extra times that the officers were called out. I had found more marijuana. I had also found more guns. I found guns in the house and I found marijuana in the garage after it had been searched.
Q Okay. The detached garage after it had been searched. Okay. Okay. I just want to clarify, none of the marijuana was yours?
A No, it was not.
Q And none of the guns taken were yours?
A No, they were not.
Q How long did you know the marijuana was there then?
A From the beginning.
Q Okay. And why did you call on that day, on the 21st? What made you call from the point that you knew about it up until that point?
A Because when it started everything was supposed to have been done the right way. It wasn't supposed to be told to everybody in the neighborhood and I became scared because everybody, a lot of other people had approached me saying that they knew we had marijuana. I had kids approach my daughters at school about the marijuana.
Q And I forgot to ask you, you had told me how long you lived in the house, how long did the two of you live in the home together?
A We both lived in the house up until he moved out in, I believe it is late June.
Q In June of this year, correct?
A Yes.
Q Okay. So, did he come back to the house after June, after he moved out?
A Yes, he did. He would come back and see his son and then he would go out in the garage.
Q To the detached garage, or --
A To the detached garage.
Q The one that you did not have access to at that time?
A Correct.
Q And then before when you called the police on the 21st of August, how long had it been, do you remember, since he had been to the detached garage and to your home?
A I don't understand the question.
Q How long had he, when was the last time he had visited the detached garage at your home before the 21st? Was he there on the 21st, or --
A I believe it had been maybe a couple weeks.
Q Couple weeks.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Frost.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. FROST:
Q Mrs. Granke, none of the guns that were seized were yours, but many of the guns on the property were yours, isn't that correct?
A Absolutely not.
Q You didn't have any, none of those guns on that property were yours. Is that what you are telling the Court?
A None of those guns were mine.
Q Okay. You were a resident of that home on your own starting around the first part of June, is that correct?
A Approximately that date, yes.
Q So that is when Mr. Granke moved out, first part of June, right?
A Somewhere in there, yes.
Q Okay. And that was because you two were going through a divorce, is that correct?
A Correct.
Q Would you, would you, is it safe to assume that that is a contentious divorce?
A Simpler terms.
Q Do you understand, you don't understand what contentious, okay. Is there a lot of anger?
A Not that much.
Q But there is some?
A There is some.
Q And you are currently still undergoing that divorce, is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Was there a custody battle?
A Yes, there was.
Q You were actively involved in this grow operation at one point, weren't you?
A Not exactly active.
Q Okay. You were involved in it, weren't you?
A In the beginning when it was legal, yes.
Q Well, we have not yet determined that it wasn't legal at this point. So, I will ask to strike that statement from the record. But I think we clarified you were involved in the grow at some point, correct?
A In the beginning, yes.
Q Okay. You were actually a registered caregiver, is that right?
A No, I am not.
Q You were at one point?
A At one point, yes.
Q Do you had medical marijuana patients, is that correct?
A I was told --
Q Ma'am, my question is, did you have medical marijuana patients at some point?
A I did not have medical marijuana patients. I didn't see anyone.
Q Okay. Were you listed as a medical marijuana caregiver for patients at some point?
A Correct.
Q That is a yes?
A Yes.
Q Now, Mr. Granke moved out around the beginning of June and it took you close to three months to call the police with respect to your concerns that there were guns in the home. Why is that?
A Why did it take so long?
Q Yes.
A I was scared. The guns had been in the house for a long time. I had gotten used to, over the years, them building up. I began to get scared because there was somebody that was seen outside the house multiple times. I began getting scared that somebody was going to break in.
Q Who is that somebody? Do you know?
A I have no idea.
Q There was someone seen outside of your house on multiple times?
A There was a truck outside my home.
Q Okay.
A Multiple times.
Q When did you file for divorce?
A I am not good with days.
Q Okay. But it was only after Mr. Granke moved out and the divorce became contentious with a custody battle that you actually called the police, is that correct?
A At that time I didn't have to be scared. He wasn't in the house anymore.
Q Well, please answer my question. It was only after Mr. Granke had moved out and the divorce had become contentious and involved a custody battle, only at that point did you call the police, correct?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Objection, Your Honor. That is a compound question.
THE COURT: Well --
MR. FROST: It is not --
THE COURT: -- let me just, let me help out here. Ma'am, you said Mr. Granke moved out the first part of June, correct?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
THE COURT: Had the divorce been filed?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it had.
THE COURT: When the divorce was filed was there bitterness, arguing, anger going on between the parties?
THE WITNESS: Yes, there was.
THE COURT: After he moved out it took a couple of months before you called regarding the marijuana, correct?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Had the custody battle, debate been going on since he moved out prior to you calling the police?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Mr. Frost, you may continue.
BY MR. FROST:
Q Ms. Granke, from the beginning of June till October you were the sole resident of that house. You and your son, correct?
A Me, my son, and my two daughters.
Q Okay. Mr. Granke was not a resident of that house? That is correct?
A He abandoned us.
Q Okay. Did that make you angry?
A It scared me.
Q Abandoned is a pretty strong word. Were you angry that Mr. Granke left?
A No. Actually relieved.
Q Why were you relieved?
A Because he scared me.
MR. FROST: One moment, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You may.
BY MR. FROST:
Q At any point did you own any guns? Any point within the last year or so?
A Yes. I own two guns.
Q And you moved those out of the house prior to calling the police?
A I moved those out quite a while ago.
Q Okay. Were you actually scared of the guns in the house?
A That bothered me also because I was afraid somebody was going to come in and shoot and kill us.
Q And you said you only found the guns as a result of you cleaning the house? That correct?
A No. Just some of the guns. Others had been laying around.
Q Okay. You found some of the guns when you were cleaning the house?
A What was left, yes.
Q When was that?
A After he had moved out I started trying to get things cleaned up.
Q Okay. Did you actually physically move some of the guns that were in the house to a separate location?
A Yes, I did because I didn't want them around the kids.
Q Okay. And where did you move them from and where did you move them to?
A From the house to the pole barn.
Q Okay. Now, you stated originally that you had called the police because you were concerned that the number of plants in the grow were too many, is that correct?
A Correct.
Q Yet it took you three months to call the police from the time Mr. Granke moved out, is that right?
A Ah.
Q Is that yes or no?
THE COURT: She is thinking.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR. FROST:
Q Okay. What exact point, your testimony is you didn't have any access to that grow. What exact point made you think to yourself, maybe there are too many plants in there. I need to call the police.
A It wasn't just because there was too many plants, it was the fact that all the people in Bangor knew that we were growing. I had become scared. I was afraid for my family. And I was scared that somebody was going to break in and kill us.
Q Okay. Did anyone every threaten you?
A No.
Q Okay.
MR. FROST: No further questions of this witness, Your Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: I have got a couple questions then Ms. Zuiderveen may ask questions.
