California Criminal Lawyers Blog

Our Long Beach medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers wrote in mid-August about the appeals court ruling in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim. That ruling by the Fourth District Court of Appeal was called a mixed victory in the media, but one victory for patients was its ruling on federal preemption of California's Medical Marijuana Program Act. That is, the court said the city of Anaheim may not ban all medical marijuana dispensaries on the grounds that federal law makes all marijuana illegal. The case was sent back to trial court to consider other issues. But, as media outlets including the LA Weekly reported, medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access contacted more than 140 local governments Aug. 31 to remind them that cities will have to find other justifications for a complete ban.

The letter from ASA (PDF) came two weeks after the ruling, which said unanimously that federal law alone does not preempt state law, and that the court should explore the issue of whether state law can preempt local dispensary bans. The letter said that this shows that local dispensary bans may violate state law, and asked cities to reconsider. No news reports show that any city has changed its laws in response. In fact, media reports show that at least two cities are considering their own dispensary bans, including the city of Downey in Los Angeles County as well as the Sacramento suburb of Elk Grove. At least one of the proposed bans is based on the same federal preemption argument that was discredited in the Qualified Patients ruling. That ruling is the only such ruling thus far in California, although observers expect the issue to eventually reach the state Supreme Court. The letter ends by noting that ASA will "explore [its] legal options," although the accompanying press release does not mention litigation.

As Ontario medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we hope no further lawsuits are necessary. We are disappointed in the attempt by Downey to ban medical marijuana based on federal preemption, since the ruling explicitly said this alone is not an acceptable reason for an outright ban. Both cities also use arguments that dispensaries attract crime, which were discredited as unproven in the ruling, as well as by an ASA study (PDF) showing that well-regulated dispensaries actually see a slight decrease in crime. ASA's letter to the cities with dispensary bans offered to help those cities develop appropriate regulations to achieve this. However, we suspect cities will continue to fight for outright bans, using the same spurious arguments. Not only does this deny patients access to the medicine they have been legally prescribed, but it makes them and the dispensary operators into criminals for doing what they are legally allowed to do under state law.

Continue reading "Americans for Safe Access Calls on Cities to Abide by Qualified Patients Court Ruling" »

In a move that surprised even the people who drafted its law, the Los Angeles city government has announced that only 41 dispensaries in the city will be permitted to stay open. As Orange medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we were very interested to see the Aug. 26 Los Angeles Times article announcing the decision. Medical marijuana dispensaries have become a political issue in Los Angeles, which led to strict laws on how many dispensaries may exist, where they may be and who may run them. To curtail what was seen as out-of-control numbers of dispensaries, the council said it would shut down shops that didn't meet the new legal requirements. However, the article said, the strict elimination process the city left only 41 shops, far fewer than the roughly 130 it expected to stay open.

Before the crackdown, it was estimated that about 580 dispensaries were operating in the city, which has 470 square miles of land. The ordinance regulating dispensaries was expected to shut down about 400, according to the LA Weekly. However, the Times wrote that using that ordinance to eliminate dispensaries left just 41 in the city, which even co-author and special assistant city attorney Jane Usher said was a surprise. A spokesperson for the city clerk said the office took a very strict interpretation of the ordinance, which required no more than one change of location, no changes in management and no serious criminal record for managers. Because the number left was so low, the article said, the city has suspended its efforts to choose between dispensaries, which could have inspired a new round of lawsuits by eliminated businesses. Instead, the city planned to file its own lawsuit Aug. 26, asking a judge to declare that its selection process was legal. No one will be shut down before a court ruling.

As the article notes, the city already faces almost 30 lawsuits by 85 dispensaries that have been asked to shut down. Our Torrance medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers suspect that it's right to expect more lawsuits from this admittedly strict selection process. This is particularly true because, as the LA Times notes, some of the eliminated dispensaries are among the most reputable in the city. Fundamentally, we believe the city is regulating medical marijuana dispensaries so harshly because politicians are trying to please a vocal minority that is against marijuana despite the lack of any real evidence of problems. For example, opponents of dispensaries frequently say they attract crimes, but have failed to cite statistics that show a greater-than-ordinary amount of crimes in and around the dispensaries. In that context, it's difficult to see the point of shutdown orders that make reputable collectives and cooperatives into ordinance violators and, by implication, dangerous "drug dealers."

