Blog - Page 31 of 54 - Arizona Medical Marijuana Law

Denver Lawyer Loses Liability Insurance over Medical-marijuana Clients

Denver Post: “In what appears to be a first-of-its-kind event nationwide, a Denver lawyer has lost her liability insurance because part of her practice involves representing medical-marijuana businesses. Ann Toney’s insurance company told her last month that it will not renew her malpractice coverage. In its terse notice, the Hanover Insurance Group explained that Toney’s practice “does not meet current underwriting guidelines because of the following risk factors: Area of practice involving medical marijuana.”

By On the Net|2012-05-10T06:53:38-07:00May 10th, 2012|Legal Issues, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

25 Colorado Medical-marijuana Dispensaries Close after Warning

Denver Post: “All 25 of the medical-marijuana stores in Colorado that received warning letters for being within 1,000 feet of schools have heeded the threat from the U.S. Attorney’s Office and closed. The letters were sent out on March 23 and gave the businesses 45 days to close down before facing potential civil and criminal action.”

By On the Net|2012-08-25T08:05:59-07:00May 10th, 2012|Colorado News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Judge Rules Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Must Have a Medical Director

Arizona Republic: “Medical-marjiuana dispensaries will have to employ a medical director at their operations, as state health officials require, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge has ruled. The non-profits could begin opening this summer. Judge Richard Gama’s May 1 decision is an important one because it could prevent abuse of medical marijuana, said Will Humble, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services.”

The following is what Will Humble said about the court’s decision in this case:

“One of the outstanding legal uncertainties regarding our implementation of AZ Medical Marijuana Act has been the Compassion First v. Brewer lawsuit that challenged our authority to require future dispensaries to have a Medical Director. We’ve always thought dispensary medical direction was a key component to making sure that future dispensaries act in the best interest of patients and prevent recreational diversion. After a judge’s ruling today, it looks like we’ll be OK.

Today a Maricopa Superior Court judge denied the Plaintiffs’ “Motion for Leave” to Amend their previous Complaint (which the court invalidated some of our dispensary selection criteria). The Compassion First were attempting to re-open the case to challenge our requirement that dispensaries have a medical director.

In his opinion (that largely tracks our argument), the judge denied their Motion, finding that the Plaintiffs failed to provide an adequate basis for declining to bring the medical director challenge in their initial complaint and that we (and the public) would be unduly prejudiced if the Court were to grant their Motion. Of course, the Compassion First plaintiffs could always appeal- but (for now) the upshot is that we can require future dispensaries to have medical direction.”

By On the Net|2012-05-09T08:15:55-07:00May 9th, 2012|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Dept Health Services, Medical Directors, Stories & Articles, Will Humble Speaks|Comments Off

Those with PTSD Seeking Legal Pot Use

Arizona Daily Star: “Arizonans who say they suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder are hoping to get the same medical options as those with glaucoma or seizures: the right to use marijuana for medical purposes. Petitions have been filed asking state Health Director Will Humble to add PTSD to the list of medical conditions that voters approved two years ago for medical marijuana. Humble will conduct a hearing later this month and likely issue a ruling in August. PTSD sufferers are not the only ones hoping to join the list of those who can be treated with marijuana. Other petitions are seeking to make the drug an option to treat migraines, depression and general anxiety disorder.”

By On the Net|2012-05-09T07:38:18-07:00May 9th, 2012|Dept Health Services, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Maricopa County Superior Court Ruling May be Last Nail in the Coffin of the Unborn Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary Industry

On April 17, 2012, Maricopa County, Arizona, Superior Court Judge Michael R. McVey signed a Judgment of Dismissal that could be the death blow to Arizona’s fledgling medical marijuana dispensary industry. The case is Michele Rene Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II, a Colorado corporation (“THC”). Although the judge’s decision has not yet been appealed and may not be appealed, the legal significance of the case cannot be ignored by anybody who is considering becoming involved in a prospective or actual Arizona medical marijuana dispensary or anybody who is a party to or may become a party to a contract that involves the growing, transporting, storing, infusing, processing, selling or dealing in any way with marijuana in Arizona.

Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II involves a very common situation. Michele Hammer and Mark Haile each loaned $250,000 to Today’s Health Care II, a Colorado corporation. Each lender and borrower signed a loan agreement that stated:

“Borrower shall use the loan proceeds for a retail medical marijuana sales and grow center.”

THC defaulted on both loans. Although the loan proceeds were to be used only in Colorado, a state where medical marijuana is legal, each lender sued in Maricopa County Superior Court to collect the amounts owed under the promissory notes signed by THC. The two cases (Hammer v. THC and Mark W. Haile v. Todays Health Care II) were consolidated. The plaintiffs and defendant filed motions for summary judgment. On April 17, 2012, the judge signed the Judgment of Dismissal in which he ruled that THC is not obligated to repay all or any part of either loan. Judge McVey stated:

“The explicitly stated purpose of these loan agreements was to finance the sale and distribution of marijuana. This was in clear violation of the laws of the United States. As such, this contract is void and unenforceable. This Court recognizes the harsh result of this ruling. Although Plaintiffs did not plead any equitable right to recovery such as unjust enrichment, or restitution, this Court considered whether such relief may be available to these Plaintiffs. Equitable relief is not available when recovery at law is forbidden because the contract is void as against public policy.”

Result: The borrower can keep the $500,000 and it has no legal obligation to repay the loans. The borrower does not get to keep all of the money, however, because it will be required to report $500,000 as taxable income on its 2012 federal income tax return. Forgiveness of a debt causes “discharge of indebtedness income” that must be reported to the IRS and taxed at the taxpayer’s marginal tax rate.

There is an equitable concept in the law called unjust enrichment. There are many cases where a court has ruled that even though the plaintiff could not prove a legal basis on which the plaintiff should be paid damages, a court of equity looking at all of the facts gave the plaintiff a judgment for money because the actions of the plaintiff caused the defendant to be unjustly enriched and it would not be fair for the defendant to keep the economic benefit bestowed on the defendant. Judge McVey wrote that he considered ruling in favor of the lenders on the basis of unjust enrichment, but that remedy is also denied when the contract involved is void as against public policy.

Judge McVey based his decision on the fact the purpose of the loan was for a purpose that is illegal under federal law. He did not examine whether the loans should be enforced because they were legal under state law. After all, collection of a loan arises from legal obligations and rights created under state law, not federal criminal law. It seems logical and lawful to me that the judge could have ruled in favor of the plaintiffs had he considered the legality of the loans under state law.

This case does not have the legal precedent of a written opinion from the Arizona Court of Appeals or the Arizona Supreme Court. Nevertheless Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II stands for a very important principle that everybody who is contemplating becoming involved with the Arizona medical marijuana industry cannot ignore, i.e.:

Unless and until an Arizona appellate court rules that contracts involving Arizona medical marijuana are enforceable under Arizona law (as opposed to unenforceable under federal law), any contract that has a purpose related to Arizona medical marijuana may be unenforceable and not worth the paper it is written on!

What Does the Case Mean to People Considering Becoming Involved in Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensaries?

Until an Arizona appellate court reverses the result in this case it means that people who enter into contracts that relate in any way to Arizona medical marijuana will have to hope the other side to the contract satisfies his/her/its obligations because it may not be possible to sue for breach of contract and get a judgment against the party who defaults. This case should cause the following people to think twice or three times before getting involved:

Landlords who lease to dispensaries. The lease may not be enforced. If a dispensary tenant defaults on the rent would a court evict the tenant or give the landlord a money judgment for damages for breach of the lease?

Investors in dispensaries. Would the investment be treated the same as a loan with no legal way to force the dispensary to repay the investment or profits?