Ms. Granke, we are talking, I heard the word guns. Rifles? Pistols? What kind of guns?
THE WITNESS: There was rifles and pistols, or shotguns and pistols.
THE COURT: How many did you move to the pole barn?
THE WITNESS: As many I could possibly find to get them out of the house.
THE COURT: Ballpark number. Estimate. Can you give me an idea, one, five? Whatever. What do you think?
THE WITNESS: It would be 20 or so.
THE COURT: And these were located in the marital home. Then you moved them out to the pole barn.
THE WITNESS: I moved them out in the pole barn, yes.
THE COURT: Whose guns were they?
THE WITNESS: They were my husband's.
THE COURT: Scot? You are shaking your head yes.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Thank you. And out of this maybe 20, what portion of those were pistols versus shotguns?
THE WITNESS: I am going to say maybe three or four.
THE COURT: And the rest were rifles, shotguns?
THE WITNESS: I believe so.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Ms. Zuiderveen, do you wish -- I may have generated questions. And Mr. Frost, it may generate questions so you may enquire, ma'am.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
REDIRECT-EXAMINATION
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q You mentioned that you were scared and that was why you had called. Were there any events, you had mentioned that people were saying, talking in Bangor. Were there any other events that scared you?
A There was a vehicle that kept coming around the home. It started off down the road and started getting closer and closer to the house and it would speed off, speed off as soon as somebody would come out there.
Q And you saw that vehicle how many times?
A Within a six month period of time, maybe five, six times.
Q And so had you seen the vehicle a short amount of time before calling the police? Is that, how long had it been since you had see the vehicle at the time that you called the police?
A Um, maybe a couple weeks.
Q Okay. Were there any other events that frightened you?
A Just the fact that other people were starting to tell us about what they knew Scot had.
Q Then I just want to clarify why didn't you call when the two of you lived together?
A Number one, he was my husband. And number two, I was scared to.
Q Scared of?
A Scared of what was going to happen.
Q To you?
A To me, to the family, to him.
Q And so then when he left it changed and that is why you called?
A At the point where he left he abandoned it. It was there. I didn't want it in the house and I didn't want to be around it.
Q And you and the kids were still living at the house?
A Correct.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Frost.
MR. FROST: Nothing further, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Ma'am, you may step down. You may go back to this young lady, back where you were, please. Thank you.
MR. FROST: Your Honor, can I have one moment, please?
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. FROST: Your Honor, if I could have just a quick follow-up with her I would appreciate it.
THE COURT: Thank you.
(Off Record Discussion)
THE COURT: Ms. Granke, if you could come back in and please have a seat, Ma'am. The attorneys did have just a couple other questions so we want to finish those up before I excuse you.
Mr. Frost, you may enquire.
MR. FROST: Okay. I am sorry, Ms. Granke, just briefly.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. FROST:
Q Between the beginning of June and August, late August when you called the police, Mr. Granke did show up at the residence on several occasions, is that correct?
A Yes, he did.
Q And on several of those occasions you actually called the police, is that correct?
A Yes, I did.
Q Okay. Because you did not want him there, is that right?
A Because he scared me.
Q Okay. One more quick follow-up question. You just testified that you were involved in the grow, remember that?
A Yes.
Q You would actually trim the marijuana plants, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q And you handled the clone, is that correct?
A Yes. He paid me and that was the only way I could get money.
Q Okay. He actually paid you to handle the clone trimming for the plants, caring for the plants, correct?
A So I could get away, yes.
Q Well, I don't know what you mean so you could get away.
A Because I wanted to leave and he wouldn't give me any money.
Q Okay. But you were involved in the grow by trimming, caring for and cloning the plants, correct?
A Yes.
MR. FROST: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. Ms. Zuiderveen, anything further.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Does either side have any objection if this witness may be excused?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No, Your Honor.
MR. FROST: None here, Your Honor.
THE COURT: So she is free to leave then? Ma'am, that means you are free to leave. You may stay in the building or you are free to leave and go about your daily business, ma'am. Thank you.
THE WITNESS: May I join my sister-in-law?
THE COURT: You may if you so choose.
If she stays in the courtroom then under the sequestration she is not being able to testify again in the courtroom, at this hearing. She would be allowed to testify if this matter goes to trial, but she is allowed to sit in the courtroom for the remainder of the preliminary examination.
Any objections?
MR. FROST: No, objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No objection, Your Honor.
(Witness excused at 2:13 p.m.)
THE COURT: You may call your next witness, ma'am.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: The People call Detective Trooper Evan Hauger, please.
THE COURT: Sir, if you would do me a favor. Come up to the witness chair and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
THE WITNESS: I do.
THE COURT: Thank you. You may have a seat, sir. When he is situated, you may enquire.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
Trooper Evan Hauger
(At 2:14 p.m., sworn as a witness, testified as follows)
DIRECT EXAMINATON
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q Detective, can you state your name and spell your first and last name for the record?
A Yes. My name is Evan Hauger. First name is E-v-a-n, last name is spelled H-a-u-g-e-r.
Q And what is your occupation?
A I am a Detective Trooper with the Michigan State Police assigned to the South West Enforcement Team.
Q What do your duties include?
A Investigation of narcotic related complaints.
Q How long have you been in that position?
A I was assigned in July of 2013.
Q Have you had special training for this position?
A Yes, I have. Prior to being assigned and since I have had training in meth labs, basic narcotics school, advanced narcotics school, a few more meth classes. But specific to this case narcotics school and I have been exposed to numerous street drugs and numerous medical marijuana investigations. I have also had a medical marijuana update several times throughout my career.
Q Thank you. And were you on duty on August 21st of this year?
A I was called and awoken and brought in, yes.
Q So regretfully on duty, is that right?
A Yes.
Q And then were you dispatched then to a particular location?
A Yes.
Q What was the complaint?
A The complaint was that Ms. Marlene Granke had contact police and stated that she believed that there were numerous weapons in her house that she was suspicious of due to the nature in which she found them and also that there was an illegal medical marijuana grow inside a building there.
Q Did you proceed then to that home?
A I did. I met with my other team members there.
Q And where was that home located?
A Exact address, 27035ish County Road 215, Bangor, Arlington Township.
Q And that is Van Buren County, State of Michigan?
A Yes, it is.
Q And then who did you make contact with upon arriving?
A I first made contact with my lieutenant, Lieutenant Blanksvord, and then he directed me towards Marlene Granke, the complainant in this matter.
Q And then what happened then? Did you speak to Ms. Granke then at that time?
A I did. I made contact with her in the front yard and she was accompanied by her, by her son, by her son Scot, I think it was Scotty, Scot Junior. And she informed me that she had been finding guns in the house and she was suspicious of some of them within, I think, a couple weeks prior to this incident she had contacted the Michigan State Police because she found a pistol that was vacuum sealed in a plastic bag which we thought was odd. And I then contacted the sergeant who handled that complaint, Sergeant Scott Earnstest, and he kind of brought me up to speed. And she also mentioned that her husband had been a medical marijuana patient card holder, however his card was not valid any longer, but she believed he was a caregiver still and he had a medical marijuana grow in the detached garage. She stated that she didn't believe he was in compliance anymore and she wished for us to investigate from there.