Continue reading "Only 41 Medical Marijuana Dispensaries May Remain Under Strict Los Angeles Rules" »

Like much of the Orange County medical marijuana community, our Anaheim medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys have eagerly awaited a ruling in a case challenging the city of Anaheim's ban on dispensaries. On Aug. 18, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which hears appeals of cases from Orange County's Superior Court, issued a ruling -- but it's not a definitive yes or no, the Orange County Register reported. Rather, the court sent the bulk of the case back to Superior Court, saying it did not have enough facts to make a decision on several important issues. It also made rulings on other issues, some of which pleased medical marijuana advocates and some of which pleased advocates of the ban.

The ruling in Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim (PDF) was widely anticipated because both sides believed it would set a precedent on dispensary bans. Instead, the 38-page ruling addresses other issues. In the original case, Qualified Patients Association -- medical marijuana advocates -- argued that state law allowing medical use of marijuana should invalidate Anaheim's ban on dispensaries. They also argued that the ban discriminated against disabled people in violation of state civil rights laws. In essence, the court said the civil rights argument was wrong, but the state preemption argument had merit and should not have been dismissed without a hearing. In concluding this, the court did not determine whether state law did or should preempt local ordinances, but it did say federal law alone does not preempt state law. It also ruled that state civil rights law applies only to business establishments, meaning the patients could not use that law to claim they were discriminated against by the city, a non-business.

On the whole, our Murrieta medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers are pleased by this ruling. While it is not the strong precedent against the ban that we had hoped for, it is a carefully considered ruling that will strengthen the case against the ban. By sending the case back to trial court, the appeals court said the federal preemption issue is not as clear-cut as the city of Anaheim had argued. Indeed, the appeals court wrote that it would be odd to conclude that the city may criminalize a use of property that is expressly allowed by state law, especially since the Legislature has explicitly departed from federal policy in other areas. The disability rights ruling is disappointing, but not unreasonable after a close reading of the statute. And the ruling does not necessarily foreclose a disability rights claim under the Americans With Disabilities Act, which does explicitly ban discrimination by public entities.

Continue reading "Appeals Court Sends Much Watched Anaheim Dispensary Ban Back to Trial Court" »

As Riverside County medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we were interested to read an article about a medical marijuana arrest up north. According to an Aug. 11 article from the Marin Independent Journal, a woman from Mountain View is facing multiple drug charges after a traffic stop at which police found nearly three pounds of marijuana in her car. The California Highway Patrol says Sloopy Clarice Barreau was pulled over after officers spotted her weaving on the highway in San Rafael. Inside the vehicle, they smelled a strong odor of marijuana and searched the car. She said she is a medical marijuana provider but had documentation allowing only personal use.

According to the article, officers saw Barreau's vehicle on 101 north near North San Pedro Road early on the morning of Aug. 8. They say she was weaving, but there are no allegations that she was driving under the influence. Rather, the officers smelled marijuana and searched her vehicle, finding 1,200 grams of marijuana -- nearly three pounds -- along with packaging materials, marijuana seeds and photographs of a grow operation. She told officers that she was a medical marijuana provider trying to sell to dispensaries, but did not have documentation showing this. During the arrest, officers said, she was combative and charged at them. She has pleaded not guilty to resisting arrest, transportation of marijuana and possession of marijuana for sale, and will appear in court Aug. 17.

Our Placentia medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers do not recommend that clients fight officers, because this can result in additional charges like Barreau's resisting arrest charge. In fact, this account suggests Barreau's actions could complicate her defense -- but that doesn't mean her case is hopeless. If she is indeed a legal medical marijuana provider, she should be able to prove it in court using the proper documentation. In a fair court, this should result in dropping the two felony charges -- the transportation and possession for sale charges, which carry a combined total of up to seven years in prison. It should not in itself result in dropping of the resisting arrest charge, but this is a misdemeanor with no prison time. It's also possible that Barreau truly was attempting to sell to medical marijuana dispensaries, but without the proper documentation. This is not a good idea, but failure to follow bureaucratic procedures is not the same as selling illegal street drugs, and an experienced attorney should be able to make that case to a jury.

Continue reading "Bay Area Woman Found Driving With Medical Marijuana Faces Felony Drug Charges" »

As Chino medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we were disappointed but not surprised to see that the Riverside County city of Wildomar is unlikely to overturn its current ban on medical marijuana dispensaries. The Riverside Press-Enterprise reported August 4 that the city's Planning Commission, which manages things like growth and transportation within the city, voted 3-2 to recommend that the City Council continue its two-year-old dispensary ban. The Planning Commission does not have the final say on the matter; the City Council will ultimately make the decision. But the commission's meeting still heard at length from opponents and proponents of the dispensaries, with about 20 of the 35 speakers opposing any dispensaries at all.

