Releaf Magazine
3Nov/150

Sean Parker initiative ignites California marijuana legalization

Billionaire technology and music industry disruptor Sean Parker upended another sector this afternoon, with the release of a new initiative to legalize marijuana in California in 2016.

Parker’s proposal — called the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act — calls for ending cannabis prohibition in California, and allowing folks to possess up to one ounce of bud and grow up to six plants. Cities would have wide latitude on cannabis commerce, but couldn’t ban small, secure personal indoor gardens.

Philanthropist Sean Parker shakes up marijuana legalization in California

Billionaire philanthropist Sean Parker shakes up marijuana legalization in California (By Kendrick Brinson for SF Chronicle)

The proposal upends the 2016 playing field for California reformers. Parker’s wealth is the first substantial amount of funds to be moved into play in the 2016 race. Drug Policy Alliance and Marijuana Policy Project are reportedly backing the Parker proposal. That leaves other camps far out of the running for lack of funds — including the post-Prop 19 coalition ReformCA, as well as group behind the MCLR.

The full measure also received enthusiastic support from respected social-justice and industry organizations.

“This initiative provides a model for the country,” stated Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance. “It breaks new ground not just with its pragmatic regulatory provisions but also in directing tax revenue to prevention and treatment for young people, environmental protections and job creation in underserved communities.”

“California voters are ready to end marijuana prohibition in 2016 and replace it with a more sensible system,” stated Rob Kampia, Executive Director of the Marijuana Policy Project. “That is exactly what this initiative will do, and that is why MPP is proud to support it. We look forward to working with the proponents and doing whatever we can to help pass this measure and make history in California next year.”

About a half-dozen groups have filed ballot language, which costs $200 and signifies little.Millions of dollars must be spent to gather several hundred thousand valid signatures by a state deadline, then run a potentially polarizing campaign against a united conservative right, and a fractured, bickering far left. About 53 percent of Californians support legalization in theory. The details could drag those numbers down.

Over in Ohio, another set of profit-minded liberals are set to forfeit their legalization funds this week. Ohio’s Issue 3 to legalize pot is polling at 46-46, and has been dragged down by similar forces as could emerge in California.

California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, who chaired a Blue Ribbon Commission on Marijuana Policy, of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, supported the measure, which was filed today by official proponents, Dr. Donald O. Lyman, MD, and Michael Sutton — a doctor and an environmentalist:

“I am pleased that this thoughtful measure is aligned with the Blue Ribbon Commission’s recommendations, and presents California its best opportunity to improve the status quo by making marijuana difficult for kids to access. It is backed by the broadest coalition of supporters to date and I believe that Californians will rally behind this consensus measure, which also serves to strengthen law enforcement, respect local preferences, protect public health and public safety, and restore the environment.”

Official filer Sutton is a longtime conservationist and environmental attorney, and former President of the California Fish and Game Commission, and former Vice President of the National Audubon Society.

“The physician community and the people of California in general have increasingly voiced support for ending marijuana prohibition and bringing greater control, oversight and consumer protections to our marijuana policies,” stated Dr. Lyman, author of the California Medical Association’s 2011 Background Paper on Marijuana. “This is the most comprehensive and carefully-crafted measure ever introduced to control, regulate and tax responsible adult-use of marijuana anywhere in America – and it will make California healthier, make our streets and communities safer and better protect our children.”

“A regulated and reliable framework of marijuana policy will bring illicit cultivation out of the shadows and allow us to protect and restore California’s precious land, water and wildlife,” stated Sutton, who also founded the Marine Stewardship Council while at World Wildlife Fund. “It’s good for the environment, good for our water supply and good for natural resources.”

Paul Warshaw, CEO of GreenRush, a patient-centered cannabis delivery platform celebrated the news.

“California is home to dozens of world-class industries, now including a cannabis sector that is growing exponentially more professional, varied, and profitable. The state’s cannabis industry is certainly complimented by it’s other leading technology and investment  sectors – we’re seeing leaders like Sean Parker and others stepping forward to advocate for rational cannabis regulation and reform.”

