Actress Danielle Watts had an unfortunate encounter with some of LA's finest last weekend, after someone called 911 to report suspected prostitution in a parked car. Apparently, the Django Unchained actress, who is black, was sitting in the vehicle and kissing(?) her boyfriend, who is white.
During the course of their investigation, police requested Ms. Watts' ID. When she refused to provide one, she was briefly handcuffed and placed into the back of a squad car. Eventually, her boyfriend produced her driver's license and she was released. Her refusal to provide ID has raised a lot of commentary from legal analysts, amateur and professional alike. What legal authority do police have to request ID from adults in public places? What rights do I have if I refuse to provide one? Put simply, am I required to show my ID to police upon demand in California?
The answer, like almost everything else in the law, is "it depends".
In most situations, you have no legal obligation to show your ID to police in California -- that is, you will not be arrested simply for the crime of "refusing to produce ID upon demand of a peace officer". An exception exists if you are operating a motor vehicle. Of course, cops can demand to see your driver's license if you're observed committing some kind of traffic violation in your car. Refusal to provide your driver's license after a traffic stop will result in a citation or arrest.
And then there's a lot of gray area.
Keep in mind, police can always ask to see your ID, just like they can ask you to make them a turkey sandwich. You have no legal obligation to do either (under most circumstances). The big question then becomes: what happens if I say "no"?
Police have authority to temporarily detain individuals if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the subject might be engaged in some type of criminal activity. These "temporary detentions" usually involve little more than checking ID and sending folks on their way. "Reasonable" is the key word in these situations: is the cop acting "reasonably" in suspecting that a subject might be involved in criminal activity? Is the detention "reasonable" under the circumstances? These questions obviously depend on the specifics of each case.
So, while you generally have no legal duty in California to show your ID to cops upon demand, refusal to do so may prolong your "temporary detention", as Ms. Watts recently learned. If the police are justified in demanding to see your ID and you refuse, you may be arrested and prosecuted for "resisting obstructing or delaying a peace officer" under PC 148(a)(1), even if you would not have been arrested for the conduct that attracted attention from the police in the first place.
If you or a loved one has been cited for resisting arrest, or if you have questions about interactions with police in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Fullerton Police Misconduct Lawyer
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Cited on Catalina Island
You might be surprised to learn that Catalina Island (located just off the coast of Los Angeles and Orange County, CA), is home to small courthouse. Pictured above, the one-room court is attached to the local Sheriff's station on Sumner Ave., right in the heart of downtown Avalon. Most visitors probably walk right by without even noticing it's there. The courthouse hears low-level criminal matters and is only open on alternating Fridays.
The most commonly charged offenses in the Catalina Courthouse include DUI (yes, even on golf carts), assault / battery, disturbing the peace, domestic violence, being drunk in public, possession of a controlled substance and fishing violations.
If you've been cited while visiting Catalina, you were probably given a "Notice to Appear" (that little, yellow piece of paper), instructing you to return here for an arraignment in about 8 weeks. At your arraignment, you will have an opportunity to resolve the case by simply pleading "guilty", or you may begin the process of fighting your case by pleading "not guilty". This is not the day for your trial. If you intend to fight the case, you should expect to make a series of trips back to the island until your case is resolved. This process can take several months.
As mentioned, the courthouse is only open on two days of each month, weather permitting. During rain storms, the ferries serving the island often stop running. Intermittent ferry service can make it difficult to appear in court. The cost of making several trips back to the island can also be prohibitive -- you're likely to spend more on travel expenses than you will on your court fines.
Save yourself the time, expense and hassle of traveling back to Catalina to appear in court -- have a local attorney do it for you. As a private, local defense attorney, I can make most court appearances on your behalf without you being personally present. My fees are probably less than what you would spend on travel alone.
We have extensive experience in the Catalina Courthouse and we get fantastic results for our clients. A misdemeanor conviction can follow you around and make your life difficult in many ways. Too many people are intimidated by the cost of making several trips back to the island. Rather than fighting for the best possible resolution, they accept bad deals to settle their cases. Don't be intimidated into accepting anything less than the best possible resolution for your matter.
If you or a loved one has been cited while visiting Catalina (Avalon, Two Harbors, or anywhere in between), call us for a free consultation. (714) 505-2468. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Thursday, July 24, 2014
How to Get an Expungement in California
If you've been convicted of a crime in California, you may be eligible to clean up your record with an expungement. Expungements are governed by section 1203.4 of the Penal Code. Once granted, they have the effect of dismissing a case against you after you've finished serving all your penalties. After your record has been expunged, you can honestly tell most employers that you have no criminal convictions in your past. Like everything else in the law, though, there are some exceptions. I'll get into those below.
In order to qualify for an expungement, you must meet the following criteria:
1) You were convicted of a crime in California (infraction, misdemeanor or felony, with a few exceptions).
2) You were NOT sentenced to state prison (county jail is OK, but state prison is not).
3) You received probation and you successfully completed your term of probation without any violations, OR you received a terminal disposition (no probation) and you've waited more than one year since the conviction, OR you violated probation, but there's a very compelling reason why the judge should make an exception for you and grant the expungement anyway.
4) You have no other active, open or pending criminal cases, and
5) You're not currently on probation or parole in any other cases.
If all of these factors are satisfied, congratulations! You're probably eligible to petition the court for an expungement.
To start the process of your expungement petition, you (or your attorney) must complete a couple documents, called a "CR-180" and a "CR-181", available here.
After filling out those forms completely, they must both be properly served on the DA who prosecuted your case and they must be filed with the court where your case was heard. Service must be made by someone else (you may not serve your own documents). The person who mails or delivers the documents to the DA must also complete a "proof of service" form and include that document when the petition is filed with the court. The court's filing fee for expungement petitions varies from $60.00-$150.00.
Once your petition packet has been served on the DA and filed with the court, the DA has 15 days to respond with any reasons that they believe the petition should not be granted (for example, if they believe that the petitioner did not successfully complete probation or if they believe that the petitioner has some other active, open cases. The process can get complicated if the petitioner has a common name and other people with the same name have recent criminal activity).