In Riverside County, only one city, Palm Springs, allows medical marijuana dispensaries. Wildomar is considering a law that would allow the dispensaries, but limit where they may be. The proposed law, modeled after one in Laguna Woods here in Orange County, would allow any number of dispensaries as long as they are in commercial zones and away from schools and parks. Only storefront dispensaries that are not for profit would be allowed. Several people on the Planning Commission suggested limiting the number of dispensaries to two, in a city of about 31,000 people. Commissioners discussed how the law might be affected if California's Proposition 19, which would legalize and regulate marijuana for all adults 21 and over, is passed this fall.

As Orange County medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we do not believe that the passing of Proposition 19 would change the minds of the most fervent opponents of dispensaries. Numerous cities throughout Southern California have used their zoning laws as a battering ram to essentially force medical marijuana delivery services out of those city. As one person quoted in the article said, this is despite the fact that a majority of California voters legalized marijuana for sick people more than a decade ago, and despite instructions from the state attorney general that nonprofit dispensaries are legal. We believe some people are simply too prejudiced against marijuana to respect this authority and are determined to oppose dispensaries, even when that means denying medicine to the sick.

Continue reading "Wildomar City Planning Commission Votes Against Ending City Ban on Dispensaries" »

AsDana Point medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we were disappointed to see that the city of Orange is considering making its medical marijuana moratorium permanent. The nonprofit news site Voice of OC reported July 27 that the Orange City Council was set to consider making the ban permanent that evening. There was no follow-up report on whether the city made a decision. Orange has had a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries since XXX, but that temporary ban was set to come to an end, the city attorney said. An Orange Planning Commission document dated June 10 (PDF) shows that the moratorium was scheduled to expire September 22, after having been extended twice since its inception in November of 2008.

The city council's action comes at a time when medical marijuana dispensary bans are being challenged in California's appellate courts. Patients sued the city of Anaheim over its ban on dispensaries, saying it was unfair to patients and counter to the Compassionate Use Act that authorizes medical marijuana, but a judge dismissed the case. The patients appealed the decision to the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana, and that court is set to make a ruling on the case Aug. 18. Ten cities are backing Anaheim in the case, including the city of Orange. The ruling will help establish whether cities have the right to ban dispensaries, although observers on both sides expect it to be appealed to the state Supreme Court. The ruling could overturn any ban that Orange may adopt.

Our Chino Hills medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers believe the patients are right that cities may not ban medical marijuana dispensaries. For one thing, dispensary bans put a real burden on sick patients, who may have to travel a long way to get their medicine. With the amount of bans in Orange County, this can add up to significant travel for a sick person. Furthermore, the bans treat medical marijuana dispensaries like threats to their neighbors, despite the lack of evidence for this. In fact, the Orange Planning Commission report cites no increase in crime aside from briefly noting that dispensaries are targets for crime. This is also true of liquor and jewelry stores, which have not been banned. It also speculates that the marijuana is smuggled from Mexico and sold to illegitimate "patients," which can be handled on a case-by-case basis and without infringing on the rights of truly sick people.

Continue reading "City of Orange Considering Whether to Permanently Ban Medical Pot Dispensaries" »

Our Fountain Valley medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys believe medical marijuana users who follow the law should be free of legalized harassment by law enforcement. So we were pleased to see recent reports about protests by the medical marijuana community of DEA raids on several people in California who are not accused of breaking any state law. Americans for Safe Access issued a press release July 21 about a protest in San Diego following multiple raids on dispensaries there two weeks earlier, as well as raids on a legal grower in Mendocino County and another in Saginaw, Mich. A similar protest was organized in Michigan. The protests came in the same week that medical marijuana activists called on the Obama administration to drop the nomination of Michele Leonhart, who they believe is leading and inspiring the raids, as head of the DEA.