The California Cannabis Industry Association also supports the Parker proposal.

“CCIA is pleased to join a diverse group of stakeholders in support of this initiative, which will bring sensible adult-use laws and regulations to California’s cannabis industry,” said CCIA president Sean Luse, in a statement. “This initiative represents the collective voice of California’s lawful medical cannabis industry.”

The Adult Use of Marijuana Act will lay atop California’s new statewide medical cannabis regulations, while streamlining some of them, stated CCIA general counsel Khurshid Khoja. “No legislation is perfect, but we believe the initiative will benefit patients, taxpayers and the legal marijuana industry.”

California is positioning itself as a national and global leader in legal cannabis, after decades of it as a major part of the underground economy.

“Our hope is this initiative will pave the way for California to take
its rightful place as the center of the cannabis economy,” stated CCIA executive director Nate Bradley. “California has long been the leader in technology, the environment and entertainment. This initiative lays the foundation for marijuana to become California’s next great industry — with all the jobs, tax revenue and economic growth that come with a productive new industry.”

A number of groups have signed onto the initiative with letters of support, including: The Nature Conservancy, Audubon California, California Council of Land Trusts, California Native Plant Society, California State Parks Foundation, California Trout, California Urban Stream Partnership, Defenders of Wildlife, Endangered Habitats League, Pacific Forest Trust, Trout Unlimited and Trust for Public Land.

“The environmental provisions of the Adult Use Act will represent a major step forward in protecting California’s rich natural resources in the future,” stated the Nature Conservancy in an October 29, 2015 letter.

-

VIA SFGate

Post to Twitter

6Oct/150

Proposed California Marijuana Initiative Allows Cannabis Cafés

The measure includes a generous home cultivation limit, and it does not define drugged driving based on THC levels.

by Jacob Sullum

This week Reform CA, the leading campaign to legalize marijuana in California next year, filed the proposed language of its ballot initiative. Like the initiatives in the four states that have legalized marijuana so far, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2016 would allow adults 21 or older to possess up to an ounce of marijuana in public. Like three of those initiatives, it also would let people share up to an ounce at a time with other adults and grow marijuana at home.

Unlike the other initiatives, the California measure would limit home cultivation not by the number of plants but by area: up to 100 square feet. Based on an estimate by the consultants who advised Washington's marijuana regulators, a professional grower could produce as much as nine pounds of usable marijuana per harvest in that amount of space, although the typical home garden probably would be much less productive. Home growers would be allowed to possess and share (but not sell) whatever they produced.

The proposed initiative would establish an Office of Cannabis Regulation within the California Department of Consumer Affairs, overseen by a newly created California Cannabis Commission and charged with licensing and regulating marijuana businesses. The office would be required to start issuing "provisional licenses" to existing medical marijuana dispensaries by July 1, 2017, meaning that legal recreational sales could begin as early as then. July 1 is also the deadline for beginning to write regulations for the newly legal recreational industry. Licenses under the new rules would be issued by January 1, 2018. The initiative authorizes three levels of taxation: $2 per square foot of canopy on commercial growers, $15 per ounce on the first sale, and a 10 percent retail sales tax. Local governments could ban marijuana outlets but only with the approval of local voters.

Unlike the earlier initiatives, the Reform CA measure clearly leaves the door open to cannabis consumption outside of private residences. Consumption is legal in "a private residence or such other location as permitted under this Act." Consumption "in a public street, school, playground, public transit vehicle, or any public property" would be an infraction subject to a maximum fine of $500 (which seems steep to me, especially since the corresponding fines in other states range from $50 to $260). Likewise consumption "on any property where such activity is prohibited by the property owner, resident, operator, manager, or business owner." The implication is that consumption in private businesses would be legal (subject to existing restrictions on smoking) as long as the owner says it's OK.

That means cannabis-friendly bars, restaurants, or clubs would be allowed under state law. So would cannabis-friendly limos and similar privately operated conveyances, since consumption in a vehicle is prohibited only "in the driver compartment." In fact, the initiative, like a Massachusetts measure that is expected to appear on the ballot in that state next year, apparently would allow consumption on the premises of marijuana merchants, since it authorizes the Office of Cannabis Regulation to establish "controls governing on-site consumption of cannabis and cannabis products."