Lenders who loan to dispensaries. This is the same facts as Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II. Why would any person or entity make a loan to a dispensary when there is a good chance a court would refuse to enforce the loan?

Medical directors of dispensaries. What if the dispensary doesn’t pay for the doctor’s services?

High paid employees or independent contractors. Are you willing to work and have the dispensary refuse to pay and dare you to sue?

The above list is not complete. If you are contemplating entering into any type of contract (oral or written) with a prospective or actual Arizona medical marijuana dispensary you are taking a risk that an Arizona court may rule that the contract is unenforceable.

You might think that the ultimate winner as a result of Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II is the Arizona medical marijuana dispensary. Perhaps, but I submit that dispensaries are actually the ultimate losers because this case stands for the proposition that it will be very difficult if not impossible for Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries to operate because prudent people and businesses will not want to contract with dispensaries until an Arizona appellate court rules that the contracts are enforceable under Arizona law.

Update: Richard Keyt and Judge McVey’s ruling are discussed in the following stories:

ABC News: “$500,000 Medical Marijuana Loan Up In Smoke” quotes “Richard Keyt, a business attorney in Phoenix who runs a medical marijuana law web site.”

Phoenix New Times reporter Ray Stern’s article called “Marijuana Dispensary Loan for $500,000 Doesn’t Need to be Paid Back, Judge Rules, Because Pot is Illegal Under Federal Law” in which he gives me credit for breaking this story.

Arizona Republic story called “Arizona Medical-pot Ruling may Reverberate.”

Fox News Chicago story called “Contracts with medical marijuana companies unenforceable, Arizona court rules.”

By Richard Keyt|2015-04-06T18:53:12-07:00May 7th, 2012|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Legal Issues, Stories & Articles|4 Comments

Feds Targeting Property, Assets in Fight Against Marijuana Dispensaries

Noozhawk: “In their stepped-up battle against local marijuana dispensaries and growing operations that supply them, federal authorities are employing a powerful weapon: asset-forfeiture laws. The U.S. Attorney’s Office this week filed legal complaints for forfeiture against the property owners of two South Coast medical marijuana storefront dispensaries and one indoor farm. They allege that the owners should have known what the buildings were used for — growing and/or selling marijuana, which the government considers illegal under both federal and California law, even if the marijuana is considered medicinal.”

The letter from the U.S. attorney to property owners said:

“Accordingly, it is not a defense to either the referenced crime or to the forfeiture of property that the dispensary is providing ‘medical marijuana.’ Even under these circumstances, an owner of real property with knowledge or reason to know of illegal marijuana distribution occurring on real property that he owns or controls may have his interest in the property forfeited to the government without compensation.”

Arizona property owners who are considering leasing to a medical marijuana dispensary take note. The federal government has not only clearly stated its intention to confiscate real property used to grow, store or sell medical marijuana, it is now actively pursing forfeiture against property owners.

By On the Net|2012-05-12T14:43:32-07:00May 6th, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Real Estate Issues, Stories & Articles|1 Comment

Vallejo Police Raid 5th Marijuana Dispensary

Times-Herald: “The mid-afternoon raid by police, aided by Solano County Narcotics Enforcement, was at Natures Love in the 300 block of Tennessee Street.”

By On the Net|2019-06-14T08:25:48-07:00May 6th, 2012|California News, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Feds, Santa Barbara Police Serve More Warrants Related to Marijuana Operations

Noozhawk: “Multi-agency operation targets illegal storefront dispensaries and grow sites, with three asset-forfeiture lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court. Federal authorities and Santa Barbara police served search warrants at a medical marijuana dispensary and a grow house this week, and sent warning letters to all pot storefronts in the county that are still in business, threatening federal enforcement action if they don’t close down, according to the Santa Barbara Police Department. . . . As part of the enforcement effort, three asset-forfeiture lawsuits were filed this week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles alleging that the owners ‘either knowingly allowed commercial marijuana stores to operate or knowingly allowed a significant indoor marijuana farm to function,’ according to the statement from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the asset-forfeiture lawsuits were filed against the Miramar Collective in Summerland, Pacific Coast Collective and the indoor marijuana farm connected to Kessler.”