Q And were you able to search any part of the property?
A Yes. She gave us written consent to search the home. She told us we could search the garage where the medical marijuana grow was, however we didn't feel that she had standing there because she did not have access to that garage. So, she took us in the house where we located -- well, first the pole barn where she had laid out numerous guns. I think almost all of them were long guns, rifles and shotguns. And she had also found a gun and what we later determined to be a smoke bomb or smoke grenade in the kitchen. The gun in the kitchen was a small pistol which we ran and found was unregistered. The grenade we didn't know at the time if it was a real grenade or not. We contacted the bomb squad, they came out, rendered it safe and found out it was a military ordinance smoke grenade which they explained to us, it is not illegal to possess, but they are not for civilian possession. So the fact that a civilian possessed it means it was probably smuggled off of a military base. With the unregistered gun in the kitchen we asked her, please search really good in the house. We don't want to leave unregistered handguns here. She then looked more in the house and in a dresser at the top of the upstairs stairwell, she found more pistols. We ran those and some of those were also unregistered.
Q Do you remember how many were unregistered?
A I want to say that total at that time we had five handguns and maybe four were unregistered and actually one of those was improperly registered. It was registered still to Eleanor Granke which I believe is the defendant's mother. And she had been deceased and it was never, the registration was never changed to anyone else. So, if my memory serves correct, I think three of the handguns were unregistered, one was improperly registered and one was lawfully registered to Scot Granke.
Q All right.
A From there it was actually Scotty, the son, stated that he had seen a double barrel shotgun in the detached garage which was supposed to have the medical marijuana grow inside. We then, I then drafted a search warrant for the garage for illegal weapons having found them in the house and believing there was more inside there. The search warrant was approved.
Q When did you draft that search warrant, I am sorry.
A On the 21st. Yeah.
Q On that day?
A Yeah.
Q And then was it approved?
A It was yeah. I believe it was Magistrate Becker.
Q On that day as well?
A Yes.
Q And we obtained that search warrant, came back. We made forced entry into the garage because the door was locked. We did our normal knock and announce even though we didn't believe anyone was in there. Once we breached the door we could clearly see numerous marijuana plants in different stages of growth and that changed the circumstances so at that point we backed out. I drafted a second search warrant for drugs or marijuana and other drugs, and after we obtained that then we went back in and continued to search.
Q And then what did you find on, during that search?
A During that search we found a lot of marijuana plants and a surprising amount of processed marijuana and other processed meaning in my mind, marijuana buds, the common smoking flowers and we also found numerous bags and bags of leaves which we know from our training and experience leaves and stems are often used to make hash, butane honey oil, products like that.
Q Can you give the Court an idea of how much was in the garage in terms of the number of plants, processed marijuana, what you found in terms of actual produce?
A Sure. Initially our plant count I believe was 66 plants and those were plants that were potted and that we could pull out and see had root structures. Later the lab actually came to our facility because there was just too many plants to send to the lab so they actually came all the way down to us from Grand Rapids. And they tested all the plants. In that timeframe of a couple months between a couple of the really smaller plants they had kind of shriveled up in their roots, kind of disintegrated so the lab told us we can't count these as plants. But if I recall the official plant count at the lab it was still in the neighborhood of 60 plants. Which our initial count was 66. As far as the processed marijuana, at the time we could just look at it and tell it was grossly out of compliance. We didn't have a feasible way to measure it all because there was so many glass jars and then subtract the weight of the jars, so we could see garbage bags full of leaves which are defined in Michigan as usable marijuana because they are often converted into hash and oils, and one garbage bag was already putting him out of compliance if it weighed over a pound because he could only have, well, we will get to that. We didn't know -- we found some expired medical marijuana cards in the garage. We did not find any current cards. So, at that point we believed, well, this guy, you know, he is not trying. He doesn't have a patient card, he doesn't have any valid patients. We could only find the expired cards in the building. So, with that we had probable cause to seize everything and we did so. We later on meticulously took ever single jar, weighed out the marijuana inside and tallied that up for the report.
Q How many jars was that?
A I would have to refer to the report. There was a lot. But conveniently they were labeled with different trade names like Swiss Cheese, Sour D, things like that.
Q These are trade names for?
A For medical marijuana, well, for marijuana strains. As I understand different strains of marijuana sometimes have different affects on the body, therapeutic or otherwise. So they were segregated by their flavor or the type of strain.
Q And how many jars did you say?
A I would have to read the report. I think there was well over 20, possibly 40. I mean there was a lot.
Q We will get into that too. I just kind of want to get idea for the Court too.
So when you are going through this with your expertise and experience, you felt that this was more than would be allowed for, even if -- how many patients could he have had at that time?
A Sure. If Mr. Scot Granke was a patient, then he could have 12. And if he was caregiver for five other patients then he could have 72? Seventy-two total plants. However, Ms. Granke informed us that his card was expired. Furthermore we found paperwork in the house before we did the search warrant in the garage that was actually a letter from the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs that rejected his renewal application for his card and it mentioned that he failed to submit a photo with his card. So, and that was a fairly recent letter. It was within a couple months of August 21st. So, we have reason to believe that time he was not a valid patient and he could not have 66 plants unless he had five patients and he was a valid patient. We knew for that reason he was out of compliance. We knew by our gross estimation of all the processed marijuana and all the usable marijuana that that was way, way over. Also we found hash and oils and tinctures, and things later identified by Mr. Granke in an interview as items that are not protected under the medical marijuana statute as usable marijuana. That alone would take him out of compliance and as I understand from my medical marijuana updates that medical marijuana is a shield against prosecution. It doesn't make marijuana legal. It just makes people if they follow the medical marijuana laws immune to prosecution. And our job, once we find that someone is outside of the realm of those protections so they violate the medical marijuana statute, now they are subject to full prosecution for everything. So, we are not in the business of leaving his proper amount of processed amount of processed marijuana had we known how much he could have, or the correct number of plants had we known how much he could have. Our job is to say, well, he is obviously not in compliance. We must take it all.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Your Honor, may I approach?
THE COURT: You may.
(Whereupon Exhibit No. 1 was duly marked)
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q I am going to show you what has been marked as People's Exhibit, Proposed Exhibit 1?
A Okay.
Q Can you tell this Court what this is just in general terms?