The California initiative wisely does not establish a definition of drugged driving based on THC blood levels, an unreliable measure of impairment. Instead it says "a person shall be deemed to be under the influence of cannabis if, as a result of consuming cannabis, his or her mental or physical abilities are so impaired that he or she is no longer able to drive a vehicle or operate a vessel with the caution of a sober person, using ordinary care, under similar circumstances." It adds that "this standard shall be the sole standard used in determining driving under the influence allegations."

The initiative sensibly distinguishes between "minors" who are younger than 18 and minors who are 18, 19, or 20 (who in other contexts are recognized as adults). Hence an 18-to-20-year-old who shares marijuana with another 18-to-20-year-old commits an infraction punishable by a $100 fine, the same category as underage possession. If the person providing the marijuana is 21 or older, the offense is still an infraction, but the maximum fine rises to $500. Providing marijuana to someone younger than 18 can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony. By contrast, there is no felony option in California for providing alcohol to a minor. That inconsistency is hard to justify, especially since alcohol is in several important ways more dangerous than marijuana.

Reform CA says the initiative is still subject to revision, although feedback must be submitted by midnight tomorrow.

-

VIA Reason

Post to Twitter

2Sep/150

11 States Most Likely to Legalize Marijuana Next

With a majority of Americans in favor of marijuana legalization, it seems to be only time before the herb is legal in every state. Currently only four states (Alaska, Colorado, Oregon and Washington) and D.C. have legalized recreational pot for adults—but according to financial blog 24/7 Wall St., 11 more states might not be far behind.

The blog's predictions are based on two criteria: states where medical marijuana is legal and states where possession of small amounts of weed is not punishable by jail.

Other considerations included the number of marijuana-related arrests per 100,000 residents, the estimated proportion of residents who used marijuana in the past year and public opinion polls.

According to USA Today, most of the states on the list also have a high number of marijuana users, with nine surpassing the nationwide rate.

See the list below:

1. Massachusetts

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $100
Marijuana Related Arrests in 2012: 2,596
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 39
Minimum Penalty Classification : Civil Offense

2. Nevada

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $600
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 8,524
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 309
Minimum Penalty Classification: Misdemeanor

3. California

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $100
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 21,256
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 56
Minimum Penalty Classification: Infraction

4. New York

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $100
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 112,974
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 577
Minimum Penalty Classification: Not Classified

5. Vermont

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $200
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 926
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 148
Minimum Penalty Classification: Civil Violation

6. Minnesota

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $200
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 12,051
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 224
Minimum Penalty Classification: Misdemeanor

7. Connecticut

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $150
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 3,747
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 104
Minimum Penalty Classification: Civil Penalty

8. Maryland

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $100
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 22,042
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 375
Minimum Penalty Classification: Civil Offense

9. Rhode Island

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $150
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 2,320
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 221
Minimum Penalty Classification: Civil Violation

10. Maine

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $600
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 3,202
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 241
Minimum Penalty Classification: Civil Violation

11. Delaware

Maximum Fine for Small Amount of Pot: $575
Marijuana-Related Arrests in 2012: 2,912
Marijuana Arrests per 100,000: 318
Minimum Penalty Classification: Misdemeanor

-

VIA High Times

Post to Twitter

9May/140

Proposed Marijuana DUI Law Fails in California

Office of Jim Frazier

Phew, many of you are saying.

A bill that would have made the presence of just a little itty bit of weed in your bloodstream, even if you toked up a few days ago, worth a DUI prosecution was killed in the California legislature recently. The legislation was nixed by the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

AB 2500 by Assemblyman Jim Frazier would have imposed a 2 nanograms per milliliter THC blood limit on the state's drivers. Medical marijuana defenders were outraged because THC metabolites can stay in your blood days after the high has worn off:

They argued the law would, de facto, make regular medical marijuana users DUI drivers, even if they weren't actually impaired behind the wheel.

