Prop. 64, which opened the doors to recreational marijuana, imparted a significant amount of power and discretion to local jurisdictions to decide the type and volume of marijuana businesses that would be allowable. Some communities, like San Jose and San Francisco, embraced commercial cannabis at the outset. Meanwhile, others like Fontana have tried to outlaw the shops entirely. Those with the harshest restrictions have in some cases (Fontana, for instance) been successfully challenged.

For the most part, communities agree the drug should be legal, but just practically speaking, it takes time to supplant an unregulated market. Questions have still arisen regarding how the wealth should be distributed, who gets a chance to participate and how tight should restrictions be. A dedicated California marijuana dispensary attorney can advocate on behalf of all types of cannabis corporations, whether a brick-and-mortar store, a delivery service, farmers or ancillary business.

In some cases, some municipal marijuana markets have paved the way a small number of well-capitalized cannabis firms to dominate, while others have seen the proliferation of smaller, mom-and-pop-type pot shops. An analysis by the California Cannabis Growers, the state’s biggest marijuana trade organization, insists the success of the regulatory schema will hinge primarily on how many businesses are allowed to enter the market. Local regulations can hinder up-and-coming entrepreneurs trying to get a foot in the door.

Many marijuana business attorneys are seeing situations wherein some companies have become severely backlogged with product because they can’t distribute due to a lack of local ordinances. They end up losing substantial sums in these scenarios.

On average, a person in California must drive 60 miles to arrive at a dispensary, according to the state’s Bureau of Cannabis Control. This creates a somewhat confusing scenario, as many Californians assume legal marijuana is everywhere. But the residents in these under-served areas aren’t simply using less marijuana. Instead, they’re getting it on the black market – which has actually grown in some ways because the state has made it quite difficult for new businesses to enter the above-board market and little incentive to compel them to keep trying.

It’s had a ripple effect in places like Los Angeles, which has approved just three of the hundreds of annual licensing applications received by the Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch. Ancillary companies can only work with those that are licensed, so they’be been stuck at a standstill too.

State and local agencies insist they are doing all they can to keep the licensing process moving. Our Los Angeles marijuana business attorneys know that no one likes navigating through bureaucracy, but it’s a necessary evil at this point for many firms. Because you might only get one shot at this opportunity, business owners need to make certain state laws and local ordinances are meticulously followed on their end – which makes working with a lawyer a necessity.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Doing a weed start-up? Wait in line, Nov. 19, 2018, By Lisa Renner, Capitol Weekly

More Blog Entries:

Fontana Marijuana Lawyers Hail Axed Home-Grown Pot Rules, Nov. 15, 2018, L.A. Marijuana Dispensary Attorney Blog

But as the market grows, our L.A. marijuana business attorneys cannot stress enough how important it is that whatever you niche, you need an attorney to help you navigate through the complex process of state law and local regulation. Failure to do so can end up costing you a substantial sum in the long run.

Although it seems everyone is finding a niche in the cannabis market, there are some main umbrellas under which most of these operations fall:

• Cultivation
• Infused products
• Retail sales

Grow operations tend to be heavily regulated, require large upfront investment and horticultural background. Infused products are produced for recreational users or medical marijuana patients who may prefer edible forms of marijuana, and safety of these products is paramount. Retail service stores are often the priciest and toughest to launch, but can be among the most lucrative.

With any of these, you need to be aware of the existing regulatory environment and potential uncertainties, given the fact that marijuana is still considered a Schedule I narcotic under federal law. One most consider costs, residency requirements, impact of prior criminal records, potential risk, timing (often months for a license) and how you will structure all this with partners and investors.

One will also need to determine the type of legal structure you’re going to use for tax purposes, such as:

• Sole proprietorship;
• General partnership;
• Limited liability company (LLC)
• Corporation

Note too that Proposition 64 requires that you be totally compliant with the Bureau of Marijuana Control (responsible for licensing and regulation of marijuana businesses in California) and that you be sure your licensing and compliance is fully intact before you begin operations. Failure to do so may result not only in shut down of your business, but also potentially criminal charges. Entrepreneurs wading into the L.A. marijuana industry have invested too much of their time, their money and creativity to leave these elements to chance.

If you have a marijuana facility that was already operating in compliance with local ordinances on or before Jan. 1, 2018, you are likely allowed to continue operation until such time as your license is approved or denied, per AB No. 266.