A Yes. This is just an inventory of all the property that we seized from the location. At the time we are there we will do what we call a return tabulation on a carbon copy form. We will just write down what we are taking and we will leave that at the scene so that Mr. Granke would know that what exactly we took so if anything is missing and it is not on there we can say that we didn't take it. Later when we are typing the report we have to enter all these things into the computer so that there are electronically tracked. That is so that marijuana and other drugs or weapons don't come up missing. We have to account for them. So, this is just a complete list of everything that we seized at that date and I think there were 60 some items, about half of which were guns and about half of which were either growing equipment or marijuana, suspected marijuana.
Q And is that, does that reflect the report that you turned in? Is that an accurate representation of the report you turned in?
A Yes. And some of those, some of the weights will have a slight variance because the lab came and they subtracted a few plants because they had withered away and so there will be some slight variance from a lab report which is done by a separate entity, but yes.
Q But that is an accurate reflection of what you recorded after taking, after the seizure took place?
A Yes.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Your Honor, the People request that People's Proposed Exhibit 1 be admitted into evidence.
THE COURT: Mr. Frost?
MR. FROST: No objection.
THE COURT: Exhibit No. 1 is admitted.
(Whereupon Exhibit No. 1 was duly admitted)
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q And then did you return, so you said you got the copy of the search warrant, of the search warrant and everything that was taken at the garage, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Did you return back to that location, back to that home?
A Yes. It was actually, it was actually the following day. I remember because we did about four search warrant in about a 48 hour period and they were just back to back.
Q Okay.
A And Ms. Granke called again and stated that she had some concerns. When we left the residence we couldn't really secure the garage door very well because the lock had been broken during our forced entry. After we left she had gone in the garage to see what all had happened, what it looked like and she had found some marijuana that we had missed. It was just an oversight. There was no electricity and it was hard to see. It had gotten dark by the time we left. There was I think three freezers, because the location had formerly been a butcher shop, and inside some of the freezers were additional marijuana and hash. So, she called us to retrieve those because she didn't want to be living there, being responsible for illegal items when she couldn't possess those items.
Q So you listed after those two days, does that report list all of the items that you seized then in those two days?
A Yes. They will either be there or supplemental report. But I do think it is in that original report and it should be annotated in the comments.
Q Do you remember how much processed marijuana was seized?
A Yes. We did a press release after Mr. Granke turned himself in because we had a lot of media inquiries. And we went through and we added up all the grams, we divided that by 16, I am sorry, by 28 to get 28 grams. I don't want to confuse you because I am not very good at math, but my boss checked because he is much better at math and we added up the total weight and if I recall, it was somewhere between 11 and 15 pounds, somewhere in that, that timeframe, which is important because a patient who is also a caregiver for his maximum number of patients being five patients still couldn't even have one pound of processed or usable marijuana and this was between 11 and 15 pounds. So it was grossly overweight.
Q And we already talked about how many plants. It ended up being around 60 you testified to?
A Yes.
Q Do you know how much hashish, hash oil was seized?
A I don't know if I tallied that up. I know it is broken down in that exhibit, but I don't know off the top of my head how much of that there was total, no.
Q So if I totaled it and told you it was around 62 ounces, would that sound approximately --
A Yeah, that would sound normal and as far as the tinctures and the liquids, we didn't have a feasible way of weighing those because they were in so many different small vials and bottles we would have to kind of pour them all into one, one at a time. We would end up losing a lot of it. So, we didn't bother to weigh those.
Q Okay. And then when did you make, or did you make contact with the defendant?
A I did. Well, at the scene, prior to even obtaining a search warrant we called him twice, left voice mails and we didn't have a call back. Because we certainly would rather have him come out, show us his grow and then if he is in compliance, leave. We don't want to break down anybody's door. However, no calls were returned so eventually we obtained a search warrant. No calls were returned within the next few days and it was sometime later, I think around the 28th that we did make contact with him and I interviewed him along with Detective Lieutenant Blanksvord who was helping me.
Q Where did you make contact with him?
A It was at the Miles Cove Campground. I believe that was off of, it was like the county line between Allegan and Van Buren County. Somewhere north of Bloomingdale area and I remember my report says lot 71. So that is probably accurate although I can't remember now if it was lot 71 or not.
Q Do you, you made contact with the defendant at that time?
A Yes. Um-hum.
Q Do you see the person that you made contact with in the courtroom today?
A Yes.
Q Can you point to him and identify him?
A Yes, ma'am. He is sitting here in the middle with the black coat.
THE COURT: Colored shirt?
THE WITNESS: And the teal, I think that is teal.
THE COURT: It will be so noted that he identified the defendant in this matter.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q And then what did he tell you concerning the medical marijuana?
A We talked at length. I think about an hour at least. I first informed him that he was under no obligation to speak with us or answer our questions. He was not under arrest. We told him he would not be arrested that day. We just wished to get his side of this whole matter. He then proceeded to tell us he was kind of surprised we didn't talk to him sooner and we said well, we didn't know exactly where you were staying.
He told us that this is all because of his bitter divorce in his view and he said that, you know, he was a medical marijuana caregiver for five patients. I asked if he had those patient cards and he retrieved his wallet and he provided us with three cards. He said he didn't know where the other two were, but he was pretty confident that he did have them somewhere. Once I obtained the three cards he handed me I asked for his patient's names. That is something I always do because often times we will find that people will obtain the maximum number of patients whether they know them or not just so they can grow more marijuana and make it appear legal and Mr. Granke only knew one patient's name which kind of surprised me.
Q He was the dedicated caregiver?
A Correct.
Q And he only knew one of those names?
A One of the three cards he provided us and he couldn't give us the name of the other two people who he didn't have cards for in his possession.
He was very well informed. He is obviously very intelligent person. He explained a lot of the differences between us from different strains like Setevas and Indicas, and what types of treatments they are used for. Mr. Granke stated that he is not a drug dealer. He helps people with legitimate problems. He explained to us he doesn't see people with just chronic pain as we often see. He sees people with life threatening and seriously debilitating conditions. He prided himself in his abilities to create what he called sub-lingual mouth drops which I imagine are some of the liquid things as well as the hash and hash oil. He explained the extraction method for making BHO or butane honey oil. And he even documented a time where he had almost kind of blow up on him because he was smoking a cigarette while dealing with all this.
He was confident at first that he was within the guidelines as far as his usable marijuana. We then explained to him what the court defines as usable marijuana being the flowers, leaves, and stems of the marijuana plant. At that point he was no longer confident. He stated he was concerned that he was over.
Interesting though, just the finished marijuana bud that was in separate jars labeled which was clearly intent for, intended for consumption, just those jars were well over what he can legally possess.
Q Just the buds alone?
A Just the buds alone.
Q Not counting the hash, the hash oil, the plants?
A The numerous bags of leaves, any garbage bags full of leaves. Not even counting those he was over with just the marijuana bud which is the flower.
Q And those are the jars that you said were labeled with a different names, correct?
A Correct. But when we explained to him that, you know, leaves and stems count, he stated that he believed only the bud or the flowers counted and, as usable marijuana because people don't smoke leaves. And then we pointed out well, you care converting leaves and stems to hash and hash oil, that makes it usable marijuana.