Frazier is a Democrat from Oakley, California who changed the bill, likely after outrage followed the original version that would have triggered DUI prosecutions for drivers caught with any discernible amount of pot in their systems.

The pro-marijuana group NORML:
... The bill would make marijuana users liable for DUI regardless of whether they were actually impaired at the time.
The revised proposal still would have made it illegal for drivers to have low amounts of any federally illicit narcotic - cocaine, meth, heroin - in their blood streams.

And it was still stricter than the 5 nanograms per milliliter blood-THC standard used in Colorado, a limit also being buzzed about by some prosecutors right here in California.

Local district attorneys and city attorneys say stoned driving is on the increase because of the prevalence of medical marijuana retailers in California. They want new tools for prosecuting the crime.

Marijuana DUIs are harder to prove than drunk driving, though, because there's no scientific standard that's the equivalent of California's .08 blood-alcohol limit.

NORML questions why a stoned driving law would be needed at all. The group claims:
... Even while marijuana usage has been increasing over the past decade, accident rates and DUI arrests in California have been declining.

-

Via LA Weekly

Post to Twitter

Tagged as: , , No Comments
26Mar/130

Coporate Americas High Life

Stacking the vapors... ILLA

img1Forbs.com

It’s hard to ignore the prevalence of medical marijuana dispensaries in California and elsewhere. They are on the corner and in the news. If you are a tax lawyer, it is even harder to ignore them, for there are big tax problems in this industry. See Voters Say Yes To Marijuana, IRS Says No. But when I said I thought the industry was going corporate—Is Medical Marijuana Going Corporate?—I didn’t realize how true it was.

Now I’m getting merger notices. Yes, marijuana M&A is here. In this case, it’s about the vapor machines that can obviate smoking and instead dispense the meds without even using a match (or a lighter for that matter).

Medbox, Inc. (OTC Markets: MDBX) announced the acquisition of 100% of Vaporfection International Inc., manufacturer of Vaporfection vaporizers. Medbox was featured on the cover of the Los Angeles Times Business Section: Wall Street sees opportunity in marijuana.

Vaporfection makes “herbal delivery systems.” The deal involved the issuance of 260,864 MDBX stock warrants. Medbox sells and services automated, biometrically controlled dispensing and storage systems for medicine and merchandise. And Vaporfection seems quite a catch.

Vaporfection claimed Best Vaporizer in Product of the Year at the Cannabis Cup Amsterdam 2011, and Best Vaporizer at the Kush Expo LA 2012. The company’s patented designs cause marijuana to release its medicinal ingredient into the vapor. The resulting vapor is pure, virtually odorless, and goes into the patient’s respiratory system.

Vaporfection was created by Amir Yomtov in 2006. In 2011, the company was purchased by entrepreneur Herb Postma. Mr. Postma continues to manage Vaporfection and notes that under Medbox, Vaporfection revenues are projected to exceed $4 million in 12 months. All this sound rosy, but not to the feds.

After all, legal dispensaries are still labeled as drug traffickers under federal law, and that creates big tax problems. Section 280E of the tax code denies tax deductions for any business trafficking in controlled substances. The IRS says it must enforce Section 280E. Yet the U.S. Tax Court has opened the door a crack by allowing dispensaries to deduct other expenses distinct from dispensing marijuana. See Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems Inc. v. Commissioner.

If a dispensary sells marijuana and operates the separate business of care-giving, the care-giving expenses are deductible. Some expenses might relate to both. If only 10% of the premises are used to dispense marijuana, 90% of the rent is deductible. But good record-keeping is essential. See Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Persist Despite Tax Obstacles.

But even good records won’t make vaporizers or drug paraphernalia deductible. In Olive v. Commissioner, Martin Olive sold medical marijuana at the Vapor Room, where he used vaporizers so patients didn’t have to smoke. However, with only one business, Section 280E precluded Olive’s deductions.

Robert W. Wood practices law with Wood LLP, in San Francisco. The author of more than 30 books, including Taxation of Damage Awards & Settlement Payments (4th Ed. 2009 with 2012 Supplement, Tax Institute), he can be reached at Wood@WoodLLP.com. This discussion is not intended as legal advice, and cannot be relied upon for any purpose without the services of a qualified professional.