You should also know that dozens of California cities in the last year have updated or established new local policies on marijuana cultivation, manufacturing and retail. New changes are being made constantly. So whether you have an existing marijuana business or are planning to launch a new one or are thinking of expanding, you need to consult with an L.A. marijuana lawyer in California who has been involved in marijuana business strategy and legal solutions from the very beginning.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Budding Cannabis Business Expo Sprouts in Downtown Los Angeles, Sept. 27, 2018, By Aliya Jasmine, NBC-4

More Blog Entries:

“Think About the Children” Goes Both Ways When It Comes to Marijuana, Sept. 14, 2018, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

Different strands of the story have cropped up in recent years. Some will tell you it’s tea time in Holland. Others think it has something to do with the number of active chemicals in the drug. Others cite a tune by Bob Dylan. Maybe it’s the California criminal code to punish marijuana possession? (It’s not.) Some think it’s totally arbitrary.

According to CNN, the most credible theory begins with a secret code among a group of high school friends at San Rafael High School in Marin County, California. They called themselves, “the Waldos.” Almost every school day at 4:20 p.m., they would meet up and smoke out.

The teens opined it was the perfect time to get high: They were not in school, but their parents weren’t yet home from work. That gave them some time unsupervised to indulge. Their daily meeting spot was just behind a large statue of scientist Louis Pasteur. That’s why the teens originally called it “420-Louis,” but later dropped the latter half.

The time of their daily meeting became known as a code for to keep the dalliances a secret from unsuspecting teachers, coaches and parents.

It’s believed the code term may have caught on among Grateful Dead followers in California and later beyond. “The Waldos” were in close proximity to the Grateful Dead, and the father of one of the teams handled real estate for the band. One of the teen’s older brothers was a good friend of the bassist. The pair had a side band and smoked together numerous times. The Waldos hung around with a side band the bassist played in, and the term “420ing” got tossed around as they smoked together. Flyers would circulate at concerts, detailing the “Waldos” origin story of 420. Huffington Post and High Times both spoke to members of “The Waldos.” They were able to provide proof of their story, including early 1970s post marks with the reference, as as an old flag and numerous old letters that referenced the number.

Since then, the code word has crept into popular culture in a number of ways. For example, in the early 1990s, a writer for High Times magazine attended a Grateful Dead concert and stumbled on one of those 420 fliers detailing the Waldo group. He had never before heard the term, and wrote a story about it for the magazine. A few years later, the magazine would purchase the domain, “420.com.”

If you’ve ever watched the movie, “Pulp Fiction,” starring Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta, you may have noticed that all the clocks in the entire Quentin Tarantino film were set to 4:20.

It later became the California Senate bill that ushered in the state’s medicinal marijuana program – SB420 – in 2003. How that happened is still unsettled. Supporters of the bill say while the designation is officially a mystery, though the theory is that it was the work of a staffer working for Assemblyman Mark Leno, who sponsored the bill.

On Craig’s List, those hoping to find a roommate who isn’t bothered by their penchant for pot will specifically seek out those who are “420 friendly.”

As for the Waldos, they have each attained their own level of success, and none has chosen to publicly come forward. They are, however, known in their inner circles. One was quoted by the Post as saying he was sure on his gravestone, it would read, “One of the 420 guys.”

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

420 History: The Story Behind April 20 Becoming ‘Weed Day’, April 20, 2013, By Ryan Grim, Huffington Post

More Blog Entries:

Anti-Cannabis Campaign Faces Violations, April 18, 2017, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

But now, as The News Tribune has reported, one man is determined to open a shop there anyway – making it one of two marijuana retail operations that will be legally up-and-running in city limits. The reason this is possible, as the reporter explained, is because the first location is run by the Puyallup Tribe. The Native American group’s shop, which opened in what used to be a cigar bar, is situated on tribal land and therefore isn’t bound by city rules.

The second store is slated to open in a former drug store. It’s within walking distance of the tribal shop. That location is within the boundaries of the city’s authority, but the shop will be allowed in spite of the ban following an out-of-court settlement reached late last year by the owner and the city in which the owner won an exemption against the ban.