Next, a judge will review your petition and the DA's response. Typically, if you are clearly eligible and the DA has no opposition, the judge will simply sign the proposed expungement order and will return it to you by mail within 6-8 weeks.
If the DA opposes your expungement petition, the court will schedule a hearing for both sides to appear before a judge and to explain why the expungement should or should not be granted.
After your expungement petition is granted and signed by a judge, your criminal record will be amended to show that your old case has been dismissed. An expungement will not completely erase the case from your record, but it will erase the fact that you pleaded "guilty" or "no contest", or that you were convicted by a jury. For most private employers, that's as good as if the whole matter never happened. As I mentioned above, though, there are some exceptions. If you apply to be a police officer or if you seek to enter some profession that is licensed by the state (e.g., doctor, lawyer, nurse, dentist, notary, bail bondsman, contractor, insurance broker, Realtor, etc.), the licensing body responsible for that profession may still consider the prior conviction. The same is true if you own a market and you apply to sell lottery tickets. For some reason, the state lottery does not recognize California expungements.
This is the expungement process in a nutshell, but it's obviously a lot more complicated than that. If you have questions about your eligibility for an expungement in California, call our office for a free consultation. I'll never charge you a penny to answer your questions. If this entire process sounds too complicated or time-consuming, let us handle everything for you. We have extensive experience with expungements in all Southern California courts, including in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego Counties. Our fees are competitive and depend on the nature of your case.
Other firms will quote you a low price to get started, then they'll bury you in hidden fees. We never charge hidden fees. I will quote you a fixed price up front. I will also be personally responsible for your case until it is resolved. You will never be handed off to an intern or a less-experienced junior partner.
Invest in your future by cleaning up your past. Don't waste another day if your old mistakes are standing between you and a better job. Call for a free consultation (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Orange County Expungement Attorney
In order to qualify for an expungement, you must meet the following criteria:
1) You were convicted of a crime in California (infraction, misdemeanor or felony, with a few exceptions).
2) You were NOT sentenced to state prison (county jail is OK, but state prison is not).
3) You received probation and you successfully completed your term of probation without any violations, OR you received a terminal disposition (no probation) and you've waited more than one year since the conviction, OR you violated probation, but there's a very compelling reason why the judge should make an exception for you and grant the expungement anyway.
4) You have no other active, open or pending criminal cases, and
5) You're not currently on probation or parole in any other cases.
If all of these factors are satisfied, congratulations! You're probably eligible to petition the court for an expungement.
To start the process of your expungement petition, you (or your attorney) must complete a couple documents, called a "CR-180" and a "CR-181", available here.
After filling out those forms completely, they must both be properly served on the DA who prosecuted your case and they must be filed with the court where your case was heard. Service must be made by someone else (you may not serve your own documents). The person who mails or delivers the documents to the DA must also complete a "proof of service" form and include that document when the petition is filed with the court. The court's filing fee for expungement petitions varies from $60.00-$150.00.
Once your petition packet has been served on the DA and filed with the court, the DA has 15 days to respond with any reasons that they believe the petition should not be granted (for example, if they believe that the petitioner did not successfully complete probation or if they believe that the petitioner has some other active, open cases. The process can get complicated if the petitioner has a common name and other people with the same name have recent criminal activity).
Next, a judge will review your petition and the DA's response. Typically, if you are clearly eligible and the DA has no opposition, the judge will simply sign the proposed expungement order and will return it to you by mail within 6-8 weeks.
If the DA opposes your expungement petition, the court will schedule a hearing for both sides to appear before a judge and to explain why the expungement should or should not be granted.
After your expungement petition is granted and signed by a judge, your criminal record will be amended to show that your old case has been dismissed. An expungement will not completely erase the case from your record, but it will erase the fact that you pleaded "guilty" or "no contest", or that you were convicted by a jury. For most private employers, that's as good as if the whole matter never happened. As I mentioned above, though, there are some exceptions. If you apply to be a police officer or if you seek to enter some profession that is licensed by the state (e.g., doctor, lawyer, nurse, dentist, notary, bail bondsman, contractor, insurance broker, Realtor, etc.), the licensing body responsible for that profession may still consider the prior conviction. The same is true if you own a market and you apply to sell lottery tickets. For some reason, the state lottery does not recognize California expungements.
This is the expungement process in a nutshell, but it's obviously a lot more complicated than that. If you have questions about your eligibility for an expungement in California, call our office for a free consultation. I'll never charge you a penny to answer your questions. If this entire process sounds too complicated or time-consuming, let us handle everything for you. We have extensive experience with expungements in all Southern California courts, including in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego Counties. Our fees are competitive and depend on the nature of your case.
Other firms will quote you a low price to get started, then they'll bury you in hidden fees. We never charge hidden fees. I will quote you a fixed price up front. I will also be personally responsible for your case until it is resolved. You will never be handed off to an intern or a less-experienced junior partner.
Invest in your future by cleaning up your past. Don't waste another day if your old mistakes are standing between you and a better job. Call for a free consultation (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Orange County Expungement Attorney
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
The Future of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in Santa Ana
Updated 9/16/15: The California State Legislature has approved a package of laws that will create a comprehensive new system to regulate medical marijuana. Click on the link for more information about the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act.
Updated 11/10/14: Both proposed ordinances passed, but the Council's measure garnered more total votes. The new ordinance will take effect December 19. The city's Director of Planning will now prepare an application packet that each dispensary must submit. Once all qualified applications are received, the city will hold a lottery to randomly select 20 dispensaries that will be permitted to operate within 2 designated areas.
Updated 7/24/14: The OC Register is reporting that the Santa Ana City Council recently voted to earmark $500,000 for a task force devoted specifically to shutting down illegal dispensaries in the city. According to the author, SA police cited or arrested 42 people over the course of 2 days for crimes related to working in, owning, managing or volunteering at illegal shops. Stay tuned for more details as they become available.
The future of Santa Ana's bustling medical marijuana industry hangs in the balance, as activists and local leaders grapple with the city's proliferation of storefront dispensaries.
As of today, nearly 50 active pot shops operate within Santa Ana, mostly concentrated around "the green mile" -- 17th Street, between Grand & the 55 Freeway. That number has fluctuated wildly over the past couple years, due largely to inconsistent enforcement and market forces.