Also as far as his plant count, you know, there were still debate at that time if he had five patients or three. He believed that he was in compliance. We told him 66 plants and then he was surprised by that. And we explained to him, you know, a plant is considered a marijuana plant that has a root system and he stated that he thought that plants were only plants when they were producing buds or flowers which can be smoked. Surprised us because he was very well informed on all the other areas of the law, but he seemed to be uninformed on the most common which is the definition of a plant.
Q And you said when those plants were sent to the lab they came back only like 60 something plants that were confirmed with a root system?
A Yes. And I am sorry. I thought you had the lab report or I certainly would have brought it today. I will make sure both sides get that as soon as possible.
Q Did he have a medical marijuana patient card?
A He did not produce a valid card and I don't think he said anything to contradict what we already believed was that his card expired and his renewal was rejected. I don't believe he told us that. He resent it back in since that date.
Q Did he tell you when he had least tended to his plants?
A Yes. We recounted the date of the search warrant as being August 21st. In his estimate, I believe, was within two weeks or maybe two weeks prior to that date was the last time he had gone in to tend his plants. The power to the home and to the garage had been shut off and he stated to us that he had just kind of given up. He thought he was kind of too far in the whole maybe with this whole thing so he just kind of gave up on it.
Q Did he, so you mentioned that of the sub-lingual mouth drops and tinctures can you just explain kind of what those are or how many of those you found?
A Dozens of vials in a bag of a thick viscous liquid. The liquids such as butane honey oil, BHO, that is created by packing marijuana leaves, stems, or buds, any parts of the marijuana plant that contain THC into maybe a tube and then butane is forced through there. The butane acts as a solvent and it will absorb the THC and it will leave behind all the leaves and all the parts of the marijuana plant that don't elicit a euphoric response. That butane is then evaporated and when it is evaporated it leaves behind pretty much pure THC or the parts of the marijuana plant that people say gets you high. So that is, it is basically a super concentrated form of marijuana. It is converted from a leafy material to more like a liquid and it can be dried and turned into a solid.
Q Is that also called a resin?
A I believe so. There is a lot of pseudonyms and I believe resins and hash oil, honey oil, they all kind of fall under that guise.
Q And then so he told you, I am sorry, what did he say he had manufactured -- let me rephrase that. Did he say that that was his grow or did he say that anyone else was involved?
A He said it was his grow. He did state that his wife, Marlene, had been a patient and a caregiver a while back. However, he estimated that she gave up her grow and her patient card and her patients approximately a year prior to the interview, so maybe August of 2012. And he stated that at that time, about August of 2012 she turned very negative towards his medical marijuana, his marijuana growing.
Q And that she had not participated since that time?
A Correct. And I don't recall if he confirmed that she had trimmed or tended plants after that time, but he stated that she had been a caregiver with him there.
Q Okay. Okay. And then you talk about these sublingual drops and the hash oil. Are those items protected under the medical marijuana law?
A No, no they are not. We had clarification within the last year or so through case law that they are not considered usable marijuana because the act defines it as the flowers, the leaves, and the stems, of the marijuana plant.
But, Mr. Granke defended his actions by saying that some people's conditions hash, oils, tinctures, sublingual mouth drops, worked better for their condition than smoking marijuana and he seemed to not be aware that that wasn't protected under medical marijuana. And he stated that he had made those items and he had even, he even had a patient who had requested some marijuana suppositories which he considered making in the future and we explained that leaves, stems, flowers, are currently the only think allowed under medical marijuana.
Q Did he remember those patient's names?
A I don't believe he shared them.
Q But he did not have cards for those patients either?
A No. He only had the three cards with him.
Q Did you ask him about the handguns that you had seized?
A Yes. And he acknowledged some of the handguns and some others he seemed surprised by. We mentioned the vacuum-sealed handgun in the plastic bag and he said he had no idea where that came from and no idea how it got in his house. Some of the guns he remembered off the top of his head. Some he didn't, which is reasonable because there is over 30 guns, but he remembered certain guns specifically like there was a Derringer I believe he mentioned. And I believe he mentioned a 357 Smith and Wesson.
Q Did he say they were all registered?
A He said that he believed that they were all registered. At that time I had the list in front of me and I was going through about the guns and one, I don't know which one now, but one which was unregistered he was adamant that no, that should be registered. I bought it from some guy that used to work at the court as probation officer, I think he said. He was surprised that some of the guns were unregistered.
Q You said there were approximately 30 guns?
MR. FROST: Your Honor, I am going to, I am going to object to this line of questioning. There is six counts here. Two of them are the manufacturing of marijuana. Four of them are these weapons charges that are 90 day misdemeanors and these are not subject to this preliminary examination. I am going to object to this line of questioning. Irrelevant.
THE COURT: I probably made the mistake earlier by opening up that door a little bit, Mr. Frost, so I am going to allow her a little bit of latitude here, but we are going to keep it short, because you are right, those are misdemeanors and we don't need to get into them. We need to deal with Count I and Count II.
MR. FROST: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You are welcome. So you can, I will give you a little leeway, ma'am.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: And actually I don't need ask any more questions on the guns, Your Honor.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q I just want to go back to, so how many cards did you collect total from Mr. Granke?
A When we interviewed him at the Miles Cove Campground he produced three cards. I wrote down their information and I returned those cards back to him because he was still a valid caregiver for those patients.
Q So, for those three cards, I want you to keep in mind that those three cards were produced, I want to go back to the amounts that were seized.
A Okay.
Q So, I have about 185 ounces of this processed marijuana was seized. Can you tell the Court how many ounces would be allowed with three caregiver cards?
A Yes. If he had three valid patients, which he did, he would be allowed 7.5 ounces because each patient can have 2.5 ounces.
Q Compared to the 185?
A Correct.
Q And then how many plants would somebody with three cards be able to have?
A He could have up to 36 plants.
Q And then so out of the, about approximately 60 that were returned from the lab he was able to have --
A Thirty-six.
Q Thirty-six. And then how much hashish, hash oil, would that person also be allowed to have?
A None.
Q None. So, out of the 62 ounces that would calculate it in People's Exhibit No. 1, zero ounces would be allowed under that?
A Correct.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Frost, you may enquire, sir.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. FROST:
Q Detective, is hash oil a mixture or preparation of marijuana?
A Mixture or preparation? I guess I don't completely understand the question, sir.
Q Is hash oil derived from resins of marijuana?
A I am not an expert in the creation of hash. From what I understand from my medical marijuana updates it is derived from marijuana using butane.
Q And when you use butane, you extract the THC and that leaves behind dried leaves?
A I may -- let me back up. I may have made a mistake there. The butane honey oil is extracted with butane. Hash, from what I understand in my training, marijuana is filtered through several screens until it is broken down smaller and smaller. And then from there I couldn't tell you exactly how hash is formed.