According to the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access, the San Diego raids were "aggressive SWAT-style raids" against the Green Kross, Kush Lounge and Unified Collective dispensaries. As many as 12 people were arrested, the chapter said, and the federal government seized marijuana, money and patient paperwork, which may be confidential under federal law. The raid in Mendocino County was on the Covelo home of Joy Greenfield, 68, who had Mendocino County's first cultivation permit. The Santa Rosa Press-Democrat said the DEA took 99 plants -- with county-issued zip ties showing they were legal -- as well as a computer and paperwork. Greenfield was not home. None of the dispensaries or people were accused of violating the state laws that allow and regulate medical marijuana use, but were accused of federal drug crimes.

Medical marijuana organizations oppose Leonhart's nomination in part because they believe she supports raids like these. Leonhart is a Bush appointee who once headed the DEA's Los Angeles office, and is currently acting administrator of the DEA. She is believed to have supported or ordered the recent raids, which are in defiance of an order from Attorney General Eric Holder. That order says the DEA will not raid medical marijuana patients, growers or organizations that are in compliance with the laws of their states. However, Leonhart is believed to be an enthusiastic proponent of raiding medical marijuana organizations, and was deputy administrator during more than 200 raids in California and other medical marijuana states. She also recently refused to allow expansion of research into therapeutic use of marijuana.

As Riverside County medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we're disappointed at this nomination, which is likely to endanger the lives and livelihoods of people in the medical marijuana community. Collectives, cooperatives and patients who do their best to follow state law may still be raided and brutally prosecuted by the federal government -- despite an explicit assurance from the Department of Justice and the president that they should not be. If Leonhart is defying administration policy on this issue, she should not be confirmed or allowed to continue in her current position of power. Raids on dispensaries treat medical marijuana growers and patients as if they were dangerous criminals and put them in danger of spending years in prison for actions that they had every reason to believe is legal.

Continue reading "Medical Marijuana Community Protests Raids and Appointment of DEA Leader" »

A few months ago, our Murrieta medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys wrote about a man who is facing federal criminal charges for running a medical marijuana collective in Vista, in San Diego County. James Stacy is not accused of violating state medical marijuana laws. Rather, he is facing federal charges of conspiracy to cultivate and sell marijuana, actually growing marijuana and a firearms violation. At a hearing this week, SanDiego.com reported July 16, the judge in Stacy's case dealt a blow to the defense by ruling that Stacy can't use an argument of "entrapment by estoppel." In this case, that means he can't argue that he should have been safe because the Justice Department had already said it won't prosecute people who are in compliance with state law.

Stacy was one of two dispensary owners charged last fall after an undercover sting by the DEA. The other such person, Joseph Nunes, pleaded guilty and will serve a one-year prison sentence. Stacy was offered the same deal, the article said, but rejected it because he does not feel that he has done anything wrong under state law. In fact, the DEA agrees as far as state law goes, but medical marijuana remains prohibited under federal law, which is the law being used to try Stacy. Stacy's case will be closely watched because he is expected to use his compliance with state law as a defense to federal charges. This strategy has been rejected in previous cases, thanks to the Supreme Court's ruling in Gonzalez v. Raich, but Stacy's case may be the first to go to trial since the Justice Department's statement. This ruling weakens his chance of using that statement as a defense, but may not remove the defense entirely.

As Chino Hills medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we're sorry the judge ruled the way he did. As someone quote in the articled pointed out, it's perfectly possible to be heavily prosecuted by the federal government for the same actions that are fully compliant with state law. The Attorney General's memo saying medical marijuana defendants will not be prosecuted is not legally binding on the DEA or U.S. attorneys -- as this case shows -- but it's the clearest guideline currently available for how the federal government intends to handle this discrepancy. It is unfortunate, to say the least, that federal agents and prosecutors are not willing to abide by that memo, and it's even more unfortunate that the judge won't admit evidence of this at trial. Stacy may still be able to appeal the issue, and we wish him the best of luck.

Continue reading "Judge Bars Entrapment Defense From Use at San Diego County Medical Marijuana Trial" »

If you've been following the fight over medical marijuana in Orange County, you may recall that the city of Lake Forest recently ordered all of the dispensaries within city limits to close. Our Riverside medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys are proud to say that we're a part of the fight by some dispensaries to stay open. As KPCC reported June 18, some dispensaries defied the late May order to close, causing lawyers for the city to seek a ruling holding them in contempt of court for failing to follow that order. Our partner, Damian J. Nassiri, represents one client that filed an appeal of that order last week, which means we've asked a higher court to reconsider whether the trial court's order was legally correct.

