Call or email an Arizona attorney: 480-664-7478|rk@keytlaw.com

Medical Marijuana Dispensaries are Dead in the United States

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer killed Arizona’s medical marijuana dispensaries before the dispensaries even got to the starting gate.  The six lawsuits involving Arizona’s medical marijuana dispensary industry and cannabis clubs are slowly proceeding in court.  What happens in each of the lawsuits is not as important as the elephant in the medical marijuana room, which is that the United States has now made it clear even to the blind who will not see that the U.S. will prosecute people involved in selling medical marijuana any where in the U.S., including in states that have legalized it.  Here is the evidence:

The U.S. Justice Department has said in no uncertain terms that it will do the following in all fifty states:

  1. Prosecute people involved in selling medical marijuana to medical marijuana patients or caregivers.
  2. Prosecute people involved in growing medical marijuana for the purpose of selling to medical marijuana patients and caregivers.
  3. Prosecute landlords who lease real property to people or businesses that grow or sell marijuana on the premises.
  4. Prosecute lenders who loan money to people or businesses that grow medical marijuana for distribution or that sell  marijuana to medical marijuana patients or caregivers.

It does not matter if the parties who want to establish medical marijuana dispensaries and cannabis clubs are successful in all six of the Arizona lawsuits.  Even if the six lawsuits authorize medical marijuana dispensaries and cannabis clubs in Arizona, the federal government will prosecute anyone involved in growing and selling marijuana – medical or recreational.

People involved  in the cannabis club industry should also be very afraid.  The only people who have any comfort from the U.S. Justice Department’s current medical marijuana policies are state approved medical marijuana patients and caregivers who do not sell marijuana.  Cannabis clubs do not fall in that category.  It is clear to me that the U.S. Justice Department’s policy is to prosecute everybody involved in growing, selling and distributing marijuana except patients and caregivers.

By |2015-04-06T18:52:31-07:00October 11th, 2011|Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|2 Comments
Read More

Medical Marijuana: Feds Flex Their Muscles

NBC LA:  “Once again, the Barack Obama administration has taken a stance on medical marijuana. Federal prosecutors have written medical marijuana dispensaries throughout California that they will prosecute them for violating federal drug laws that prevent cultivation, possession and sales of marijuana unless they shut down their facilities.”

By |2012-05-12T14:42:03-07:00October 11th, 2011|California News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Medical Marijuana: Feds Flex Their Muscles
Read More

Cow Palace Hosts First Ever Medical Marijuana Job Fair

CBS San Francisco:  “Even though the federal government threatened a crack down on California’s medical marijuana clubs this week, The Cow Palace is brazenly hosting a Cannabis Expo that includes a job fair just south of San Francisco. Medical marijuana growers and sellers gathered this weekend with no sign of the feds in sight at the West Coast Cannabis Expo.”

By |2011-10-11T06:56:10-07:00October 11th, 2011|California News, Stories & Articles|1 Comment
Read More

New York Times: Federal Crackdown on Medical Pot Sales Reflects a Shift in Policy

New York Times:  “U.S. Attorneys in California Set Crackdown on Marijuana – Federal officials on Friday warned dozens of marijuana dispensaries throughout California to shut down or face civil and criminal action as part of a major crackdown on the state’s growing medical marijuana industry. The four United States attorneys in California said that they would move against landlords who rent space to the storefront operators of medical marijuana dispensaries, whom prosecutors suspect of using the law to cover large-scale for-profit drug sales. . .. But federal prosecutors said that in California, many people had simply used the law as a cover for large-scale drug operations, with tens of millions of dollars’ worth of marijuana being sent across state lines from here. Officials said they would also concentrate on properties used to grow marijuana, particularly in the agriculturally rich central part of the state.”

Watch a video clip of the U.S. Attorneys’ news conference on October 7, 2011.

Los Angeles Times:  “California’s U.S. attorneys say they are going after for-profit marijuana sellers. The Obama administration’s crackdown on California’s highly profitable medical marijuana industry represents a dramatic departure from the low-key approach it has long pursued.  California’s four U.S. attorneys said Friday that they are taking aim at large-scale growers and dispensary owners who are raking in millions of dollars while falsely claiming that their medical marijuana operations comply with state law, which does not allow for-profit sales.”

“. . . The step comes as the Obama administration has been steadily ratcheting up enforcement efforts. Last month, a federal firearms official sent a letter to gun dealers warning them against selling to medical marijuana users. The last bank in Colorado willing to handle money from dispensaries closed those accounts last week, concerned about federal prosecution. And the Internal Revenue Service has begun to order some dispensaries to pay millions of dollars in back taxes and penalties, ruling that they can’t deduct expenses because their business is illegal.”