Santa Ana imposed an official ban on storefront dispensaries in 2007. Since that time, enforcement actions have shuttered 177 collectives. Despite the city's efforts, though, clubs are often operating again within days.
The high turn-over in "fly-by-night" pot shops has frustrated observers on both sides of the debate. City leaders and code enforcement officials complain that, despite their best efforts, the lure of quick money attracts new dispensaries faster than law enforcement can shut them down. Seriously ill patients complain about the safety, security and lack of regulation at "less-than-legitimate" collectives.
We all agree that the current status of medical marijuana in Santa Ana is not sustainable. Only a clear, concise set of reasonable regulations will bring some order to Santa Ana's green mile. Residents need assurances that the pot shops in their backyards aren't attracting crime or degrading the quality of life in their neighborhoods. Patients need a safe, affordable and reliable source for their medicine.
Medical marijuana activists have gathered enough signatures to qualify a ballot initiative for the November election. If approved by voters, The "Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative" would establish a process for collectives to register with the city and to pay a 2% sales tax. It would prohibit loitering and smoking on the premises and would restrict areas where pot shops could operate. Kandice Hawes, president of OC NORML, says, "We feel that people do want medical marijuana collectives. They want them to be controlled and safe, and they want the participation of the city and the police departments."
The City Council is now debating whether or not to place its own, competing measure on the ballot. The city's proposal would impose a 5-10% tax and would cap the total number of licensed shops, and would restrict dispensaries to two industrial zones within the city.
If we've learned anything from our country's failed social experiment called "prohibition", it should be that the government cannot simply make something go away by making it illegal. The market forces of supply and demand are far more powerful than any local code enforcement agency. Driving the market underground causes more problems than it solves. When the product is outlawed, the government turns its citizens into outlaws. I understand and support the city's need for comprehensive, effective regulation of this emerging industry. Residents should feel secure in their homes, without excessive traffic, loitering and other nuisance behavior. The Council's proposed ordinance could be counterproductive, though, if it overtaxes marijuana or places an artificial cap on the number of shops that are permitted to operate within the city. Let the market decide how many shops will operate. If dispensaries are overly restricted and taxed, prices are likely to climb and many consumers will turn back to the black market.
Unlike the Council's proposed ordinance, the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative (or MCRLI) sounds like an effective way to address the community's concerns while ensuring that qualified patients have safe and convenient access to their medicine. It will protect children, generate revenue for the city without imposing burdensome taxes, and reduce the harmful impact that some collectives have had on their surrounding neighborhoods.
This November, vote to save medical marijuana in Santa Ana. Vote "yes" on the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative. If the Council votes to place its own, competing measure on the ballot, tell them to butt out and let the free market do what it does best.
Disagree? Let me know in the comments section, below.
Thank for reading.
Updated 11/10/14: Both proposed ordinances passed, but the Council's measure garnered more total votes. The new ordinance will take effect December 19. The city's Director of Planning will now prepare an application packet that each dispensary must submit. Once all qualified applications are received, the city will hold a lottery to randomly select 20 dispensaries that will be permitted to operate within 2 designated areas.
Updated 7/24/14: The OC Register is reporting that the Santa Ana City Council recently voted to earmark $500,000 for a task force devoted specifically to shutting down illegal dispensaries in the city. According to the author, SA police cited or arrested 42 people over the course of 2 days for crimes related to working in, owning, managing or volunteering at illegal shops. Stay tuned for more details as they become available.
The future of Santa Ana's bustling medical marijuana industry hangs in the balance, as activists and local leaders grapple with the city's proliferation of storefront dispensaries.
As of today, nearly 50 active pot shops operate within Santa Ana, mostly concentrated around "the green mile" -- 17th Street, between Grand & the 55 Freeway. That number has fluctuated wildly over the past couple years, due largely to inconsistent enforcement and market forces.
Santa Ana imposed an official ban on storefront dispensaries in 2007. Since that time, enforcement actions have shuttered 177 collectives. Despite the city's efforts, though, clubs are often operating again within days.
The high turn-over in "fly-by-night" pot shops has frustrated observers on both sides of the debate. City leaders and code enforcement officials complain that, despite their best efforts, the lure of quick money attracts new dispensaries faster than law enforcement can shut them down. Seriously ill patients complain about the safety, security and lack of regulation at "less-than-legitimate" collectives.
We all agree that the current status of medical marijuana in Santa Ana is not sustainable. Only a clear, concise set of reasonable regulations will bring some order to Santa Ana's green mile. Residents need assurances that the pot shops in their backyards aren't attracting crime or degrading the quality of life in their neighborhoods. Patients need a safe, affordable and reliable source for their medicine.
Medical marijuana activists have gathered enough signatures to qualify a ballot initiative for the November election. If approved by voters, The "Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative" would establish a process for collectives to register with the city and to pay a 2% sales tax. It would prohibit loitering and smoking on the premises and would restrict areas where pot shops could operate. Kandice Hawes, president of OC NORML, says, "We feel that people do want medical marijuana collectives. They want them to be controlled and safe, and they want the participation of the city and the police departments."
The City Council is now debating whether or not to place its own, competing measure on the ballot. The city's proposal would impose a 5-10% tax and would cap the total number of licensed shops, and would restrict dispensaries to two industrial zones within the city.
If we've learned anything from our country's failed social experiment called "prohibition", it should be that the government cannot simply make something go away by making it illegal. The market forces of supply and demand are far more powerful than any local code enforcement agency. Driving the market underground causes more problems than it solves. When the product is outlawed, the government turns its citizens into outlaws. I understand and support the city's need for comprehensive, effective regulation of this emerging industry. Residents should feel secure in their homes, without excessive traffic, loitering and other nuisance behavior. The Council's proposed ordinance could be counterproductive, though, if it overtaxes marijuana or places an artificial cap on the number of shops that are permitted to operate within the city. Let the market decide how many shops will operate. If dispensaries are overly restricted and taxed, prices are likely to climb and many consumers will turn back to the black market.