Both sides had been warring over the issue for the last three years, with plaintiff/ soon-to-be shop owner arguing the city had no authority to impose such a ban under Washington state’s marijuana law. The city won the case at the trial court level, but plaintiff appealed. A decision in that case was pending when the two sides reached an agreement: Plaintiff would be allowed to open his marijuana dispensary within city limits with designated zoning as “non-conforming use,” so long as plaintiff also agreed to pay the city’s $35,000 in legal fees.

Deciding to settle, said the city manager, was a conclusion reached for a number of reasons. For starters, the legal battle was growing more costly. Meanwhile, the local Native American tribe was already planning to open a cannabis sales location nearby. Plus, other local communities that had not enacted such a ban had not seen the large spike in crime that so many detractors feared.

With that settlement, the mayor and council have requested review of the still-in-effect ban by the planning commission. The group has been asked to determine whether the current rules need to be rewritten to allow other marijuana retailers to open shop as well. Ultimately, the final determination about whether to lift the ban lies with the council. If the ban is lifted, the city would be tasked with deciding what new rules, if any should be imposed on legal marijuana sales operations.

Meanwhile, plaintiff plans to open his location in March. He anticipates his operation alone could generate an additional $150,000 for the city in tax revenue. When the city first voted for the ban, state law in Washington declared that any marijuana sales tax revenue couldn’t be split with municipalities. That law has since changed.

Taxes collected by the tribe, meanwhile, will be retained by the tribe for what it deems to be essential government services. The tribe also operates a hotel, a casino and a handful of other businesses throughout the city.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Two marijuana retailers opening soon in city that still bans cannabis sales, Jan. 28, 2017, By John Gillie, The News-Tribune

More Blog Entries:

Report: Marijuana Legalization in Colorado Making Pot Cheaper for Consumers, Feb. 4, 2017, Marijuana Lawyer Blog

The L.A. Times recently reported on a local businesswoman who alongside her partner launched a packaging company that caters to the cannabis industry. They produce containers, bags, logos, labels, custom-printed jars and boxes. They currently have about three workers and are preparing to bring on three more. They provide marketing and branding assistance to growers and distributors, and the owner describes it as “all very upscale.” The biggest problem, however, has been the banking.

She explained how she met with a single accountant last year who informed her she would likely only be paid in cash and that her workers and suppliers would need to be paid in cash as well. Payroll, sales and income taxes – all of it has to be done in cash. The accountant advised her to stash the cash under her mattress and then somewhere down the line find a time to make a large deposit into her bank account. When she told him that sounded illegal, he shrugged, saying that’s how everyone does it.

That kind of exchange is exactly why having a marijuana lawyer help you develop a business plan is so imperative. If you as a business owner get dragged into court for violating state guidelines or federal laws, it’s not going to be a valid defense to say, “But my accountant told me to do it.”

The fact is, marijuana is illegal at the federal level, and business owners need to proceed with appropriate caution. Operating everything safely and above board can be tricky when you don’t have a bank to keep your money safe.

Ultimately, this kind of conflict imposed on legal businesses by the federal government’s refusal to budge on the cannabis classification is not tenable long-term. As a direct result of this, there are about 70 percent of marijuana businesses that have no bank accounts.

This leaves businesses vulnerable to all kinds of issues, including crime. Five years ago, the owner of a medical marijuana dispensary in Orange County was kidnapped and tortured with genital mutilation when four men sought to rob him. Other dispensary owners have been robbed at gunpoint, and many pay a great deal of money for extensive security measures. In another case, a dispensary owner was pulled over by police while transporting about $30,000 to the company’s headquarters. She was able to produce all the right paperwork to show the money was legitimately sourced, but she still had to hire a marijuana lawyer to help her get it back.

There are also practical problems. For example, how do you physically store $250,000 in cash? How do you keep it organized and secure?

Recently, these stores were shared at the Cannabis Banking Working Group’s first meeting in December. The goal is to come up with recommendations for federal legislation that would allow marijuana businesses to access legal banking. The problem is that because cannabis is illegal under federal law, banks fear they will be violating federal drug and money laundering statutes.