Post to Twitter

11Oct/120

Obama // Romney // Legalization?

Ads running to legalize marijuana in three states

RBR.com
By Carl Marcucci

In November, voters in Colorado, Washington and Oregon will consider legalizing marijuana for recreational use. Although similar initiatives have failed in the past, this time the groups fighting to legalize pot are well-organized, professional and backed by high-dollar donors willing to outspend the competition, reports Raycom News Network.

In Colorado, the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol (CRMLA) has produced several ads that say marijuana is healthier than alcohol. The campaign’s website points to medical studies that claim marijuana, unlike alcohol, has not been linked to cancer, brain damage, addiction or high healthcare costs.

CRMLA was given nearly $1.2 million from the Marijuana Policy Project, a DC-based lobbying group, as well as more than $800,000 by Peter Lewis, the founder and chairman of Progressive Insurance. Lewis has been a vocal proponent of marijuana legalization for several years and donated millions to legalization efforts around the country.

In an online video ad campaign, CRMLA has young adults explaining to their parents they prefer marijuana to alcohol. In one of the ads, titled Dear Mom, a 20-something woman tells her mother marijuana is “better for my body, I don’t get hung-over and honestly I feel safer around marijuana users.”

In Washington, rather than comparing marijuana to alcohol, New Approach Washington (NAW) is focusing on legalization, arguing outlawing cannabis does more harm than good, by wasting tax dollars on law enforcement while letting gangs control the money. She describes the possible benefits of legalization through saved law enforcement dollars and extra tax revenue.

The TV spot has a professional/executive looking woman, “I don’t like it personally, but it’s time for a conversation about legalizing marijuana. It’s a multi-million dollar industry in Washington state, and we get no benefit.”

These efforts appear to be working. In Washington, 50% of voters say marijuana should be legal while 38% say it should not, according to an Elway Research poll. And in Colorado, a Denver Post poll showed 51% of Coloradans were in favor of legalization, while 41% opposed it.

In Washington, the effort to legalize marijuana is being fought with a bankroll of between $4 and $5 million, according to the Raycom News Network story. NAW used those funds to put $1 million into television advertising during August, and hope to put triple that amount into the weeks preceding the November vote.

In total, groups in Colorado fighting to get marijuana legalized have a war chest of $2.5 million.

The campaigns are especially targeting women ages 30 to 55, whom tend to be less supportive of legalization and regulation than men.

The only visible group opposing the marijuana ballot, SMART Colorado, has been given less than $200,000 – most of it from Save Our Society, a Florida-based anti-drug group.

RBR-TVBR observation: Interesting that the Chairman of Progressive Insurance is donating so much money in this legalization effort. Perhaps legalizing it would create fewer accidents/injuries from police chases and save the insurance industry money? We doubt drivers with the stuff in their car would try to flee if it’s no more illegal than a pack of cigarettes. Who knows, but Progressive is a big corporation and Lewis seems to not be concerned about sticking his neck out on this.

Post to Twitter

13Jun/120

June Issue now Available Online!

Post to Twitter

14Mar/120

March Issue Now Available Online!

Post to Twitter

5Mar/120

Dirty judgement

Medical Marijuana Lawsuit Dismissed By Federal Judge In Sacramento

huffingtonpost.com

SAN FRANCISCO -- Medical marijuana advocates faced another setback Tuesday, when a federal judge in Sacramento dismissed a lawsuit claiming that the Obama administration broke its promise to leave the pot industry alone when it began an aggressive crackdown against California dispensaries last fall.

Proponents of the suit cited President Obama's 2009 Ogden Memo, which told federal prosecutors to concentrate their efforts on large drug trafficking networks and "not focus federal resources" on medical marijuana operations in states that have legalized cannabis for medicinal purposes.

But in a sharp reversal of the memo, federal authorities announced a renewed effort to target pot dispensaries throughout California last October, claiming the industry had ballooned to unprecedented proportions.