Q Okay. Because earlier you stated that you use this butane to extract the THC from the leaves, leaving behind dried leaves with no THC?
A Not dried leaves necessarily.
Q But leaves with no THC?
A I would not know. It would take a chemist in a lab to tell you how much THC was left in those leaves. But I know that the butane, just like in a meth lab is a solvent and will absorb THC from the leaves. I doubt it would take 100 percent of the THC out.
Q Okay. In your opinion those leaves that are left behind and there were garbage bags full of leaves, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Would still be considered usable marijuana?
A If they tested positive by the lab as marijuana leaves containing THC, yes.
Q Did those bags test positive for THC?
A I don't know if the bags have returned yet. I know the plants have. I don't think the bags have returned yet.
Q So the pound and pounds of marijuana, we don't have any evidence before the Court here at this point that it actually tested positive for THC. Is that correct?
A We have pounds of marijuana bud which field tested positive for THC.
Q Okay.
A Which puts him over.
Q How many pounds is a bud?
A I would have to refer to Exhibit No. 1 to count all that up.
THE WITNESS: May I use a calculator, Your Honor? Thank you.
THE COURT: You are welcome.
THE WITNESS: This is going to take a few minutes.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. FROST: While you are looking through there if you can answer a few questions maybe we can get this thing going a little quicker.
THE WITNESS: I am going to need some time. I can't do two things at once. I am sorry.
MR. FROST: Okay.
THE COURT: We are going to take a short break.
(Off Record Discussion)
THE COURT: We are back on the record with the Granke matter. I believe the witness was doing some calculations. Have you had an opportunity to do those?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And did you come up with a number?
THE WITNESS: Yes. Your Honor, I took only property items No. 44, 45, and 50 listed in Exhibit 1. I chose these three items because I specifically mentioned that they were marijuana bud in the description of the item. There may be other items which were buds that I left the term bud out of. However, those three items totaled up their weight as 4.95 pounds, just under five pounds.
BY MR. FROST:
Q That is just the bud and not the jars that they were in?
A Correct.
Q Were those all in jars?
A Property item No. 44, I am sorry, No. 45, were 20 jars. So all those were in jars. Each jar was taken out. The marijuana was taken out, weighed on a scale that was tiered and then they were placed back in the jars after that.
Q What, Detective Hauger, if you could define your role in this investigation, what would it be?
A I was assigned this case because I was relatively new to the team. I had very little experience in Van Buren County. Most of mine had been in the seven other counties I have worked. So, I was the lead investigator. I did the interviews of Ms. Granke, and Mr. Granke. And I was the one in charge of typing the report. Now, my teammates did most of the searching that day. However, I believe I was the tabulation officer for that incident.
Q So you investigated the scene along with your team?
A Yes.
Q Did you and your team thoroughly investigate that scene?
A As well as we could, given the conditions with no lighting, that night. Of course, it was embarrassing being called back the next day for more marijuana that we missed, but the garage was quite disheveled, it was hard to move around because of all the equipment in there. So, we believe we did.
Q Was it your intention to go back the next day to finish up the investigation?
A No.
Q Did you include everything in your report that you considered to be relevant to this matter?
A That is a pretty open-ended question. Without the advantage of hindsight I would say yes at this point. But we never --
Q Is it your policy to include all important facts in your report?
A Yes. That are to our knowledge, yes.
Q Okay. Did you photograph all items that you deemed to be important?
A One of my teammates did, yes.
Q Okay. Do you trust that your teammate to photograph all items that would be important in this investigation?
A I hope so.
Q You hope that you trust that he did?
A I hope he did.
Q You trust that he did?
A Sure.
Q Okay. Detective Hauger, most of the plants were dead, is that correct?
A I don't recall. And I don't, I mean, the term dead, I don't know. I mean some were yellow which I had never seen yellow plants. They were obviously probably too far gone to be brought back. Many other still had enough green where I think if they were exposed to light and water would probably return to being healthy plants.
Q Okay. Do you have experience with actually growing --
A No.
Q -- marijuana?
A No, counselor.
Q Okay. So that is speculation that --
A If you are asking me to speculate on if the plants were dead or not, then I speculate.
Q Well, no. If they are brown and shriveled, let's put it this way. Let me rephrase the question. Were most of the plants brown and shriveled?
A No. The biggest plants were definitely yellowish color. They were not shriveled. They had very large buds on them, but they were standing, still erect, and they were yellow in color.
Q Okay. Would you agree with me that most of the plants or many of the plants were yellow in color and were not the typical live grow that you would go out and see?
A I can't use the phrase most or many because I don't recall exactly how many --
Q Okay. Several?
A Several yes.
Q Several were yellow, not that green good-looking plant where you go out there to an outdoor grow and you are ripping them out of the ground, right?
A Correct.
Q Thank you. Would you agree with me that a great percentage of the marijuana that you found at the scene was not usable marijuana?
A No. I would not agree with that.
Q Why is that?
A Because we only seize marijuana at the scene that was leaves, flowers, or stems, that is defined by the court as usable marijuana. It appeared to be staged in bags for the further manufacture of marijuana and other marijuana items.
Q Or to be incinerated or thrown away. It was in trash bags, correct?
A Correct.
Q So, it could have been in a trash bag to dispose of it, correct?
A You are asking me to speculate again.
Q I am.
A It is also a storage container, the trash bag.
Q All right. But what are trash bags typically used for?
A I would think trash.
Q Okay. You keep mentioning that the courts define usable marijuana in a certain way. Where are you getting that information from?
A That is my best recollection of my medical marijuana update that I think the last one came out was July. And that might be the statute not the courts that define marijuana that way.
Q Okay. The statute, would you agree with me, actually defines usable marijuana as dry leaves and flowers of the marijuana plant and any mixture or preparation thereof. That sound right to you?
A Yes.
Q And it defines marijuana according to the public health code, and would you agree with me that marijuana means all parts of the plant, the cannabis, Latvia L, growing or not, the seeds thereof, and the resin extracted from any part of that plant, does that sound right to you?
A Is it really one question? You are asking the definition of marijuana itself --
Q Yes.
A -- or usable marijuana?
Q Correct.
A Marijuana itself, I think you just read the description from the public health --
Q Public health code, right.
A Public health code, yes.
Q The, the, the, would you agree with me that the medical marijuana, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act holds the definition of marijuana, not usable marijuana, but marijuana from the public health code?
A I can't give the intent of the legislator when they wrote the bill. I don't know enough about it to speculate on that.
Q Okay. Well, then let me back up then just a second, detective. When you are talking about how the courts define marijuana and how the courts define medical marijuana, you are just going based upon what you believe the courts --
A No. My highest training and experience which as you know this medical marijuana is constantly being altered by court decisions and we attend like by-annual medical marijuana updates. So, I can only go off what I was most recently informed of which was in July of this year.