Marijuana business owners want to abide by the applicable laws, but this kind of disconnect between state and federal laws is making it incredibly hard. Some companies estimate they are losing $1 million annually to the various burdens that being a “cash-only” business imposes.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Your business is legal, but you can’t use banks. Welcome to the cannabis all-cash nightmare, Jan. 29, 2017, By Robin Abcarian, Los Angeles Times

More Blog Entries:

SB 65 Would Ban Marijuana Use While Driving, Jan. 28, 2017, L.A. Marijuana Attorney Blog

According to Financial Post, this purchase could make Canopy Growth, the parent company, the owner of the biggest indoor marijuana production site in Canada, and possibly the world. The building was purchased with the help of a group of collective investors who backed Canopy. There was previously a medical marijuana facility of the site, but they were only a tenant and they only took up a third of the building’s space – a whopping 472,000 square feet.

This new space has the potential for add-ons of hundreds of thousands of square feet of production and processing space, which could include expanding the indoor facilities or creating greenhouse growing platforms. Even as there is a need for commercial processing of the drug, there is also space needed to convert the marijuana and cannabinoids into products that are higher margin means of profit, such as oils and edibles. Vaporizer pens and other medical delivery options too could be easily manufactured at this site.

The company expects this expansion will allow it to triple its potential for business in Ontario.

The building was purchased for $6.6 million, with about $925,000 in shares.

At this juncture, the company has already converted about 170,000 square feet of space into a licensed cannabis production space, with 12 of up to 40 possible growing rooms now operational. There are another dozen multi-level grow rooms that are either under construction or almost to the completion stage.

The mayor of the town, Smith Falls, has said the company’s impact on the community has already been overwhelmingly positive. The site sat vacant for years after the chocolate plant shut down in 2008. That’s when Hershey moved its production to Mexico. There was no other large-scale commercial production effort that needed that kind of footprint – until this.

Now, the town is looking forward to the promise of new jobs. As of right now, the company employs 200. It’s believed that number could at least triple. This goes beyond simple marijuana production. It’s likely going to involve partnerships with other dealers and businesses in the area, a highly-technical in-house quality assurance laboratory and a seed-breeding area. The company is also looking into whether it may be able to use any of the chocolate-making equipment left behind for the production of edible products.

“We’d love to come full circle and start producing chocolate again,” said the owner. “We just need a few laws to change before we can get going.”

Eventually, the owners say they are looking forward to opening up on-site tours, training and a “bud bar” for guests to relax and enjoy the fruits of this labor.

Other analysts have opined that California is primed for a “marijuana land rush,” particularly in the northern portion of the state. California could soon become the single largest marijuana market in the country, and possibly the world. We’re already seeing these kinds of real estate stories unfold. Those looking to invest or become otherwise involved should consult an experienced marijuana attorney.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Cannabis producer Tweed Inc. triples production space with purchase of former Hershey factory, Jan. 27, 2017, By Sabrina Bedford, Financial Post

More Blog Entries:

California Weighs Marijuana Billboard Ban, Jan. 30, 2017, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

One example is Florida.

Recently, media in The Sunshine State have been exploring the way in which marijuana businesses are carefully entering the market after the approval of Amendment 2, which took effect this month. As reported by one outlet, one 2,000-square-foot storefront in Tampa does not, the reporter noted, “evoke images of the seedy bong-filled pot shops of popular imagination.” Again, we have to remember that it’s still “imagination” to those who haven’t lived in or traveled to a state where this substance has been widely available for years. The writer describes a clean, spacious dispensary with a brightly-lit showroom and materials to help educate buyers on the drug’s merits. One customer, there to purchase products for her son with epilepsy, comments to the writer that in truth, she “didn’t know what to expect,” but was pleasantly surprised.

That’s the kind of impression dispensary owners are hoping to have as this industry expands. That kind of a reputation is what’s going to help sway those communities that early on jumped on the bandwagon to ban marijuana dispensaries opening up in their own neighborhoods. For example, since Amendment 2 passed in Florida, 60 Florida communities have voted to ban dispensaries from opening there, at least temporarily. Comments made by local leaders generally involve concern about the potential criminal element a marijuana dispensary may attract.

While there are some legitimate concerns, particularly as long as banking institutions continue to turn down contracts with these firms, forcing them to operate almost exclusively in cash, the reality is that dispensaries are by-and-large as safe and above-board as any other business. Still, there is a greater burden placed on newly-opened facilities in these communities to show what they are, what they aren’t and how they can help community. Aside from providing patients with safe, secure access to a drug with numerous medically beneficial properties, the other major benefit is the revenue generation. Some local governments could be looking at a substantial boost in tax revenue, which can help bolster public safety, education, infrastructure and more.