Unlike the Council's proposed ordinance, the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative (or MCRLI) sounds like an effective way to address the community's concerns while ensuring that qualified patients have safe and convenient access to their medicine. It will protect children, generate revenue for the city without imposing burdensome taxes, and reduce the harmful impact that some collectives have had on their surrounding neighborhoods.
This November, vote to save medical marijuana in Santa Ana. Vote "yes" on the Medical Cannabis Restriction and Limitation Initiative. If the Council votes to place its own, competing measure on the ballot, tell them to butt out and let the free market do what it does best.
Disagree? Let me know in the comments section, below.
Thank for reading.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Appearing in Court on Catalina Island (Avalon Courthouse)
Save yourself the time, hassle and expense of traveling back to the island for a court appearance -- Have an experienced, knowledgeable, local attorney do it for you.
Catalina Island, located approximately 22 miles off the coast of Orange County and Los Angeles, California, is home to a small, one-room courthouse. The courthouse is open on alternating Fridays. It generally hears only misdemeanor criminal cases, infractions (minor traffic matters, etc.) and restraining orders. Felony cases and more serious matters are usually sent to Long Beach.
The City of Avalon, nestled on the southeast corner of the island, is only home to about 2,200 full-time residents, but the population swells between the months of April and September. Tourists, fishermen, divers, hikers, families, boaters and adventure-seekers descend upon the community to enjoy the island's temperate climate and unspoiled, scenic beauty. Each fall, the town of Two Harbors also hosts its Buccaneers Weekend pirate party, a legendary festival that marks both the unofficial end of tourist season on the island and the official beginning of lobster season statewide.
Catalina and its surrounding waters are home to world-famous fishing and diving. It also hosts several marine reserves and designated "conservation areas". These areas are not clearly marked, but fishing within one of them will result in heavy fines and possible forfeiture of your gear. Many visitors are surprised to learn that they've accidentally strayed into a protected area. They're equally surprised when Fish & Wildlife agents show up, cite them, and confiscate their valuable fishing equipment. Remember, it is the individual fisherman's responsibility to know and comply with all local laws and regulations. Ignorance of the law is no defense to the crime of fishing within a protected area.
Visitors are also responsible for correctly identifying their catches and complying with local rules regarding limits, allowable sized fish, season restrictions, etc. California fishing laws are no joke. As mentioned above, they often carry stiff penalties that may include high fines, jail time, probation, forfeiture of your equipment and an embarrassing blemish on your criminal record.
If you've been arrested or cited while visiting Catalina Island, a quality, local attorney can guide you through the process to ensure that your rights are preserved and that you walk away with the best outcome possible. Our professional staff will work with you, the court and prosecutors to beat your case or to negotiate a fair disposition. Our goal is always to make the process as painless and stress-free as possible for you.
Our firm has extensive experience in defending against all types of criminal issues that arise on Catalina Island -- Avalon, Two Harbors, and everywhere in between. The most common issues we see on the island include DUI (driving a car, a boat or a golf cart under the influence), domestic violence, assault / battery, disturbing the peace, being drunk in public, possession of drugs or paraphernalia, and various fishing violations. We can often make your appearances for you, without you having to be personally present in court. Save yourself the time, hassle and expense of traveling back to the island for a court appearance (or a series of court appearances) -- have a local attorney do it for you.
We're familiar with the local judge, court staff and prosecutors. We know "how the game is played" on Catalina Island and we typically get fantastic results for our clients. Of course, each case is unique. Past performance is no guarantee of future success. The results of your case will depend upon its specific facts and your criminal history.
You have a choice in hiring a lawyer. Many attorneys serve the Avalon courthouse and most of them tout their local knowledge and experience, but I actually know the difference between a Canary Rockfish and a Vermilion Rockfish.
If you've been cited or arrested on Catalina Island, call our office for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449 3335.
Thanks for reading.
Catalina Island Lawyer
Thanks for reading.
Catalina Island Lawyer
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Update on Medical Marijuana in California
Updated 9/16/15: The California Legislature has approved a set of laws that will completely change the way medical marijuana is regulated in the state. Follow the link for more information regarding the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act.
A Los Angeles appellate court handed down a decision last week that could dramatically change the way that dispensaries conduct business in the state. If you operate or grow for a collective, you must be aware of the new rules (or new interpretation of the old rules).
A Los Angeles appellate court handed down a decision last week that could dramatically change the way that dispensaries conduct business in the state. If you operate or grow for a collective, you must be aware of the new rules (or new interpretation of the old rules).
California law allows qualified patients to form non-profit organizations for the purpose of cultivating and distributing marijuana among themselves. The authors of the law envisioned a group of patients who would pool their resources and designate one member of the group to cultivate all of the medicine for the entire club. Members of the club would then compensate the club for the value of the medicine that each member consumed, and the club would compensate the grower for his expenses, plus the value of his time, labor and skill. Money may change hands during these transactions, but clubs were -- and are -- prohibited from acting on a for-profit basis.
Defendant in this case, Brian Mitchell, was the designated grower for a collective in Los Angeles. He was a member of the club and had proper documentation to prove that he was both a qualified patient and a duly-designated cultivator. Mr. Mitchell established his own corporation, Herbmetics, Inc., for the purpose of cultivating medical marijuana on behalf of the club. He obtained seller's permits in his own name from the state Board of Equalization and paid taxes as required.
Mr. Mitchell was arrested and convicted for illegally cultivating marijuana in state court. At trial, it was determined that the club to which he provided his cannabis, "Keeping It Medical", was improperly organized as a for-profit corporation. Since K.I.M. operated for profit, a judge ruled that Mr. Mitchell was not entitled to rely upon the limited immunity provided under California's medical marijuana laws. He was convicted, and a court of appeals recently affirmed the conviction.
The court did a very poor job of explaining their reasoning in this case. I've read the opinion, and I'm still not clear on what the judges determined to be the deciding factor. I spotted several issues where the judges seemed to focus their attention, but they never gave any indication as to what they found most compelling -- or how someone might avoid those pitfalls in the future. Here are some of the factors that I think steered the court's judgement:
-The fact that the club itself, "Keeping It Medical", was organized as a for-profit corporation (rather than a cooperative, a collective, or a not-for-profit mutual benefit corporation). Since California's medical marijuana laws allow patients to collectively cultivate marijuana on a not-for-profit basis, the court found that individuals or clubs who operate on a for-profit basis may not avail themselves of the limited immunity provided under HS 11362.775, even though the defendant was a member / vendor and not the owner or operator of K.I.M.