Note to Property Owners Considering Leasing to Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

The story above is a clear warning to landlords and property owners who allow or who are considering allowing medical marijuana dispensaries to operate on their real property. The federal government may seize the real estate and sue in federal court to take the land and its value from the owner.

The legal significance of the federal government now going after property owners extends beyond the loss of the property to the owners. This new government action should also have the very much intended consequence of shutting down medical marijuana dispensaries in every state that has legalized them.

By On the Net|2012-05-12T14:43:44-07:00May 5th, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Real Estate Issues, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

DEA Raids Glendora Marijuana Dispensary

Glendora Patch: “Drug Enforcement Administration agents raided a medical marijuana dispensary in Glendora Friday morning, arresting two individuals and effectively shutting down the business, according to Glendora Police. The raid occurred at Glendora Healing Clinic“

The raid occurred two weeks after a story about the dispensary in the Glendora Patch entitled “Crackdown on Local Marijuana Affected By Hazy Laws.” This is an example of why I urge dispensaries to keep a low profile and avoid media attention.

By On the Net|2012-05-12T14:43:56-07:00May 5th, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks|Comments Off

Garden Grove, CA Seeks Feds’ Help to Oust Pot Clinics

Orange County Register: “Police officials have asked federal authorities who raided medical marijuana dispensaries in Costa Mesa earlier this year to do the same in this town. Police Chief Kevin Raney told the City Council Tuesday night his department has been in touch with federal agents and ‘they will be coming to Garden Grove in the future’.”

By On the Net|2012-05-05T06:47:19-07:00May 5th, 2012|California News|Comments Off

Feds Closing all Marijuana Dispensaries in Santa Barbara County, California

Reuters: “‘All known marijuana stores in Santa Barbara County are now the subject of federal enforcement actions,’ a statement from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles said. . .. One dispensary was hit with an asset forfeiture notice for operating as a not-for-profit business even though it lacks non-profit status for tax purposes, officials said. A warehouse run as an indoor cultivation center was singled out for using substandard and unpermitted electrical equipment.” The story also says that the feds are seeking forfeitures of assets in three situations where property was used in marijuana operations.

By On the Net|2012-05-12T14:44:06-07:00May 4th, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks|Comments Off

Santa Barbara Pot Dispensary Closed After Federal Raid

Noozhawk: “Federal agents served a search warrant Wednesday at a marijuana dispensary in Santa Barbara, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. The raid was conducted at the Pacific Coast Collective, 331 N. Milpas Street, said Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office. No arrests were made, Mrozek said.”

By On the Net|2012-05-12T14:44:13-07:00May 4th, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off

Latest Federal Enforcement Actions Against Marijuana Operations Target Illegal Storefronts and Grows in Santa Barbara County

The following is the text of a May 3, 2012, press release by the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California:

In the latest series of actions against the commercial marijuana industry in California, federal authorities this week filed three asset forfeiture lawsuits against properties housing marijuana operations in Santa Barbara County, executed search warrants at four locations, and have sent warning letters to people associated with 10 other illegal marijuana stores in the county.

Three civil asset forfeiture complaints were filed yesterday afternoon in United States District Court in Los Angeles against properties in Santa Barbara and Summerland where marijuana is being grown or marijuana stores are currently operating. Prosecutors yesterday also sent letters to marijuana store operators and the owners of buildings where 10 marijuana stores currently operate in Goleta, Summerland and Santa Barbara.