Dispensaries need to do their part to invest in creating a space where patients who are sick and vulnerable feel comfortable – and not as if they are doing something of which they should feel ashamed or secretive about.

The Tampa-area dispensary described by The News-Press reporter is a commercial district just outside of the University of South Florida, in a complex that is also home to a pizza shop, an insurance agency and a property management firm. Supervising the store was a registered nurse, who explained the various THC treatments used for conditions like cancer, epilepsy and multiple sclerosis.

As it now stands, there are approximately 1,800 people in Florida who are in line to start receiving medical marijuana and 388 doctors who are allowed to recommend it for them.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Dispelling fears: Dispensaries aim to ‘normalize’ Florida medical marijuana, Jan. 16, 2017, By Frank Gluck, The News-Press

More Blog Entries:

Study: Marijuana Reduces In-Hospital Mortality Risk, Jan. 10, 2017, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

You have probably taken note if you have moseyed on into a marijuana grow operation in Colorado an array of colored bar codes. Every single plant is tagged with either a blue or a yellow bar code, either stuck in the soil or tied to the stalk. Each tag has a bar code and a Radio Frequency ID chip. Then, if you take a glance around, you’ll probably notice there are security cameras watching your every move at all times. The badges worn by workers allow the company to follow them from room-to-room. Inspectors may drop by without prior notice, just to make sure the amount being produced matches the records on file with the state, which tracks it all in real time.

All of these security systems are high-tech – and costly. It’s budding into a multi-million dollar industry, and it’s one of the only reasons we’re able to safely shift this plant from the black market to a major commodity sold to the over-21 public on store shelves.

While the federal government’s refusal to budge on marijuana’s Schedule I status has been a huge thorn in the side of most within the marijuana industry, the security industry may actually benefit to some extent. That’s because with the drug outlawed by the federal government, the onus is on the state to ensure that legalization on their borders has not given a cushion to black market activity. (The reality is legalization undercuts black market sales.) But the state still has to show the federal government that it can prove at any given time where the marijuana is. It can show that there is a closed-loop with the cannabis, meaning it’s not bleeding across the borders or falling into the hands of black market traffickers.

This has given rise to the need for seed-to-sale tracking. That means there is accountability for these plants from the time the seed is put in the soil until the time it is bought by a dispensary. The state wants systems in place that can weigh the cannabis products to the milligram to know exactly how much is being moved – and where – at any given time.

Colorado was actually the very first state to require marijuana surveillance. By 2013, it went into effect with the METRC (Marijuana Enforcement Tracking Reporting and Compliance). The system is a government-facing system that gives the state’s Marijuana Enforcement Division the ability to follow millions of marijuana plants in real time as they move through the production process. The system was specifically created for Colorado’s systems and laws, but it’s now being used in Oregon, Maryland and Alaska too. It’s plausible a similar system could be adopted in California for both recreational and medical marijuana.

Other systems allow for private tracking. Seed-to-sale market tracking software is now contracted with nine other states (though it’s not officially up-and-running), while 19 states haven’t yet purchased it.

Many surveillance firms note that they are working to help take the stigma out of the industry, with compliance and technology being the primary way these marijuana businesses have to attain legitimacy and follow in the footsteps of more traditional industries.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

The Business of Making a Cannabis Surveillance State, Dec. 5, 2016, By Daniel Oberhaus, Motherboard

More Blog Entries:

First Marijuana Debit Payment App Allows Ease of Legal Transactions, Dec. 8, 2016, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

That’s because federal law – specifically 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which is part of the Gun Control Act – criminalizes the possession or receipt of a firearm by an unlawful drug user or person addicted to a controlled substance. Of course, many states have now legalized the drug, but it still remains outlawed by federal statute. Those purchasing a new firearm are asked to fill out federal background check forms that specifically ask whether the purchaser uses marijuana for recreational or medicinal purposes. If they do, they are not allowed to purchase the gun.

This conflict was recently questioned by Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican who says she didn’t vote in favor of marijuana, but now she is worried about its impact on the Second Amendment rights of citizens. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Wilson v. Lynch that the Second Amendment rights of a Nevada woman were not infringed by the federal government’s ban on sales of guns to medical marijuana card holders. The ruling is applicable to nine other states, including California.