Q Okay. When you arrived at the residence, Ms. Granke had laid out any of the guns for you already, correct?
A Yes. They were laid out in the pole barn.
Q Do you know if much of what was in the jars, the buds that you were talking about earlier was mite infested? Would you agree that much of it was?
A I have no idea.
Q Did you test it for mites?
A No. The lab might, but I -- no pun intended, I would not.
Q Had Mr. Granke been a licensed medical marijuana caregiver at some point?
A Yes, he showed us three valid caregiver cards for three patients.
Q Okay. So at that point he was a licensed medical marijuana caregiver?
A Correct.
Q Okay. So he was actually licensed to grow marijuana and to possess usable marijuana, correct?
A Yes.
Q I am not asking about how much he was licensed to have. I am asking you, was he licensed to grow marijuana?
A Yes.
Q And was he licensed to possess marijuana for the benefit of his patients?
A Yes.
Q The several pounds that we talked about, did that include hash oil?
A The oils were not weighed because they were in so many different glass vials. It would have been very difficult to pour each glass vial into a separate container, weigh the contents of and return it to that glass vial. We just didn't have the equipment for doing such a thing. There was an item that Mr. Granke referred to as hash butter or marijuana butter. That was weighed. It was inside a plastic Tupperware and that itself was over a pound.
Q When you interviewed Mr. Granke, you attempted to educate him on your belief of what usable and what was not usable medical marijuana, is that correct?
A I explained to him what medical marijuana update by Prosecuting Attorney Ken Stecker states as usable marijuana, yes.
Q Did you, did that include, the definition of usable marijuana which again does include any mixture or preparation thereof?
A That is the definition of marijuana, not usable marijuana.
Q That is the definition of usable medical marijuana.
A Okay. Can you repeat it so I fully understand, sir.
Q The definition of usable marijuana means the dried leaves and flowers of the marijuana plant and any mixture or preparation thereof?
A Of the dried leaves or flowers, correct. So if they were in brownies or something like that.
Q Okay. So a mixture or preparation which uses the leaves or buds but is not a brownie would not be covered?
A What we need to distinguish is that definition from the court cases that have stated that hash and those type items are not --
Q What court cases are those?
A I am going to let Madam Prosecutor explain that because whether that is Caruthers, I believe that is Caruthers.
Q So, in your opinion hash is not a mixture or preparation of the leaves and flowers of the marijuana plant?
A My opinion is that it is an extract, but I am not an expert. I have never made hash. It would really take a person from the lab to explain what you are asking.
Q Whether or not hash is a preparation made from marijuana leaves and buds would take an expert from the lab?
A Yes. Unless it is clearly defined in the Caruthers case that it is not.
Q Who received the call from Ms. Granke on the 22nd of August that the detectives had missed some marijuana in their search?
A I believe my Lieutenant Blanksvord received that call. Tim Blanksvord and then he called me. But I am not completely positive on who received that first, initial call.
Q Okay. And you mentioned it was dark and there were three freezers where you went in and found additional marijuana?
A The night before, by the time we were done it had gotten dark out. We didn't have any light. There is no power to the building and so I believe that is why I and the rest of my teammates missed additional marijuana outside there.
Q How many officers were out there searching?
A I believe I was the fifth. So, I believe there was four others.
Q Five of you?
A Correct.
Q What time did you arrive?
A I would estimate somewhere between 11:00 a.m. and noon.
Q And this was in August?
A Correct.
Q What time did you leave?
A I don't recall.
Q Can you give me a ballpark?
A I, I want to say it was probably after 9:30, somewhere around that timeframe because the sun had gone down, it was dark.
Q When did you start searching the grow?
A After we obtained the search warrant.
Q Do you know when that was?
A The second search warrant which was for the medical marijuana, not the weapons, I want to say that was sometime after 4:30 or 5:00.
Q Okay. To the best of your recollection were those freezers hidden or underneath anything in that grow area?
A No. It was just that the garage itself had a lot of clutter, a lot of debris, there was plants everywhere. It was just very disheveled and we had to pretty much pick an area, stick to that area and search it and for whatever reason -- I know the freezers weren't just marijuana, they were 99 percent meat, venison and other meats and there was some marijuana mixed in or some hash items.
Q Okay. So that brings me to my next question, the garage was disheveled, right?
A Yes.
Q There was trash all over the place, right?
A Yeah, there was a lot of empty pots that were just constantly in our way.
Q Okay. There was marijuana that was mixed in with meat in a meat freezer, right?
A Correct.
Q Why in your report did you state this was a very large and complex marijuana grow?
A It was large because of the volume of marijuana inside. It was complex because there was different stages of plant growth, everything from what your client referred to as clones which the lab said had roots so they weren't clones, all the way --
Q My client has referred to anything because he hadn't taken the --
A In my interview. In his interview with me. All the way to plants that were quite tall, over three feet tall. Then there was also the different equipment for making the hash and the other items, the tinctures, the sublingual mouth drops. So, it was complex because we had never seen in such a small garage so much advanced, I guess, equipment. A lot of it which is probably clandestine or makeshift, but he knew what he was doing and since he was making a lot of different items.
Q Okay. Mr. Granke has five patients, plus he was authorized to possess marijuana himself as a patient, I understand your argument is that he wasn't, he would not have been over on the plants, correct?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance. That is not the case that we have here.
MR. FROST: We note that it is good to know that, you can make that argument. But I am asking the hypothetical.
THE COURT: We will allow the hypothetical, but you are right. It is not exactly the case we are going in. So, you can answer the question to the best of your ability.
THE WITNESS: Okay. So the question again, if he --
BY MR. FROST:
Q If he had five patients.
A And he was a patient.
Q Would he have been over on plants?
A No.
Q Okay.
MR. FROST: Okay. I have nothing further for Detective Hauger.
THE COURT: Thank you. Ms. Zuiderveen, anything further?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Yes, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q I have not seen the lab report back --
A Okay.
Q -- on the matter. I understand that is coming. So, there has been discussion about what color the plants were. Can you tell me how many plants were confirmed by the lab to be medical marijuana plants? I am sorry. Just marijuana plants.
A Without the lab report in front of me, I want to say it is somewhere around 60 or slightly above 60 plants. Because I was there with them when they were testing. I remember the lab analyst saying, well, this one here, you could tell that it had roots, but they got too dehydrated and they fell off in transport so we are not going to count it because we always err on the side of less plants. So, I want to say it is slightly less than that, but I will get you both the lab report by the end of the day for the plants.
Q But even if they were discolored, the lab tested them to see what they were?
A Yes. They are still marijuana plants, yes.
Q Correct. And then with your expertise and knowledge concerning medical marijuana, does the Medical Marijuana Act cover all forms of marijuana?
A No.
Q Does it cover all amounts of marijuana?