The three forfeiture lawsuits filed this week allege that the owners either knowingly allowed commercial marijuana stores to operate or knowingly allowed a significant indoor marijuana farm to function. The buildings named in the forfeiture lawsuits house:

Miramar Collective on Ortega Hill Road in Summerland, which local authorities estimate was generating annual profits of approximately $840,000 in 2009, and whose owner is currently being prosecuted by the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office on state narcotics charges;

Pacific Coast Collective on North Milpas in Santa Barbara, whose operator is currently being prosecuted in state court and, even though called “not for profit,” the business is incorporated and does not have non-profit status for tax purposes (a federal search warrant was executed yesterday at this location and at the residence of its suspected operator); and

an indoor marijuana farm on East Haley in Santa Barbara, where substandard and unpermitted electrical equipment has been used (federal and local authorities executed a federal search warrant today at this property and at the residence of its operator).

In conjunction with the filing of the asset forfeiture complaints, letters were mailed out yesterday to the property owners and operators of 10 additional marijuana stores that are either currently operating or were recently closed – six in Santa Barbara, three in Goleta and one in Summerland.

All known marijuana stores in Santa Barbara County are now the subject of federal enforcement actions.

This week’s enforcement actions in Santa Barbara County follow similar actions in recent months across the seven-county Central District of California. Starting in October 2011, prosecutors began filing asset forfeiture lawsuits and sending letters to marijuana operations in selected areas in Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County and eastern Los Angeles County (see, for example: http://www.justice.gov/usao/cac/Pressroom/2012/014.html). Seven asset forfeiture complaints – four of which are still pending in United States District Court in Los Angeles – were filed as part of those actions that targeted more than 150 marijuana stores and grows. The majority of those stores are now closed, are the subject of eviction proceedings by landlords, or have been the subject of additional federal enforcement actions.

In October 2011, the four United States Attorneys in California announced coordinated enforcement actions targeting illegal marijuana cultivation and trafficking (see: http://www.justice.gov/usao/cac/Pressroom/2011/144a.html).

The United States Attorney’s Office is working in conjunction with the Drug Enforcement Administration and IRS – Criminal Investigation. The Santa Barbara Police Department assisted federal authorities this week during the execution of federal search warrants.

Release No. 12-056

Emphasis added.

By On the Net|2017-02-12T07:38:05-07:00May 3rd, 2012|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Real Estate Issues, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

California Appeals Court Rules It is Unlawful for Dispensaries to Sell Medical Marijuana

JDSupra: “The Court of Appeal recently issued an opinion that clarifies the operational parameters of medical marijuana collectives, cooperatives, and dispensaries, confirms that cities may pursue civil injunction relief under Health and Safety Code section 11570 and Civil Code section 3479, and confirms that cities may pursue remedies under the Unfair Competition Law to enjoin unlawfully operating medical marijuana dispensaries. (The People v. Joseph, 2012 WL 1004770, Cal.App. 2 Dist., March 26, 2012). . . . The court explains that Health and Safety Code section 11362.775 ‘protects group activity ‘to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes,’’ but ‘does not cover dispensing or selling marijuana‘.”

The California medical marijuana dispensary in this case is Organica, Inc., owned by Jeffrey K. Joseph.

By On the Net|2012-05-01T07:06:15-07:00May 1st, 2012|California News, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off

Into the mind of … Will Humble

The Arizona Republic interviewed Will Humble, the Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services.

By On the Net|2012-04-30T06:24:34-07:00April 30th, 2012|Stories & Articles, Will Humble Speaks|Comments Off

Feds under Obama Are Tougher on Medical Marijuana

Fox News: “President Obama pledged during his 2008 campaign to take a hands-off approach to medical marijuana, but four years later raids and other tactics have forced as many as 200 medical-marijuana growers and distributors to cease operations, resulting in sharp criticism from likely voters and fellow Democrats. . . . Obama said the government was not going to ‘prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana,’ but that he never committed to giving ‘carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana’.”

