PUBLIC HEALTH CODE
Act 368 of 1978
333.7202 Considerations in making determination regarding substance; emergency rule.
Sec. 7202.
(1) In making a determination regarding a substance, the administrator shall consider all of the following:
(a) The actual or relative potential for abuse.
(b) The scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known.
(c) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the substance.
(d) The history and current pattern of abuse.
(e) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse.
(f) The risk to the public health.
(g) The potential of the substance to produce psychic or physiological dependence liability.
(h) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this article.
(2) In making a determination regarding a substance that is the subject of an emergency rule, the administrator shall consider all of the factors set forth in subsection (1) and shall also consider whether the administrator has been notified that the substance constitutes an imminent danger as defined in section 2251.
History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 182, Imd. Eff. June 19, 2012
PopularName Notes:
Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1982–2013 · leading case:
People v. Feezel, 783 N.W.2d 67 (Mich. 2010).
People v. Feezel, 783 N.W.2d 67 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 8× “(g) The potential of the substance to produce psychic or physiological dependence liability.”
People v. Turmon, 340 N.W.2d 620 (Mich. 1983).
· cites it 2× “" MCL 333.7202; MSA 14.15(7202). In order to assist consideration of each factor, the statute also establishes a scientific advisory commission.”
People v. Derror, 706 N.W.2d 451 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
“25 MCL 333.7202. 26 MCL 333.7203(1). 27 MCL 333.”
People v. O'NEAL, 333 N.W.2d 56 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983).
“1 MCL 333.7202; MSA 14.15(7202). 2 MCL 333.”
People v. Turmon, 323 N.W.2d 698 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “he existence of such salts, isomers, and the salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation, is included in schedule 3: "(a) Chlorhexadol Glutethimide Lysergic acid Lysergic acid amide Methyprylon Pentazocine Sulfondiethylmethane Sulfonethylmethane…”
People v. Derror, 715 N.W.2d 822 (Mich. 2006).
· cites it 2× “[MCL 333.7202.] None of these factors that are used to determine if a substance should be classified as a schedule 1 controlled substance applies to 11-carboxy-THC.”
People of Michigan v. Dennis Wayne Kurts (Mich. 2006).
“[MCL 333.7202.] None of these factors that are used to determine if a substance should be classified as a schedule 1 controlled substance applies to 11-carboxy-THC.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7202(1) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.