-The fact that Mr. Mitchell formed his own corporation, Herbmatics, Inc., and sold his product to ANOTHER corporation, K.I.M. The law doesn't say anything about this type of arrangement, but courts and law enforcement agencies frown upon dealers who sell outside of their own non-profit organization. According to the California Attorney General's interpretation of the law, medical marijuana clubs may cultivate their OWN cannabis, but they should not buy or sell medicine outside of their own closed-loop distribution network. Again, the law is silent here, but medical marijuana entrepreneurs who grow under one corporate name and sell to another corporation will enjoy fewer legal protections than clubs that maintain ownership of their own plants from seed to flower.
-The fact that the Mr. Mitchell's written agreements with K.I.M. provided for a set annual salary, regardless of his costs or the quantity of cannabis that he provided to the club. As discussed above, money may change hands during these types of transactions, but parties must be able to demonstrate that the costs of the marijuana are reasonably related to the grower's expenses. If the grower is making significant income but cannot prove the value of his costs and labor, he's going to have a hard time defending himself in court.
Expect this case to work its way up to the State Supreme Court, where the rules are likely to get flipped on their heads again. Until we get a more coherent set of laws on the subject, more people like Mr. Mitchell are likely to end up behind bars for activities that they honestly believed were protected under the law.
Speaking of....
California might soon get a more coherent set of medical marijuana laws! The State Senate Health Committee recently approved SB 1262, a proposed set of regulations to govern medical marijuana here in California. The new regulations had been opposed by CA NORML, which was primarily concerned with some provisions that would have limited the ability of doctors to recommend marijuana to their patients. After those provisions were dropped from the bill, CA NORML Director Dale Gieringer declared that it "was on the right track".
If passed by the full Senate and State Assembly, the bill will require doctors who recommend marijuana to also discuss possible side effects of the drug with their patients. They would also be responsible for conducting appropriate examinations and follow-up consultations with patients. It would impose penalties for doctors who fail to properly examine patients before recommending marijuana.
The bill will explicitly allow cities and counties to restrict or prohibit marijuana dispensaries within their borders. It will establish systems for licensing cultivation sites and for assuring quality and purity of cannabis sold at dispensaries. The law will also require dispensaries to adopt certain security measures to prevent thefts.
Medical marijuana advocates believe that the regulations are valuable to clarify the legal protections for growers, transporters, dispensary operators and others involved in this budding industry. The federal government has also pledged to respect state marijuana laws where there is a "strong and effective" regulatory scheme in place. Until now, however, California's regulatory scheme has been neither strong, nor effective. This absence of clear guidance has exposed patients to federal raids. Hopefully, a clear and concise set of rules in California will help seriously ill patients access their medicine while reducing crime and the other harms associated with our great social experiment.
If you have questions about medical marijuana in California, call The Law Offices of John W. Bussman for a free consultation. (714) 505-2468. Thanks for reading.
Friday, March 28, 2014
How to Start a Legal Marijuana Dispensary in California
If you're interested in starting your own medical marijuana dispensary in California, you must first recognize the risks inherent in doing so. Once you recognize the risks, you can work to mitigate them. Put simply, there is no "safe" way to operate a dispensary. By strictly complying with all applicable laws, regulations and guidelines, however, you can seriously reduce the chances that you will run afoul of the law.
Marijuana remains illegal federally, but the Obama administration has indicated that it will not seek to bust those individuals who remain in "clear and unambiguous" compliance with the laws of their state. Unfortunately, nobody is in "clear and unambiguous" compliance with California law because California law is unclear and ambiguous itself. The unsettled status of our law has created a "green rush" through a legal minefield. Unfortunately, many cannabis entrepreneurs fail to take the appropriate legal precautions before wading into this new, dangerous and evolving industry. They often learn about the risks the hard way.
Marijuana remains illegal federally, but the Obama administration has indicated that it will not seek to bust those individuals who remain in "clear and unambiguous" compliance with the laws of their state. Unfortunately, nobody is in "clear and unambiguous" compliance with California law because California law is unclear and ambiguous itself. The unsettled status of our law has created a "green rush" through a legal minefield. Unfortunately, many cannabis entrepreneurs fail to take the appropriate legal precautions before wading into this new, dangerous and evolving industry. They often learn about the risks the hard way.
When operating a marijuana dispensary, your mantra must always be "CYA" (Cover Your A**). Keeping your proverbial ducks in a row will reduce the risk of attracting unwanted attention from law enforcement. Maintaining proper, professionally-prepared documentation will also help establish your legal defenses if you are ever accused of any crimes related to the operation of your dispensary.
Many of my clients call me after they've been raided. They've often failed to properly cover their a**es when they were setting up and running their dispensaries. Now they face serious criminal charges for conspiracy, cultivation, transportation, possession and sale of marijuana. Their documentation may be improper or insufficient to establish a medical defense. Prosecutors can prove that my clients were growing marijuana or trading it for money, but my clients cannot prove that their activities were performed pursuant to any lawfully-organized cannabis club.
Don't make this mistake.
Before you begin the process of forming your dispensary, you should consult with a qualified attorney (such as myself) to ensure your compliance with local laws. Our firm offers a variety of services to cannabis start-ups, including initial consulting services, help with business formation (filing articles of incorporation, depending on the business entity that best suits your individual circumstances), obtaining a Seller's Permit and Employer Identification Number, drafting of necessary documents that your dispensary will use in daily operations (contracts, bylaws, membership agreements, etc.), ensuring continuing compliance, and training your employees on the law.
After consulting with a qualified attorney, you must begin the process of creating your business plan. Your business plan will include such considerations as the form that your business entity will take. Depending on the size of your proposed project and the number of partners involved, you might choose to organize as a collective, a cooperative or a non-profit mutual interest corporation. Your attorney will explain the advantages and disadvantages of each business form. Some types of business entities require you to file complicated documents with the Secretary of State, including Articles of Incorporation and governing bylaws. Our firm can handle this entire process for you, or we can simply advise you if you wish to prepare and file the documents yourself.