Plaintiff in that case sought to purchase a firearm for self protection after obtaining a medical marijuana card. However, the gun dealer declined, citing U.S. law prohibiting sales of firearms to drug users. The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has instructed gun stores and sellers that they can safely assume a person who has a medical marijuana card uses the drug.

The appellate panel ruled that Congress made a reasonable conclusion in finding that use of marijuana and other drugs increases the risk of behavior that is both unpredictable and irrational, with which guns should not be associated. The courts also held that it was reasonable for the ATF to instruct sellers that medical marijuana cardholders use the drug.

Plaintiff’s attorney in that case said he plans to appeal.

Although both marijuana consumers and gun owners don’t always find themselves on the same side of the cultural divide, they can be one-in-the-same and many are troubled.

As noted by the founder of NORML, a marijuana advocacy group, the fact that users of marijuana are essentially being forced to forfeit their Second Amendment rights is unfair. Further, those who use the drug as medicine are being asked to decide between their health and their Second Amendment rights, which is nothing short of offensive.

The form gun buyers fill out when they visit a licensed firearm dealer is called an ATF Form 4473. In that form, Question 11(e) asks whether the person purchasing the weapon is an unlawful user or addict of marijuana. Anyone who answers “yes” cannot buy the gun. There aren’t exceptions for those who lawfully use the drug under state law.

The issue can be a tricky one. For example, even the National Rifle Association didn’t respond to requests for comment by the Wall Street Journal.

Murkowski sent a letter several months ago to the Attorney General, asking for a reconsideration of this policy. Murkowski said she does understand the concerns about marijuana and firearms, but said the same could be argued with regard to alcohol.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Legal Marijuana Poses a Problem for Gun Buyers, Nov. 14, 2016, By Gary Fields and Kristina Peterson, The Wall Street Journal

More Blog Entries:

San Jose, Other Communities, Ban Marijuana Before Vote, Nov. 12, 2016, Orange County Cannabis Lawyer Blog

Now, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued a ruling saying it is a right that should be denied to users of medical marijuana. In Wilson v. Lynch et al., the court ruled that a federal law that prohibits medical marijuana cardholders from buying firearms does not actually violate those patients’ Second Amendment rights because users of marijuana are prone to behavior that is “irrational” and “unpredictable.”

The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed by a Nevada woman who sought to buy a handgun five years ago. However, she was refused the sale after the owner of the store recognized her as being a medical marijuana patient. Plaintiff asserted that in fact, she didn’t really use marijuana, but obtained a medical marijuana card in order to make a political statement, saying she supports the liberalization of marijuana laws nationally.

Federal law does have a say here. The statute indicates guns can’t be bought by individuals who are either addicts or unlawful users of any controlled substance. Back in 2011, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) issued a clarification indicating this provision did apply to users of marijuana, even if their state had passed laws authorizing legal access and use of the drug for medicinal purposes.

Plaintiff argued this was inherently unfair and violated her Constitutional rights. The 9th DCA disagreed, finding it “beyond dispute” that users of “illegal drugs” – including those who use cannabis – are likely as a consequence of their use to be unpredictable and irrational. Further, regardless of whether plaintiff was actually a user of the drug, the fact that she was a cardholder was reasonable grounds on which to assume she was a user and deny her access to buy a gun.

Of course, our marijuana lawyers know this reasoning didn’t just appear out of thin air. There is a long history of painting marijuana users as unstable and potentially violent. In fact, the 9th DCA based much of its reasoning on the 2004 decision by the 4th DCA in U.S. v. Carter. In that case, justices cited several studies in which users of marijuana (though mostly users of marijuana plus other substances, like alcohol, cocaine and heroin) were more prone to “violent episodes” and arrests.

Interestingly, in the Carter case, the 4th DCA expressly stated that the issue of correlation versus causation was irrelevant, and that a correlation was a fair legal basis on which to deny the purchase of firearms. But researchers have criticized this approach. For example, cigarette smokers might be more likely than non-smokers to commit crimes. Yet the cigarettes in and of themselves are not the cause of the higher crime rates among users.