The problem stems from Lake Forest's attempt to use zoning law to drive out medical marijuana dispensaries. The dispensaries are legal under state law, but the city and many others in California have discovered that they can use city zoning laws to deny business permits to dispensaries. These cities claim they cannot license dispensaries because marijuana is illegal under federal law. Trial court have upheld this reasoning; the issue is currently before the California appeals courts. As a result, however, a court ordered the Lake Forest dispensaries to shut down. The one dispensary that remains in defiance of that order is our client, Lake Forest Wellness Center and Collective. As we noted in the Orange County Register, the city has not served our client with formal notice to shut down. We also believe that filing an appeal should stay the contempt order until a decision on the appeal is made.

As San Clemente medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we're sorry it's come to this. As Damon Harris told the newspaper, the collective has not violated state law, so it's unclear why the city believes it should leave. We believe city dispensary bans are an attempt to end-run around the Compassionate Use Act, which some cities, neighbors and police officers may dislike for their own emotional reasons. This would not be a sound basis for public policy that defies state law and the will of the votes. In addition to denying patients their legal medication, this means our clients could lose their businesses and all of the investment they put into them; and could also face criminal penalties for contempt of court or any "nuisance violations" the police can find to cite them for. In some cases, Californians who run legal dispensaries have even been charged with drug crimes, which carry years in state prison and can destroy a law-abiding person's life.

Continue reading "Lake Forest Dispensaries Defy Shutdown Order With Appeal to Higher Court" »

Our Chino medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys wrote in late April about a medical marijuana dispensary in Riverside County that doesn't have a fixed home -- it's run out of a motor home. We're sorry to say that a follow-up article dated June 14 says the dispensary has been forced by threats of criminal prosecution to move out of the city of Norco and into an unincorporated part of Riverside County, where city ordinances don't exist. According to the Riverside Press-Enterprise, Stewart Hauptmann moved his Pace Arrow motor home out of Norco after being cited by police for possession of drug paraphernalia and operating a dispensary. He says he has not received additional citations or had other problems since the move.

The article uses Hauptmann and his Lakeview Collective to talk about the next legal battle facing California medical marijuana dispensaries: whether it's legal to run a mobile dispensary or a delivery service. We wrote briefly about this last week, when Republican candidate for district attorney Steve Cooley said he believed these businesses are not legal. In fact, the Compassionate Use Act doesn't address mobile sales, which means there's no clear guidance. But in the meantime, more dispensaries are going mobile like Hauptmann to avoid harassment or zoning law violations created by city dispensary bans. Hauptmann himself told the newspaper that he left Norco after city authorities threatened him and his wife with a restraining order. He would have had to mortgage his home to fight the legal battle, he said, so he decided to move, even though it may do a disservice to his patients.

As Anaheim medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we're disappointed to see that people like Hauptmann are being forced out of cities through legalized harassment. Hauptmann may have violated Norco's dispensary ban -- the article doesn't say -- but as far as we know, he's not in violation of state medical marijuana laws. And that's the only available test for whether his collective is a legitimate medical marijuana collective. Given all of that, threatening him with prosecution is legalized harassment, possibly motivated by neighbors or law enforcement officers with personal prejudices against marijuana. Note that Hauptmann was also cited for possession of drug paraphernalia. Law enforcement may have wanted to charge him with drug possession, sales or trafficking, but would not have been able to -- because at the end of the day, his collective is legal under state law.

Continue reading "Mobile Medical Marijuana Dispensary Forced to Move Because of Drug Citation" »

As Los Angeles medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we were interested to see a recent report on the growth of medical marijuana delivery services. An investigative report by KQED and the Center for Investigative Reporting found that as more and more cities ban or severely restrict medical marijuana storefronts, collectives and cooperatives are responding by going mobile. The resulting services deliver marijuana to the customers' doorsteps. The story, which ran on NPR June 9, says the legality of the practice is disputed. But in a June 9 article from the Associated Press, current Los Angeles district attorney and Republican attorney general candidate Steve Cooley says he believes the practice is illegal.

Cooley's position is not exactly new. He is already known as an opponent of medical marijuana dispensaries; he says any sale of the drug is illegal. Medical marijuana advocates dispute this, pointing to a statement from a prior attorney general suggesting that storefront sales are legal as long as the dispensary is not for profit. Now, Cooley says people who deliver medical marijuana and online sellers could both face felony charges for drug sales. This argument is echoed in the Center for Investigative Reporting piece, which quotes a subordinate of Cooley's saying that there's nothing in the Compassionate Use Act that explicitly allows marijuana delivery or online sales. However, advocates argue that a delivery service is still a medical marijuana collective under the law and should be legal as long as other parts of the law are followed.