By On the Net|2012-04-28T08:22:39-07:00April 28th, 2012|Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

11 Arrested In Pot, Weapons Bust At East Oakland Warehouse

CBS San Francisco: “Eleven people were arrested and thousands of marijuana plants were seized along with several weapons in a massive drug raid Wednesday night at a warehouse in East Oakland, Oakland Police said. Investigators found some 2,500 pot plants, 50 pounds of dried processed marijuana, cash and a variety of weapons in what Asst. Police Chief Anthony Toribio described as a marijuana factory.”

See “11 arrested in raid on Oakland pot warehouse.”

By On the Net|2012-04-27T06:54:40-07:00April 27th, 2012|California News, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

ADHS Director Humble’s 4/25/12 Interview on KJZZ Radio 91.5 FM About Adding Conditions

In this radio interview on April 25, 2012, with Steve Goldstein of KJZZ 91.5 FM radio in Phoenix, Arizona, the Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services discusses ADHS’ process for adding new conditions for which an Arizona doctor may recommend medical marijuana to licensed patients. The new conditions under consideration are: (1) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; (2) Generalized Anxiety Disorder; (3) Migraines; and (4) Depression. The public may give input on these four conditions at a hearing to be held:

May 25, 2012 from 1:00 – 4:00 p.m.
State Laboratory Conference Room
250 N. 17th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85007

By On the Net|2019-06-14T08:25:48-07:00April 26th, 2012|Stories & Articles, Will Humble Speaks|Comments Off

Today April 25, 2012 is Bank Day for Prospective Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

The last day to file an application for a Dispensary Registration Certificate for an Arizona medical marijuana dispensary is May 25, 2012, at 5:00 p.m. Today is what I am calling “Bank Day,” the last day on which the entity applying for the dispensary registration certificate or a principal officer of the entity may deposit $150,000 in a bank or financial institution. The Rules and the Arizona Department of Health Services say:

“The documentation must be dated within 30 days before submitting the application and demonstrate that the entity applying for the dispensary registration certificate or a principal officer of the entity has at least $150,000 under their control and has had control of the monies for at least 30 days before submitting the application.”

Today, April 25, 2012, is 30 days before May 25, 2012.

By On the Net|2012-04-25T13:57:38-07:00April 25th, 2012|Legal Issues, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Expansion of Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Program Debated

Arizona Republic: “Four new medical conditions could eventually qualify under Arizona’s medical-marijuana program. State health officials are considering whether to add depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and migraines as “debilitating conditions,” which would allow people to legally use medical pot. Arizona would become the only state in the nation to allow medical marijuana for anxiety and depression, said Will Humble, director of the state Department of Health Services”

By On the Net|2012-04-24T19:30:52-07:00April 24th, 2012|Dept Health Services, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Vallejo Marijuana Tax Brings in Less than Value of Dispensary Raid Seizure

Times-Herald: “Vallejo police seized more than $135,000 worth of cannabis products from the Life Enhancement Services (L.E.S.) medical marijuana dispensary on Benicia Road on Friday. That same date, April 20, was the city’s collection deadline for dispensaries citywide to remit March’s payment of a new 10 percent sales tax. Eight dispensaries paid their March taxes by the due date, totaling $44,230

By On the Net|2019-06-14T08:25:48-07:00April 24th, 2012|California News, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off

Hash, Kief, Tinctures and Other Concentrates of Marijuana Might Not be Legal Under Medical-Marijuana Law

Phoenix New Times: “Phoenix police say they intend to submit charges on some of the people involved [in the raid of the Arizona Cannabis Society], including charges related to the production of concentrated marijuana. That brings up the thorny question of whether such concentrates are legal under Arizona’s 2010 Medical Marijuana Act. The answer will become more important in a few months, with the opening of medical-pot dispensaries that plan on selling these type of products.”