MR. FROST: That is pretty -- objection, vague.
THE COURT: I am not sure, ma'am, where were are going.
BY MS. ZUIDERVEEN:
Q In terms of, are they allowed to possess any amount of marijuana?
A No. No, there is specific regulations of how much they possess.
Q Okay. And the definition of usable marijuana as defined by the Federal government, is that the same definition that is used for Medical Marijuana Act in Michigan?
A No, as far as I understand.
Q Are there windows in that detached garage which you were searching at 9:30 at night?
A No.
Q So, it was a little bit difficult to see as the sun was setting?
A Yes, it was dark, yeah.
Q And can you again just describe the condition of that garage?
A Yeah, it was disheveled. There was a lot of grow equipment, there was a lot of empty plants which may have had marijuana plants in it at some point, but a lot of empty pots for plants. Just a lot of debris, but there were very large scales. There is also all the butchering equipment from when it was a butcher shop that is still there. So, there is a professional giant smoker. There is these three freezers. There is many shelves. There is glass jars all over the place. There is hundreds of empty glass vials that had not been used, in other containers that had not been used.
Q So that was a lot to go through, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q And if you, let's go back to Attorney Frost's hypothetical, if there were five confirmed patient caregivers and he was also a confirmed patient, would he have been in the correct amount for the processed marijuana that you found?
A No, he would still be over by many, many pounds.
Q Many pounds?
A He can't even have one pound if you have your maximum number. It is just under a pound and he had just on the three property items I tallied up, 4.95 pounds. And that is just marijuana bud or flowers that no one has contested are such.
Q Excuse me for being a little redundant. I just want to, if he has those five cards plus a patient card would he have been over on the amount of hash and hash oil?
A You are over by any amount of hash or hash oil because you are not allowed to possess it at all.
Q Regardless of the number of cards?
A Correct.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you. No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Frost.
MR. FROST: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. You may step down, sir.
(Witness excused at about 3:16 p.m.)
THE COURT: Anything further, ma'am?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: No further witnesses, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Frost, do you wish to present any testimony.
MR. FROST: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you. Motions?
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Your Honor, the People make a motion to bind two counts of manufacture of marijuana over to the circuit court.
THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Frost.
MR. FROST: Your Honor, I understand this is a probable cause hearing and I acknowledge that one count of controlled substance, delivery, manufacture of marijuana should be bound over to the circuit court as this is only a probable cause hearing and the prosecutor has established probable cause in this matter. Certainly not beyond reasonable doubt, but probable cause.
However, there are two counts of controlled substance, delivery, manufacture of marijuana here. Two counts should not be bound over. There was one grow. There was one seizure. This is not an instance of a delivery of marijuana where my client sold nine times to an undercover officer and he is charged with nine counts of delivery and manufacture. This is not a case where we found several grows. This is a case where the officers investigated one grow. He is charged twice. In a great bodily injury case less than harm, okay, on a probable cause hearing, if he is charged twice because he got hit once in one knee cap and once in another cap, no. You don't charge him with two counts of great bodily injury. You charge one.
My client should be charged with one count of delivery and manufacture here. Not two. The prosecutor has not provided probable cause that there are two separate instances of manufacture and there is no delivery here, Your Honor. So, I would ask that you deny bind-over on one of the two counts of delivery and manufacture and I acknowledge that certainly the prosecutor has provided probable cause on one count here, Your Honor. So, no objection to binding over one count.
THE COURT: Thank you. Ma'am.
MS. ZUIDERVEEN: Thank you, Your Honor. The People charged two counts, one for the hash oils and hash and everything that is not actually included under the medical marijuana law. There is a recent case, People v Caruthers which is a Michigan Court of Appeals case that was just decided on July 11th of this year that stated that marijuana resin, THC extract or marijuana resin is not usable marijuana under the Medical Marijuana Act. This means that the medical marijuana immunity provisions do not apply and defendant can be prosecuted for processing injected brownies in that case. Therefore he was allowed no, the option to have absolutely no hash oils and vials and butters and tinctures so that was actually count I of the charges.
The other charge was for the excess or the number of processed marijuana, the excess number of plants which all violated then the medical marijuana laws and put him outside of his protection of those laws.
MR. FROST: Your Honor, if I may.
THE COURT: Very shortly because I am ready to make my decision.
MR. FROST: Okay. We don't need to worry about the medical marijuana aspect of this. That is not why we are here. We are here on a probable cause hearing. This is not a Section 8 hearing, okay? He was over. He had marijuana. He shouldn't have. Fine. If that is the argument they are making, I understand that and I acknowledge that. But to split this up into separate, two separate causes of action it is not proper. It was one grow operation. They seized marijuana whether it be plants, buds, tinctures, whatever. One grow, one seizure. It should be one charge that is bound over, Your Honor. Being a medical marijuana issue has nothing to do with this probable cause hearing.
THE COURT: Thank you. First off, a little housekeeping here. File No. 13001479 is a misdemeanor charge. This Court is going to have that matter set up for a final pretrial and jury trial that is scheduled for a pretrial today. I am going to have the Exhibit No. 1 returned to the prosecutor as we proceed today.
Regarding file 13 001746, in this matter this Court can find probable cause that back on August 21st of this year in Arlington Township, Van Buren County that Mr. Granke had at that point in time the initial count was 66 plants. The lab found maybe 60 plants according to the Detective Lieutenant. There was a lot of processed marijuana, numerous jars, there was bags, numerous bags, there was, the Court goes into many oils under all the various names that have been used here today. This Court in my own mind I was separating those out into separate groupings of growing the plants, processing the plants into these jars, and into the various oils, so I am not adding any counts, but I am going to bind over on the two counts because I believe Mr. Granke did manufacture the controlled substance marijuana as alleged in Counts I and II. We will bind both of those Counts over for a pretrial on December 26 of this year at 1:00. Bond in this matter is going to be continued. I have a notice for Mr. Frost for your client and I will have Mr. Frost at this time sign a copy of the felony information in this matter.
And I wish you good luck, Mr. Granke.
THE DEFENDANT: Thank you.
(At about 3:24 p.m., proceedings concluded)
*******
*
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)
COUNTY OF VAN BUREN )
I certify that this transcript, consisting of 72 pages is a complete, true, and correct transcript to the best of my ability of the proceedings and testimony taken in the matter of The People of the State of Michigan versus Scot David Granke, Case Number 13 001746 FY on December 18, 2013.
_____________________________
Laura M. Canaan, CER-3535
Certified Electronic Recorder
January 9, 2014
-----------------------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- prayer pleading the precious blood of jesus
- pleading the blood of jesus
- fillable pleading paper california free
- pleading the blood of jesus prayer pdf
- is pleading the blood of jesus biblical
- blood of jesus pleading for impossible situation
- the joseph plan pleading the blood
- pleading the blood of jesus prayer
- pleading the blood of the lamb