The 9th DCA turned around to say that causation was in fact a consideration for its findings and that irrational behavior could be a consequence of using the drug. However, there is a far stronger link to suggest that alcohol intoxication has a much stronger link to violence than marijuana. In fact, there have been some studies indicating use of marijuana may actually decrease violent tendencies.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Why medical marijuana patients can’t buy guns, Sept. 7, 2016, By Christopher Ingraham, The Washington Post

More Blog Entries:

Lack of Diversity in Medical Marijuana Licenses Raises Concern, Sept. 12, 2016, Los Angeles Marijuana Lawyer Blog

Seems a fairly straightforward question with a simple answer. However, the issue has been muddled in Michigan, where the Court of Appeals had to take on the issue in Michigan v. Ventura.

The issue was raised after police in Grand Rapids raided the home of the defendant in this case, who was a medical marijuana card holder. Once inside, authorities discovered 21 marijuana plants – plus an additional 22 “clones” of those plants. Either way, he was over the limit of 19 that he was allowed to grow under the state’s 2008 medical marijuana law. Still, the language of the law was a bit hazy to begin with. Beyond that, the difference between being three plants over and 25 plants over is significant in terms of charges and penalties.

Defendant argued the 22 clones – which were portions of the plant that had been transplanted to different pots – were simply leaves and cuttings. However, after referencing the dictionary, a federal case and decision handed down recently by the Idaho Court of Appeals, the three-judge panel all agreed the clones were in fact plants. That means defendant violated the law by owning 43 plants, meaning he’ll get no reprieve on the penalty that requires him to serve two years on probation and 120 hours on community service.

Part of the basis for this ruling was the fact that the clones reportedly had leaves and roots structures. They were all green and leafy and, the justices noted, “alive.” That meant they were plants. There was no dispute that the plants weren’t large and they weren’t mature either. But the statute never stipulated between large and small plants and mature versus non-mature plants.

Last year, the Michigan Supreme Court established a four-part test intended to help lower court judges ascertain whether the state’s medical marijuana statute shields a defendant from prosecution. This came after seven years of case after case involving defendants trying to assert protection under the statute. But even the four-part test hasn’t eliminated these cases. Just this year, the Michigan Court of Appeals has heard arguments in 22 different medical marijuana cases – including this so-called “clone” case. When the Michigan Supreme Court issued its four-part test, justices wrote that there were so many inconsistencies in the law, it created substantial confusion for law enforcement, attorneys, judges, patients and caregivers. Interpreting and applying it has consumed “valuable public and private resources” justices noted.

That was not the first – or last – time the state legislature was called on to convene to clarify those elements that were more vague. And yet, they have not done so, with many lawmakers asserting their disdain for the act. This has meant they haven’t been eager to gather to provide clarification. Even law enforcement – which historically as a group has opposed marijuana legalization in any capacity – has expressed the desire for the law to be better clarified. A spokesman for the Michigan State Police said the vagueness of the law is “concerning,” and that further explanation by state lawmakers on some of the murkiest elements “would probably benefit everybody.”

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Court: Marijuana ‘clones’ still marijuana plants, Aug. 17, 2016, By Michael Gerstein, Detroit News

More Blog Entries:

Milk, Bread and Marijuana: Pot May Soon Be Sold in Grocery Stores, Aug. 14, 2016, L.A. Marijuana Lawyer Blog

California was the first to legalize the drug as medicine in 1996, but those who dispensed marijuana were never allowed to make a profit. Until now.

Well, actually, two years from now. That’s when the measure that will pull marijuana off the black market will fully go into effect, and the new California medical marijuana czar will initiate the licensing, product testing and tracking seed-to-sale of the drug. And for the first time, dispensaries will be allowed to make a profit.

The New York Times reported that last year, the California medical marijuana industry generated some $2.7 billion in sales. But all of that was funneled through non-profits. Now, companies will actually be allowed to profit from it, and there will be no limitation on how many plants farmers can grow.

In general, that’s very good news. However, as our experienced Los Angeles marijuana lawyers know, there is concern this will drive smaller providers out of operation.

Big names and corporations are scrambling to establish a piece of this new industry of large-scale, legalized marijuana farming. The stakes are especially high because California voters are predicted in November to approve a measure that will legalize marijuana for recreational purposes.

As the California market for legal marijuana already far exceeds that of Colorado and Washington, which have already legalized recreational use, the promise of profits here is a huge draw. It’s expected that if recreational marijuana is legalized in California, sales here will more than double by 2020. The mayor of Adelanto says taxes from marijuana sales alone could match the city’s current $10 million budget.