Once you've formed your business entity by filing the appropriate documents with the state, you must apply for a Seller's Permit and Employee Identification Number for tax purposes. Unlike other types of "medicine", the California Board of Equalization has determined that medical marijuana is taxable and that dispensaries must pay sales taxes. Again, we can prepare the necessary documentation for you, or else we can provide helpful advice if you wish to do it yourself.
After your dispensary is properly formed and you have your Seller's Permit / EIN, you must begin the laborious process of drafting the various contracts and agreements for members, growers, transporters, employees, caregivers, etc. Our firm will draft original contracts to specifically meet the needs of your unique dispensary.
Once your shop is open and running, you must take care to ensure that your employees are adequately trained on both the law and the shop's in-house policies. As the owner, you may be held legally responsible for crimes committed by your employees in certain circumstances. You can also be sued or exposed to civil liability for activities that occur in and around your dispensary. We can advise you regarding how to limit your own exposure to costly civil lawsuits and to criminal liability for crimes committed by your employees. We can also provide regular employee training and continuing consulting services to ensure that your dispensary remains compliant with the evolving laws.
If you've ever considered starting your own marijuana dispensary in California, call our office today to schedule a free consultation. (714) 449-3335.
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Rules for Possessing and Transporting Firearms in California
A few weeks ago, I wrote a piece about California's wacky approach to weapons laws. If you read that post, available here, you already know that it's legal to keep a machete under the driver's seat of your car, but it's illegal to keep a baseball bat in your own home if the bat's intended use is as a weapon. You can carry a 12-inch Bowie knife on your belt, but you can be arrested for keeping an extendable baton under your bed for self-defense. Samurai swords are legal; nunchucks are not. You may carry this concealed upon your person, but not this. I never said these rules made sense.
All these California laws about knives, clubs and martial arts weapons were so goofy, I decided to save firearms for another day. Well, today is that day.
California has some of the most complicated, restrictive gun laws in the United States. To oversimplify things, here's a breakdown of the 3 main laws governing how and where you may possess firearms in California. And of course, each of these rules contain exceptions, exemptions and caveats. The Big Three laws regarding possession of firearms in California are as follows:
1) You may not carry a concealed (or "concealable") firearm in any public place or in the passenger area of your car (PC 25400). The trunk is not considered the "passenger area". Handguns must be locked and out of reach during transport.
2) You may not carry a loaded firearm within any incorporated city (PC 25850), and
3) You may not "open carry" any sort of firearm (handgun, rifle or shotgun) outside of your vehicle within any incorporated city (PC 26350 & PC 26400). Since 2013, California is no longer an "open carry" state. You may still, however, carry an unloaded rifle or shotgun in your vehicle, (e.g. in a gun rack).
Of course, these rules make allowances for police officers, military personnel, and licensed security guards to carry firearms as necessary. There are also some common-sense exceptions to allow for things like shooting competitions, hunting, target ranges, gun buy-back programs, licensed "concealed carry", etc.
Some of the exceptions are less intuitive, but still make sense. For example, these rules do not apply inside your own residence, place of business or other property that you own or lawfully possess. You may also transport an unloaded gun between any of those places. "Residence" even includes temporary residences, like campsites or hotel rooms (you may possess loaded and concealed weapons while camping). You may even carry a loaded / concealed gun at your office if you own the place or you have your boss's permission to do so.
PC 25400 does not apply while a person is fishing, but PC 25850 does. Essentially, this means that you may carry a concealed weapon while fishing, but the gun may not be loaded within city limits. If you are fishing outside of city limits, you may carry a loaded, concealed handgun.
As mentioned, this is a very oversimplified glance at some of the laws regarding possession of firearms in California. The rules are complicated, but this should help give you a basic understanding of your rights and obligations as a gun owner in the Golden State.
If you or a loved one is accused of any crime involving firearms, call our office for a free consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Friday, February 14, 2014
The Hits Keep Coming for the FPD
The Orange County District Attorney announced this afternoon that it will pursue criminal charges against another Fullerton Police Officer. This time, Officer Hugo Garcia, 32, is accused of theft and embezzlement, both felonies, related to the fraudulent sale of a vehicle.
According to the DA, Garcia borrowed $12,000 from a private lender in October of 2012, using his Chevy Tahoe as collateral. The very next month, he sold the vehicle to an auto wholesaler for $12,000 cash, despite the fact that the lender still held a security interest in the car.
When Garcia stopped making payments on the loan, the lender repossessed the vehicle from a third party, who had purchased the car some time after it was sold by the wholesaler. The wholesaler then compensated the third-party buyer for the purchase price of the Tahoe, resulting in a loss for the wholesaler.
That's Fullerton's finest.
Garcia is scheduled to be arraigned on March 14, 2014 at the North Justice Center in Fullerton.
According to the DA, Garcia borrowed $12,000 from a private lender in October of 2012, using his Chevy Tahoe as collateral. The very next month, he sold the vehicle to an auto wholesaler for $12,000 cash, despite the fact that the lender still held a security interest in the car.
When Garcia stopped making payments on the loan, the lender repossessed the vehicle from a third party, who had purchased the car some time after it was sold by the wholesaler. The wholesaler then compensated the third-party buyer for the purchase price of the Tahoe, resulting in a loss for the wholesaler.
That's Fullerton's finest.
Garcia is scheduled to be arraigned on March 14, 2014 at the North Justice Center in Fullerton.
What Kinds of Weapons Can I Legally Possess in California?
Updated 8/10/23: Earlier this week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that butterfly knives are protected by the Second Amendment and that law-abiding adults have the right to carry them in public for self-defense. Read my post about it here.
Ever since the Supreme Court delivered its historic ruling in Bruen earlier this year, laws regarding weapons have been changing quickly. Check back often for updates as they become available.
Today, I want to talk specifically about knives, striking weapons (like clubs and batons), martial arts weapons, and a few other favorites. I'll reserve firearms for another day because guns probably deserve their own post.