Our Tustin medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers strongly agree. Under Senate Bill 420, the transportation of medical marijuana is legal within California as long as you are in compliance with local and state laws. It's true that this does not specifically allow delivery services, but it also does not specifically forbid them. Collectives and cooperatives need only follow the existing state law and attorney general's guidelines that clarify that law, as well as any local laws affecting their work. In a way, that's what collectives and cooperatives are doing when they convert from a banned storefront to a delivery service. A delivery service may even be more valuable for patients. As the Center for Investigative Reporting piece notes, people who are unwell enough to need medical marijuana may prefer to stay home and take a delivery anyway.

Continue reading "Attorney General Candidate Says Medical Marijuana Delivery Services Are Illegal" »

As Riverside County medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we weren't surprised to see yet another police raid of a medical marijuana dispensary, this time in Fountain Valley. But a follow-up story in the Orange County Register May 26 caught our attention. According to the article, Ian Stubbs, a co-director of OCMS Healing Leaves, claims law enforcement made false claims that substances it seized from the dispensary were "hard drugs" other than marijuana. He also told the newspaper that the police decision to seize the dispensary's inventory and cash and freeze its bank accounts has made it unable to reopen and serve its patients. The Orange County district attorney's office is examining the evidence seized in the raids on the dispensary and two private homes, but no arrests had been made.

OCMS Healing Leaves and two private homes in Garden Grove were searched last week, the Register said. The police said they found three pounds of marijuana, more than 50 marijuana plants, three pounds of hashish and an ounce of methamphetamine. They also seized $600 to $800 from a cash drawer and several firearms. Stubb said the "methamphetamine" was actually a dietary supplement from GNC, the nutrition chain store, and the "hashish" was actually trimmings from marijuana processed to make cannabis butter, an ingredient in the edibles sold at many dispensaries. The counts of the marijuana and plants were accurate, he noted, but they were a legal part of the dispensary's operations, which serve 300 to 400 patients. Stubb said the dispensary has tried to follow state law -- but now that the police have seized its assets, it can no longer pay rent and must close its doors.

Our Tustin medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers wish Stubb and his colleagues the best of luck in resolving this problem. If Stubb's claims are true, it's not clear what charges Orange County prosecutors could bring -- or why the police raided them in the first place. Regardless of what law enforcement officers or neighbors think, nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries are legal in the state of California. If OCMS Healing Leaves followed California law fully, they cannot be guilty of a California state marijuana crime. The police officers may have made a mistake with the amphetamine and hashish charges, but they may also have been looking for other charges to file, knowing that the dispensary was in compliance with medical marijuana laws. If that's the case, there's no crime -- and no grounds for the police to confiscate the dispensary's guns, cash and inventory.

Continue reading "Marijuana Dispensary Owner Claims Police Claim of Finding Hard Drugs Is False" »

As San Clemente medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys, we're very interested in how federal courts handle California's medical marijuana laws. That's why we're interested in the outcome of a trial for a North San Diego County man accused of federal drug crimes for running a medical marijuana dispensary legally under state law. The LA Weekly reported May 19 on the preliminary hearing for James Stacy, owner of Movement in Action in Vista. Stacy is federally charged with marijuana cultivation, conspiracy to grow and sell marijuana and a firearm charge. His case is being seen as a test case for whether Californians may use the state's Compassionate Use Act as a defense to federal crimes.

Movement in Action was raided by multiple federal agencies in September of last year. It was one of more than a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries in California that was raided as part of "Operation Endless Summer," but only two dispensary owners ended up facing federal charges. The other, Joseph Nunes pleaded guilty and received a one-year prison sentence. A third dispensary owner, Jovan Jackson, was acquitted in state court of drug charges. A month after the raid, the Justice Department made it a policy not to go after medical marijuana dispensaries that are legal under state law. At the May 19 hearing, Stacy is expected to argue that he should be able to admit evidence that he was in compliance with state law, which Americans for Safe Access says is routinely denied to federal medical marijuana defendants. If convicted on all charges, he could get up to 20 years in prison.