That is why the price of land in Southern California cities like Desert Hot Springs and Adelanto has tripled, almost overnight. Investors and entrepreneurs have snapped up all the land in those regions where cannabis cultivation is likely to thrive. Celebrities like Snoop Dogg and Ky-Mani Marley (Bob Marley’s son) are trying to work out deals for marijuana growing licenses.

Through all of this, there is concern that these kinds of corporate interests are going to shut out those small-time growers, as well as the counter-culture that’s been a cornerstone of California’s cannabis community for years.

Smaller farmers have expressed concern, and say they want those coming in to respect the code they have established, which is unofficially: Respect the land and respect the people.

In order to help compete with these larger outfits, a band of farmers in Humbolt County has agreed to work together to sell their product under a single banner: Emerald Family Farms. The idea is that in order to compete with mega-grow operations, they are going to need to work together. Their hope is that enough people want to buy their cannabis from local farmers with years of experience over behemoth conglomerates.

In either case, there is hope that the new industry will generate more jobs. For example in Adelanto, the unemployment rate here is higher than 10 percent – more than double the national average of 5.5 percent. Marijuana growers will be required to hire half of their workers locally.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

In California, Marijuana is Smelling More Like Big Business, April 11, 2016, By Ian Lovett, The New York Times

More Blog Entries:

No. 1 Marijuana Dispensary No Longer a Federal Target, May 10, 2016, Los Angeles Marijuana Lawyer Blog

The measure was introduced by Assemblyman Jim Wood, the Democrat from Heraldsburg who pointed to a study by the University of California San Francisco indicating secondhand smoke from marijuana could result in damage to the cardiovascular system, similar to what has been identified with tobacco.

Although landlords already have the authority to prohibit smoking cigarettes or other tobacco products on their properties, this development is troubling for the fact that it involves medicine. Tobacco is not typically used for its medicinal properties. In fact, it has proven a massive public health threat. On the other hand, despite the fact marijuana is considered a Schedule I narcotic by the federal government, it has many known medicinal benefits.

Still, Wood called the smoking of the drug a “nuisance.” He said those who live in multifamily units should not be exposed to unwanted or toxic secondhand smoke.

Tenants would still be free to consume the drug in edible, pill or liquid form. The concern is the health risk the smoke causes to third parties.

It is known that secondhand tobacco smoke can be harmful to those nearby who breathe it in. Researchers at the UCSF Division of Cardiology say that dangerous chemicals are created any time dried plant material is burned. The effect of that on humans, researchers say, is that arteries may be impeded from carrying an adequate level of blood to the body systems. Worse, marijuana may have longer-lasting effects than even tobacco.

The landlord-tenant relationship can be a tenuous one as far as marijuana is concerned.

Landlords are generally allowed to evict tenants for engaging in illegal activity on site. Obviously in states where all marijuana is illegal, landlords have a great deal of power in these situations. But even in states like California that allow medical marijuana or others where recreational marijuana is allowed, landlords may still have the upper hand. That’s because cultivation/ possession/ use of marijuana remains a crime under federal law. Until that changes, landlords have the ability to write prohibition of the drug into the lease – regardless of what one’s prescription says.

Some landlords have been cautious about implementing these rules with regard to medical marijuana patients because they may fear an anti-discrimination lawsuit. But again, as long as the drug remains illegal at the federal level, cases accusing landlords of failure to provide reasonable accommodation for those with disability may not get far. This is especially true for taxpayer-subsidized housing, such as Section 8.

The same sort of principle would apply to marijuana cultivation on rented property.

Beyond that, enforcement of such rules will largely depend on the language contained in the lease. Generally, leases cannot be re-written mid-term. So if there isn’t a “No Smoking” clause already in the lease and this proposal becomes law, landlords may have a tough time initiating such a rule for those already living there. However, new leases could easily be subject to new rules.

The bill, AB 2300, was approved by the Assembly by a vote of 74-0 and will now be subject to scrutiny by the state senate.

The Los Angeles CANNABIS LAW Group represents growers, dispensaries, collectives, patients and those facing marijuana charges. Call us at 949-375-4734.

Additional Resources:

Landlords could prohibit tenants from smoking medical marijuana under bill Ok’d by Assembly, May 10, 2016, By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times

More Blog Entries:

Why LA County Banned Marijuana Cultivation, April 26, 2016, Los Angeles Marijuana Lawyer Blog