By |2019-06-14T08:25:42-07:00October 8th, 2011|Colorado News, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on New York Times: Federal Crackdown on Medical Pot Sales Reflects a Shift in Policy
Read More

Feds Announce another Nail in Medical Marijuana Dispensaries’ Coffin – RIP

The end of the medical marijuana industry in the 16 states that have legalized medical marijuana is at hand.  Here are several articles that discuss the announcement by the four U.S. Attorneys for California that the United States will pursue forfeiture law suits against real estate owners whose property is used by medical marijuana dispensaries.

  • Los Angeles Times:  “Feds cracking down on California medical marijuana dispensaries – Federal prosecutors in California are threatening to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries throughout the state, sending letters to warn landlords to stop sales of the drug within 45 days or face the possibility that their property will be seized and they will be sent to prison.   The stepped-up enforcement appears to be a major escalation in the Obama administration’s bid to rein in the explosive spread of medical marijuana outlets that was accelerated by the announcement that federal prosecutors would not target people using medical marijuana in states that allow it.”
  • ABC News:  “Justice Dept. Targets Marijuana Distributors in Calif. – The Justice Department announced today it is cracking down on the illegal distribution of marijuana in four federal districts in California, which has had a growing cannabis industry since legalizing medicinal marijuana in 1996.  The action places into question marijuana-related activities in 15 other states and the District of Columbia, which have legalized medicinal marijuana in some form.”
  • USA Today:  “Feds to outline plans today for shutting down Calif. pot shops  – The four U.S. attorneys in California, the first state to pass a law legalizing marijuana use for patients with doctors’ recommendations, have scheduled a joint news conference today to ‘outline actions targeting the sale, distribution and cultivation of marijuana.'”
  • Sign On San Diego:  “Feds seek closure of medical marijuana dispensaries – “‘Apparently the federal government would rather destroy an industry that’s employing tens of thousands of people and creating hundreds of millions of dollars in legal tax revenues to save face on a bankrupt policy that the American people don’t even support — namely denying the medical value of marijuana,” Cal NORML Director Dale Gieringer said.”
  • Phoenix New Times:  “Feds Target Property Owners of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in California – If there’s no push-back from the states that have legalized weed for qualified patients, including Arizona, it looks like this could be the end of the road for what has been a thriving, though not altogether legal, medical marijuana industry.  Oh, and Jan Brewer will be proved right.”
By |2012-05-12T14:42:29-07:00October 7th, 2011|Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Feds Announce another Nail in Medical Marijuana Dispensaries’ Coffin – RIP
Read More

James Chaney, Owner of Tempe Pot Club Raided by DEA, Also Suspected of Possessing Meth

Phoenix New Times:  “The owner of a Tempe medical marijuana club raided by the DEA last week was already being sought by cops for possession of methamphetamine, records show.  James Chaney, 37, was arrested along with co-worker Rachel Beeder, 25, on September 29 during the morning raid of the Arizona Go Green Compassion Club at 426 East Southern Avenue. . . . Allan Sobol, the medical pot marketer who opened a compassion club in June, says he agrees with the DEA’s decision.”

By |2011-10-05T07:01:33-07:00October 5th, 2011|Cannabis Clubs, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on James Chaney, Owner of Tempe Pot Club Raided by DEA, Also Suspected of Possessing Meth
Read More

Protecting Prop 203 – With Success Comes Danger

Nearly a year after being approved by voters, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act has proven popular with patients, yet much of the Act remains on rocky legal ground.

Six active lawsuits confirm early predictions that such a significant social policy change would engender substantial court action.  What wasn’t known was how patients, caregivers and the business community serving these individuals would respond when the State once again attempted to scuttle the will of the voters.

In January of this year Attorney General Tom Horne offered anti-Prop 203 leader Carolyn Short a gift: he could disembowel significant portions of the Act by pitting Arizona’s new law against the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and last but not least, the Controlled Substance Act of 1970, Nixon’s reaction to the social unrest being fomented by the era’s youth – and still the underpinning of Federal law.  Once Governor Jan Brewer finally browbeat Arizona Department of Health Services Director Will Humble into being the State’s Plaintiff, Horne petitioned the federal court for a “Declaratory Judgement” stating that the Act did or did not conflict with federal statutue – which of course it does, as it has in every state with a medical marijuana law.

Horne had to know his abuse of the judicial system wouldn’t yield a favorable ruling, but he also knew this: the suit would create confusion and doubt about the Act, weakening public support for a ballot initiative that won by only the slimmest of margins.  This would buy opponents time to create a “sky is falling” narrative, dutifully reported by an obedient press: that “medical” marijuana is a sham, a cover for what in actuality is a recreational users program; that dispensaries would attract crime and blight to neighborhoods; that cartels would move in under the guise of being legal dispensaries; and, that medicating patients would cause trouble in the workplace, etc, etc ad nauseum.