For the sake of easily understanding how all the laws on this subject work together, I've created my own handy 4-tier classification system. This is an over-simplified glance at a few common weapons and the restrictions regarding their possession and use. Since I invented this chart, you won't find it in any law book. Don't cite to this chart in court or when you're dealing with police. Nobody will know what you're talking about if you argue that your folding knife is a "Class-4 pocket knife" and not a "Class-2 switchblade". The chart is just a simple way to wrap your head around a complicated and poorly-organized series of laws.
My 4 tiers are as follows:
-Class 1: Weapons that are illegal to own, possess, manufacture, import, sell, loan, give away, offer for sale, etc. Put simply, these weapons are ILLEGAL in California for any purpose. You could be arrested just for having them in your own home for self-defense (with a few exceptions).
- Any weapon that is disguised or not immediately recognizable as a weapon (any type of knife that is designed to look like an air gauge, lipstick case, writing pen, walking cane, belt buckle, hair brush, etc.)
- Any type of hardened knuckles (wooden, metal or composite / plastic)
- Any type of billy club, blackjack, sap, sandbag, sandclub, sap or slungshot (this is not a typo. A "slungshot", also called a "monkey fist", is a weighted ball on a rope). Courts have determined that "billy club" includes any type of bat, stick, club or baton if it's intended use is a weapon, even for home defense. Wait, that can't be right. But it is. Keeping a baseball bat under your bed as a weapon for home defense is arguably illegal in California. That's right, a loaded shotgun under the bed = legal. Baseball bat under the bed = illegal. Of course, it would be virtually impossible for police to enforce this absurd law unless the bat were used to commit some sort of crime. In the absence of some other criminal activity, I would argue that the 2nd Amendment's Right to Keep & Bear Arms trumps California's nonsensical rule against club-type weapons in the home for self-defense. I've never heard of a law-abiding person being prosecuted for possession of a baseball bat in his own home.
- Class 1 also includes "nunchaku" (nunchucks), throwing stars and other "martial arts-type" weapons, with exceptions for martial arts schools and instructors.
-Class 2: Weapons that may be owned or possessed at home, but may not be carried in public or within the passenger area of any vehicle. Class 2 weapons may be manufactured and / or imported into the state, but may not be sold, loaned, transferred or given away in California.
- Switchblades and butterfly knives with blades longer than 2 inches fall within this class -- they may be owned and possessed at home, but not in public or in the passenger area of your car. You may not sell them, loan them to a friend, give them away, or transfer them to any other person. Note: This is all up in the air since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Teter v. Lopez. In that case, the court invalidated a Hawaii law that prohibited the possession of butterfly knives.
-Class 3: Weapons that may be carried openly upon the person or within the passenger area of a vehicle, but may not be concealed upon the person.
- Any dirk or dagger. "Dirk" and "dagger" are both synonymous terms for stabbing weapons. This includes anything with a fixed blade, capable of being used to inflict death or serious injury by stabbing. Folding knifes don't count, no matter how big they are, as long as the blade is not extended and locked into place while concealed. Section 20200 of the California Penal Code reads, "A knife carried in a sheath that is worn openly suspended from the waist of the wearer is not concealed within the meaning of [this code]".
- When it comes to knives, size really doesn't matter in California. A few local codes prohibit concealed knives of various lengths, but the state Penal Code makes no distinction between giant knives and tiny ones. If the knife folds, it may be carried concealed, even if the blade is a foot long. If the blade is fixed, it may NOT be worn concealed, even if the blade is only 3 inches. And there is no maximum length for blades that are worn openly. That means swords are legal, but small neck knives are not. I didn't make up these rules.
-Class 4: Weapons that may be carried and concealed upon the person, subject to some restrictions. Generally, law-abiding adults may possess weapons in this category for self-defense. Felons, addicts, minors, people on probation, and people with certain misdemeanor convictions may be prohibited from carrying even class-4 weapons. Class-4 weapons include:
There are many possible defenses to weapons charges in California. Often, illegal weapons are discovered by police during illegal searches of your property. If a search is performed without your permission, without probable cause and without a warrant, there may be grounds to suppress anything discovered as a result of that search. Only a qualified criminal defense attorney can tell you whether or not you might have a defense based on an illegal search or a violation of your right to privacy.
- Tear gas / pepper spray
- Stun guns
- Folding knifes, as long as the blade is not open and locked into place while concealed.
There are many possible defenses to weapons charges in California. Often, illegal weapons are discovered by police during illegal searches of your property. If a search is performed without your permission, without probable cause and without a warrant, there may be grounds to suppress anything discovered as a result of that search. Only a qualified criminal defense attorney can tell you whether or not you might have a defense based on an illegal search or a violation of your right to privacy.
Even if you are found to be in possession of an item that fits the legal description of a prohibited weapon, you might have a compelling argument that the item itself is not actually a "weapon". If it's an antique, an heirloom, a movie prop, a piece of art, or if the possessor has some innocent explanation for the item (i.e. grandpa brought it home from the war, etc.), then the item might not be a "weapon" within the meaning of the law. For example, a baseball bat could be used to play baseball or it could be used to break the knees of a rival bookie. If a person is found in possession of a baseball bat, a baseball glove, a bucket of baseballs and a pair of baseball cleats, then the bat itself is clearly a piece of sporting equipment and not a weapon. Of course, baseball bats may be used to legally play baseball in California. On the other hand, if a person is found with a baseball bat behind the seat of his car, with no other sporting goods in the vehicle, he's going to be arrested on suspicion of carrying an illegal baton. Keep in mind also that "self defense" is not considered to be an "innocent explanation", and it is not a defense if you are charged with possessing an illegal weapon.
If you or a loved one is accused of possessing an illegal weapon in California, call our office for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Why Privacy Rights Still Matter
Disclosures regarding the NSA's secret spying program have recently raised some debate in the United States over privacy rights and their limits. How much government intrusion is too much and how should we balance the state's legitimate "need to know" against an individual's reasonable expectations of privacy?
The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution assures our right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Critics of the Fourth Amendment often claim that it only protects the guilty. "If you aren't doing anything illegal, then what do you have to hide?", they ask. There are lots of compelling responses to this stupid question, but perhaps the best defense of the Fourth Amendment was recently illustrated by the case of a New Mexico man named David Eckert.