By On the Net|2012-04-28T08:26:20-07:00April 23rd, 2012|Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Arizona Could Be First To OK Marijuana For Depression, Anxiety

Modern Times Magazine: “Arizona would become the first state in the U.S. to approve marijuana use for depression and anxiety if petitions requesting the addition of the conditions are approved later this summer, according to Will Humble, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services. . . . Humble posted Friday afternoon that a public hearing would be begin at 1 p.m., May 25, in the State Lab, 250 N. 17th Avenue, Phoenix. The public hearing is the next stage for the four petitions requesting that four conditions be added the list of debilitating conditions that were passed by voters by way of Prop. 203 in Nov. 2010.”

By On the Net|2012-04-22T10:03:17-07:00April 22nd, 2012|Stories & Articles|Comments Off

ADHS Considering Adding 4 New Conditions for Medical Marijuana

On April 20, 2012, Will Humble, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, wrote on his blog:

“The voter approved language in the AZ Medical Marijuana Act directs us to periodically accept and evaluate petitions to add new debilitating medical conditions. We’ve made it through the first phase of considering whether to add 4 new debilitating conditions… 1) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; 2) Generalized Anxiety Disorder; 3) Migraines; and 4) Depression. You’ll be able to give us your thoughts about these four conditions at a public hearing next month (May 25^th from 1 – 4 p.m. at our State Lab). You can read the information we already have about these four starting next week.

If we decide to add PTSD or any other debilitating conditions, we want to make sure we’re on solid medical ground. I’m heading down to a conference in Tucson next weekend where physicians can get Continuing Medical Education credits for learning about medical cannabis.”

By On the Net|2019-06-14T08:25:48-07:00April 21st, 2012|Stories & Articles, Will Humble Speaks|Comments Off

Lynching Charlie Lynch, a Medical Marijuana Martyr

Reason.tv: “Should Charlie Lynch spend the rest of his life in jail, or even a single day, for operating a legal medical marijuana dispensary? The sentencing of Morro Bay, California medical marijuana dispensary owner Charles Lynch has been delayed yet again, this time until June 11. According to Reason.tv producer Ted Balaker, who has followed the Lynch saga from its start, the mood in the courtroom was guardedly optimistic, especially as Judge George H. Wu openly expressed his sympathy for Lynch. “To be blunt, if I could find a way out, I would,” said Wu, referring to mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines that insist Lynch get at least five years in prison. However, Wu summarily dismissed the notion of disregarding the guidelines, claiming it would simply be a “monumental waste of time” because such a decision would be overruled by a higher court. Reason.tv will post a video of today’s proceedings soon. In the meantime, you can follow the case at Lynch’s website, online here.”

By On the Net|2012-04-21T07:06:51-07:00April 21st, 2012|Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles, Video|Comments Off

Arizona Cannabis Society Raided by Phoenix Police

Phoenix New Times: “Arizona Cannabis Society, a medical-marijuana caregiver collective featured prominently in a March New Times blog post, was raided today by Phoenix police. Founder Bill Hayes is still being detained, cops say. . . . After a month and a half of undercover work, police served search warrants on three locations related to AZCS. At one location, nearly 900 pot plants were found — yet not a single person involved was a qualified caregiver, [Phoenix Police Sergeant Trent] Crump says. . . . Crump says, evidence turned up that the club was not operating as a non-profit, as Arizona law requires of a medical-marijuana dispensary. . . . In February, Hayes filed a lawsuit against Arizona in federal court in the hopes of changing part of the 2010 medical-pot law. The law allows qualified patients and caregivers to grow pot — but not if they live within 25 miles of an open dispensary. Hayes wants to patients to be allowed to grow pot regardless of nearby dispensaries. . . . Crump says police intend to submit criminal charges against one or more people connected to the Arizona Cannabis Society. . . . See the slideshow [Phoenix New Times] published last month about the AZCS by clicking here.”