In the four months since the reinstated crackdown, a number of medical cannabis clubs across the state have been forced to shut down, including five in San Francisco and the legendary Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana in Marin County, California's oldest. The District Attorney's office has begun investigating 12 more stores in San Francisco this year.

The U.S. attorneys going after such dispensaries have justified their actions mainly by claiming the shops operate too close to parks and schools.

Pot activists have fought back, arguing the federal government should focus its energy elsewhere and not interfere with states abiding by their own laws.

"It's a total waste of resources," Stephanie Tucker, spokeswoman for the San Francisco Medical Cannabis Task Force, told The Huffington Post. "They're attacking a peaceful, regulated community and it's wasting money. Shame on them."

The Sacramento lawsuit was one of a handful filed in November by cannabis suppliers and patients, who cited the Ogden Memo as the basis for their action. U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell, who reviewed the case in the capitol, justified his dismissal by claiming the memo was not a "binding commitment," simply a statement of priorities.

Burrell's ruling will allow for prosecutors to continue to take action against dispensaries operating throughout the state.

Matthew Kumin, a lawyer representing one of the dispensaries in the Sacramento case, told SF Weekly that the dismissal of the cases without allowing a fair trial is bogus. "The government's blocking of us is irrational at this point," Kumin said to SF Weekly. "It's clear there's medical use; circumstances have changed."

Kumin pointed to federally-backed clinical trials of cannabis-based drugs such as Sativex as proof that scientists believe marijuana has a medical benefit. Despite that, he said he expects similar lawsuits in Oakland and Los Angeles to be dismissed this week.

"The judges know we're in the right," he said. "They just don't want to admit it."

SAN FRANCISCO -- Medical marijuana advocates faced another setback Tuesday, when a federal judge in Sacramento dismissed a lawsuit claiming that the Obama administration broke its promise to leave the pot industry alone when it began an aggressive crackdown against California dispensaries last fall.

Proponents of the suit cited President Obama's 2009 Ogden Memo, which told federal prosecutors to concentrate their efforts on large drug trafficking networks and "not focus federal resources" on medical marijuana operations in states that have legalized cannabis for medicinal purposes.

But in a sharp reversal of the memo, federal authorities announced a renewed effort to target pot dispensaries throughout California last October, claiming the industry had ballooned to unprecedented proportions.

In the four months since the reinstated crackdown, a number of medical cannabis clubs across the state have been forced to shut down, including five in San Francisco and the legendary Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana in Marin County, California's oldest. The District Attorney's office has begun investigating 12 more stores in San Francisco this year.

The U.S. attorneys going after such dispensaries have justified their actions mainly by claiming the shops operate too close to parks and schools.

Pot activists have fought back, arguing the federal government should focus its energy elsewhere and not interfere with states abiding by their own laws.

"It's a total waste of resources," Stephanie Tucker, spokeswoman for the San Francisco Medical Cannabis Task Force, told The Huffington Post. "They're attacking a peaceful, regulated community and it's wasting money. Shame on them."

The Sacramento lawsuit was one of a handful filed in November by cannabis suppliers and patients, who cited the Ogden Memo as the basis for their action. U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell, who reviewed the case in the capitol, justified his dismissal by claiming the memo was not a "binding commitment," simply a statement of priorities.

Burrell's ruling will allow for prosecutors to continue to take action against dispensaries operating throughout the state.

Matthew Kumin, a lawyer representing one of the dispensaries in the Sacramento case, told SF Weekly that the dismissal of the cases without allowing a fair trial is bogus. "The government's blocking of us is irrational at this point," Kumin said to SF Weekly. "It's clear there's medical use; circumstances have changed."

Kumin pointed to federally-backed clinical trials of cannabis-based drugs such as Sativex as proof that scientists believe marijuana has a medical benefit. Despite that, he said he expects similar lawsuits in Oakland and Los Angeles to be dismissed this week.

"The judges know we're in the right," he said. "They just don't want to admit it."

Post to Twitter

29Jan/120

Vacation to Mexico? Maybe next year…

Illegal Drug Market Violence in Mexico – Infographic
Via: Rehab International

Post to Twitter