Eckert was pulled over by police for failing to make a complete stop at a sign as he pulled out of a Walmart parking lot. An officer noticed that Mr. Eckert appeared to be clenching his buttocks. Clenched butt cheeks can only mean one thing, police reasoned: Eckert must be transporting marijuana inside his rectum (because that's where people keep it?). This was the "probable cause" that cops cited in obtaining a warrant to perform a 14-hour-long series of invasive cavity searches on their suspect.
Police transported Eckert to an area hospital for exams. Doctors initially refused to perform the requested procedures, citing medical ethics. Officers then took Eckert to the Gila Regional Medical Center, where other doctors apparently had no such ethical objections.
First, doctors performed x-rays of Eckert's lower abdomen. No contraband was located.
Then, doctors probed Eckert's anus with their fingers. No contraband was found.
Then, just to be safe, doctors probed Eckert's anus again with their fingers. Still no contraband.
Next, Eckert was subjected to an involuntary enema. He was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police. Police searched his stool for signs of contraband, but none was found.
After that, doctors forcibly inserted an enema into Mr. Eckert's anus a second time. Again, he was made to defecate in front of the doctors and police. Again, no contraband was found.
Can you guess what happened after that? If you guessed "Eckert was forcibly subjected to a third enema", you're right! Still no contraband.
Now, after spending the better part of their afternoon elbow-deep in Mr. Eckert's colon, lesser doctors might have reasonably concluded that their patient was not hiding any contraband, at least not inside his rectum. But these guys didn't get to be doctors by quitting when the going got tough.
Mr. Eckert was then subjected to another x-ray of his abdomen. Still no contraband.
Finally, Eckert was prepared for surgery and sedated. Doctors performed an involuntary colonoscopy to inspect the lower portion of his digestive tract. No contraband was ever located.
Mr. Eckert's only crime was failing to make a complete stop at a sign. Police, acting on no more than a hunch, were able to obtain a warrant from a judge, authorizing a series of highly invasive "medical procedures", supposedly justified by some serious risk to public safety (suspected possession of marijuana). Just imagine how police might have treated Eckert if he were suspected of something that was actually dangerous.
Some people will say that this type of government intrusion is making us safer by reducing the risk of a terrorist attack. I'd rather take my chances.
If you or a loved one have questions about invasive police searches and your constitutional right to privacy, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Fullerton Criminal Defense Lawyer
Some people will say that this type of government intrusion is making us safer by reducing the risk of a terrorist attack. I'd rather take my chances.
If you or a loved one have questions about invasive police searches and your constitutional right to privacy, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Fullerton Criminal Defense Lawyer
Thursday, January 9, 2014
A Plea for Restraint
Attorneys finished presenting their closing arguments in the Kelly Thomas murder trial this morning. Manuel "Manny Man" Ramos and Jay Cicinelli are each charged in the beating death of the 135-pound homeless man in Fullerton. Ramos is accused of murder and manslaughter. Cicinelli is accused of manslaughter and using excessive force.
The fates of both defendants are now in the hands of the jury. Deliberations are likely to take several days.
It's hard to believe that 2 1/2 years have elapsed since Kelly's death. In that time, Kelly's Army has shaken the bases of power in Fullerton, California. Sustained protests forced Fullerton's Chief of Police to resign, 3 city council members were recalled from office, a grand jury indicted 3 police officers for their roles in the beating, the public image of the FPD was irreparably tarnished as this scandal shed light on the culture of corruption within its ranks, and the District Attorney took the unprecedented action of filing murder charges against an on-duty cop.
As this story nears its culmination, I wanted to take a moment to urge Kelly's Army to exercise restraint, however the jury rules. Of course, any rational human with a heart and half a brain is crossing his fingers for convictions. Convictions are the only way to start the process of closure for the Thomas family and for all the citizens of Fullerton. Guilty verdicts are going to be necessary first steps toward rebuilding our trust in the FPD, protecting our most vulnerable and ensuring that this type of official abuse never happens again.
If the jury votes to convict, I want to urge Kelly's Army to restrain their celebrations. Guilty verdicts will be a fitting conclusion to this story. They'll represent the justice that we've all been screaming for since the story broke. But celebrations still don't feel appropriate. Kelly is still gone and the damage is still done. Please show respect for the Thomas family by curtailing inappropriate celebration if the jury votes to convict.
Similarly, if the jury votes to acquit, I want to urge Kelly's Army to direct their anger towards the ones who were responsible and not elsewhere. Out-of-town instigators should stay home and smash their own windows.
The fates of both defendants are now in the hands of the jury. Deliberations are likely to take several days.
It's hard to believe that 2 1/2 years have elapsed since Kelly's death. In that time, Kelly's Army has shaken the bases of power in Fullerton, California. Sustained protests forced Fullerton's Chief of Police to resign, 3 city council members were recalled from office, a grand jury indicted 3 police officers for their roles in the beating, the public image of the FPD was irreparably tarnished as this scandal shed light on the culture of corruption within its ranks, and the District Attorney took the unprecedented action of filing murder charges against an on-duty cop.
As this story nears its culmination, I wanted to take a moment to urge Kelly's Army to exercise restraint, however the jury rules. Of course, any rational human with a heart and half a brain is crossing his fingers for convictions. Convictions are the only way to start the process of closure for the Thomas family and for all the citizens of Fullerton. Guilty verdicts are going to be necessary first steps toward rebuilding our trust in the FPD, protecting our most vulnerable and ensuring that this type of official abuse never happens again.
If the jury votes to convict, I want to urge Kelly's Army to restrain their celebrations. Guilty verdicts will be a fitting conclusion to this story. They'll represent the justice that we've all been screaming for since the story broke. But celebrations still don't feel appropriate. Kelly is still gone and the damage is still done. Please show respect for the Thomas family by curtailing inappropriate celebration if the jury votes to convict.
Similarly, if the jury votes to acquit, I want to urge Kelly's Army to direct their anger towards the ones who were responsible and not elsewhere. Out-of-town instigators should stay home and smash their own windows.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)