By On the Net|2017-02-12T07:38:05-07:00April 18th, 2012|Cannabis Clubs, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Prospective Pot Dispensary Seeks Relief on Glendale Ordinance

Arizona Republic: “A [prospective] medical marijuana dispensary [Advanced Pain Solutions ] is seeking Glendale’s OK to locate closer to a school and a residential zone than allowed under city ordinance. . . . Under the city’s ordinance, dispensaries must be 500 feet from a residential zone and 1,320 feet or quarter of a mile from a school. Toris said the applicant is seeking variances, allowing it to be 425 feet from a residential zone and 1,263 feet from a school, North Pointe Preparatory, 10215 N. 43rd Ave.”

By On the Net|2012-08-18T09:36:50-07:00April 16th, 2012|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off

Recent Comments from Will Humble

Arizona Republic: “He said the ‘gold rush’ for medical-marijuana dispensary licenses died down in the past year after litigation tied the program up. ‘I just don’t sense the same land-rush type of attitude that we had a year ago,’ Humble said. ‘I don’t think we’ll be overwhelmed with applications’.”

Phoenix Business Journal: “’Had we gone forward in 2011 with the dispensary applications, I think we would have had hundreds of applications.’ . . . he expects that the most that will be awarded is 110 dispensary licenses.”

By On the Net|2015-04-18T20:00:39-07:00April 12th, 2012|Stories & Articles, Will Humble Speaks|Comments Off

Chino Valley Mulls Medical Marijuana Ordinance

Chino Valley Review: “While currently no applications for medical marijuana dispensaries or cultivation centers are pending for Chino Valley, the town Planning and Zoning Commission is attempting to stay ahead of the curve by presenting to the town council recommendations for local regulation of these type of businesses.”

By On the Net|2017-02-12T07:38:05-07:00April 12th, 2012|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off

ADHS’ Application for a Medical Marijuana Dispensary License

Here are the important dates for people who want to submit an application to the Arizona Department of Health Services to obtain an Arizona medical marijuana Dispensary Registration Certificate (the first hurdle to get a dispensary license)

May 14, 2012 – First day to submit applications for a Dispensary Registration Certificate. ADHS will refuse any applications submitted before this date.

May 25, 2012, 5:00 pm – No applications for a Dispensary Registration Certificate will be accepted after this date and time.

June 25, 2012 – ADHS finishes reviewing all applications.

July 16, 2012 – Last day for applicants who submitted defective applications to correct all defects.

August 7, 2012 – ADHS announces winners applicants awarded Dispensary Registration Certificates.

The good news is that the application is very short and simple. If your would be dispensary has done all of its homework (per my instructions in “Checklist for Opening an Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary“) and is ready to actually prepare and file the application for a DRC, you will find it to be a piece of cake.

Here are the DRC application documents that every prospective Arizona medical marijuana dispensary must use:

1. Dispensary Registration Certificate Application Checklist: Make sure that your applicant has satisfied all of the items set forth in this document.

2. Dispensary Registration Certificate Application Instructions: Follow these instructions when completing the DRC Application.

3. Dispensary Registration Certificate Application: The actual application. Make sure to take a duplicate to the Arizona Department of Health Services when you file the original and ask ADHS to stamp its received stamp on the duplicate. Keep the stamped duplicate in the applicant’s file.

See the ADHS Dispensary Registration Certificate Process flow chart.

Two items to note:

1. When you submit your DRC Application, you must include a copy of the applicant’s Bylaws drafted to comply with the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act and the final ADHS rules. To learn more about this important document read “Bylaws – We Don’t Need No Stinking Bylaws or Do We?” and “Bylaws for Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensaries.”

2. The Application must contain the name of the applicant’s Medical Director. Before you submit the name of a Medical Director you should have a signed contract between the Medical Director and applicant. The application could be put at risk if the Medical Director were to notify ADHS that he/she ceased to be the Medical Director. Do not rely on an oral commitment to be a Medical Director. Read “Clauses to Include in a Contract between a Medical Director & a Dispensary” and ““Why Every Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary Must Hire a Primary & an Alternate Medical Director.”

By On the Net|2012-05-13T16:13:35-07:00April 11th, 2012|Stories & Articles|Comments Off

Previous 303132 Next