Our Riverside medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers wish Stacy the best of luck -- not only for himself, but to set a precedent for future federal defendants. The Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Gonzalez v. Raich has been interpreted as barring defendants like Stacy from defending themselves by pointing to compliance with state law. A bill is in Congress that would explicitly authorize defendants to do so, but it hasn't been passed -- which means Stacy is gambling that the judge and jury he faces will be sympathetic. Jackson's acquittal in San Diego Superior Court suggests that if Stacy had been tried in state court himself, he'd have a good chance of going free. In fact, no evidence shows that Stacy has violated state law. His crimes appear to consist solely to actions that are legal under state law, but illegal under federal law.

Continue reading "First Federal Trial of State Medical Marijuana Dispensary Owner Starts in San Diego" »

Our Laguna Woods medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers were disappointed to see prohibitionists win yet another round in Orange County Superior Court. According to a May 12 article from the Orange County Register, a judge has granted a request from the city of Lake Forest to shut down all medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. The ruling came in a court action by Lake Forest to enforce a zoning ordinance banning the dispensaries in commercial zones. It is a preliminary injunction, which means the court may change its order after a full case is heard. Dispensaries may also request an immediate stay of the order and ask an appeals court to reconsider it.

The ruling is part of a larger battle being fought around Orange County and all of California. Cities like Lake Forest have passed ordinances severely limiting where medical marijuana dispensaries may be located, or sometimes banning them outright. Advocates for medical marijuana say this is intended to drive dispensaries out of business entirely and is likely motivated by prejudice against marijuana because of its history as a street drug. Cities cite concerns about crime and quality of life in the areas where dispensaries are located. Lake Forest has sued 21 dispensaries since September; one has sued back, alleging that the city has violated state law. Some prosecutors, including Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, have also alleged that dispensaries are illegal because they are for-profit businesses, which dispensary owners deny.

Our Anaheim medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys are actively involved in these cases. We represent multiple dispensaries in Los Angeles that are suing the city to remain open. To some extent, this is uncharted legal territory, because there are few court decisions on issues like whether a dispensary is inherently for profit, or whether a city can outright ban dispensaries. That means dispensaries trying to comply with the law must rely on a statement from the Attorney General, the most thorough guide to California's Compassionate Use Act. The Lake Forest ruling is not final and only affects dispensaries in that city, but it's very likely that this case and others will be appealed. We suspect that the final say will come from the California Supreme Court -- or even the U.S. Supreme Court.

Continue reading "Orange County Judge Allows Lake Forest to Ban Medical Marijuana Dispensaries" »

Our Wildomar medical marijuana criminal defense attorneys were disappointed but not surprised to see yet more harassment of medical marijuana dispensary owners by Los Angeles city officials. According to the Los Angeles Times, prosecutors began notifying the dispensaries May 4 that they had just over a month to comply with the city's previously passed ordinance that drastically limits where dispensaries can be located. Prosecutors told the newspaper they were optimistic that the one-month notice would compel significant compliance. Two lawsuits are challenging the rule on behalf of dispensary owners who say they followed the law; a third lawsuit is planned by patients protesting the law's drastic restrictions on where they may buy their medical marijuana.

The city's action is a move to enforce a law that proponents see as correcting uncontrolled growth of medical marijuana dispensaries. In 2007, the City Council placed a moratorium on approval of new business licenses for dispensaries, with an exception for businesses that registered with the city. That moratorium was not enforced well, and the ordinance being enforced now is an attempt to close down dispensaries that did not register. The dispensary owners' lawsuits are from owners of dispensaries that did register, and are now angry that a judge's ruling might lump them in with dispensaries that ignored the law. Business owners and patients also protest a part of the ordinance that places severe limitations on where dispensaries can be located, which they say would force patients to visit out-of-the-way areas like the downtown warehouse district to buy their medicine.

As El Segundo medical marijuana criminal defense lawyers, we have a lot of sympathy for that argument. As the attorney in the patients' lawsuit pointed out in the article, the law doesn't place greater restrictions on medical marijuana access than it does on access to any other drug with impairment or abuse potential such as Vicodin. The difference is the perception by "neighborhood activists" and law enforcement that medical marijuana is a front for criminal drug dealers. We don't doubt there are such dispensaries out there, but this is no reason to harass legitimate collectives and cooperatives that are operating within state law and the Attorney General's guidelines, the most thorough interpretation of the law currently available. Shutting down these small businesses is not legally justified, in addition to potentially violating the rights of the owners who have poured investments into them. During a recession, it may also be a poor financial move by the city.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Tells 439 Medical Marijuana Dispensaries to Close or Face Prosecution" »