This storyline failed during the 2010 election cycle, but could now have the effect sought by opponents.  Why? Because due to the Act’s passage and the government’s failure to fully stop its implementation, there are patients legally using marijuana for medicinal purposes,  patients and caregivers cultivating crops, and compassion clubs and collectives opening up across the State to provide patients with access to the medicine they voted for – all activities in which just a few wrong steps, misjudgements, foolish or criminal acts might be enough to turn the tide of public opinion towards the opponent’s desired goal – repeal of the Act.

Unsurprisingly, some regretable incidents have occurred.  The press, rarely missing an opportunity to cast MMJ in a bad light, reports each incident with just enough objectivity to mask its underlying Reefer Madness bias, confirming the worst fears of opponents while stirring doubt among casual supporters of Prop 203 last November.

So,we have a hostile government (with the Legisature reconvening in January), media outlets continually sensationalizing the subject, and well-connected private citizens whose overriding life goal is re-criminalizing personal behaviors we’ve just determined should be legal.

What is IN our favor is significant, if utilized with direction and purpose.  Raw assets include 13,000+ patients and caregivers, whose numbers grow daily; responsible business owners whose fledgling enterprises are starting to bear fruit; a nationwide network of supporting advocates who have been down this same rough road; and, the knowledge that a majority of Arizonans from across the political spectrum support the right of patients to have this medicine if they so choose.

Next: An actionable plan for advocates.

[Note] Although many know me as an insurance agent providing coverage for compassion clubs and grows, in a former life I worked ten years for an elected official. My political experience also includes advising local and state candidates and non-profit lobbying.  From these experiences I learned that even underdogs can win – but only if they are in the game.

Doug Banfelder is a commercial insurance specialist.  Reach him at 480-315-9051, [email protected], or at www.PremierDispensaryInsurance.com

By |2011-10-05T06:49:24-07:00October 2nd, 2011|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Stories & Articles|1 Comment
Read More

Maricopa County Attorney Looks at DEA’s Raid of Cannabis Club & Finds 1 + 1 = 3

After the DEA raided the AZ Green Go’s cannabis club and arrested two of its owners Bill Montgomery, the Maricopa County Attorney, issued this statement on September 30, 2011:

“The current action by the Drug Enforcement Agency underscores the importance of having the U.S. District Court determine whether the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act can operate consistent with federal law. My concern about the potential liability for County employees continues.”

Mr. Montgomery’s statement causes concern over his ability to do the medical marijuana math.  He concludes that the arrest of somebody for allegedly selling marijuana in violation of Arizona’s medical marijuana law means that state workers not selling  marijuana could also be arrested by the DEA.  Duh!

By |2011-10-01T06:26:45-07:00October 1st, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Maricopa County Attorney Looks at DEA’s Raid of Cannabis Club & Finds 1 + 1 = 3
Read More

DEA Raids Medical Marijuana Club in Tempe, Accuses Owners of Running Illegal Dispensary

Phoenix New Times:  “the DEA has gone after a . . . medical marijuana club in Tempe.  Agents began showing up at the AZ Go Green Co-Op at 426 East Southern Avenue around 8 a.m., according to a news report by Channel 10 (KSAZ-TV). The owners’ of the club, says the report, are Rachael Beeder and James Chaney.  A doctor at the clinic, James Eisenberg, left a note on the door saying he’ll be out till October 1st.”

See “Jailed Medical Marijuana Clinic Worker Speaks Out.”  “FOX 10’s cameras were the only ones there when the DEA raided a medical marijuana clinic in Tempe. In another exclusive, the woman that ran the Arizona Go Green Compassion Club talks to us from behind bars.”

For more about whether an Arizona cannabis club is legal under Arizona’s medical marijuana laws see “Are Arizona Cannabis Clubs Legal Under Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Laws?“

By |2019-06-14T08:25:41-07:00September 30th, 2011|Cannabis Clubs, Federal Dispensary Attacks, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles, Video|Comments Off on DEA Raids Medical Marijuana Club in Tempe, Accuses Owners of Running Illegal Dispensary
Read More

Rhode Island Governor Scraps Medical Marijuana Plan

Reuters:  “State-run medical marijuana dispensaries will not be coming to Rhode Island after Governor Lincoln Chafee scrapped the plan for fear it was illegal under federal law.  Chafee, who had earlier vowed support for the measure, said he decided the state’s planned dispensaries could violate superseding federal law and become a target of federal law enforcement efforts.”

This is probably the tactic Arizona Governor Jan Brewer will take to prevent medical marijuana dispensaries in Arizona after her Arizona vs. United States lawsuit gets dismissed by the federal court.

By |2012-05-12T14:43:12-07:00September 30th, 2011|Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Rhode Island Governor Scraps Medical Marijuana Plan
Read More

Cottonwood Woman Claims She was Fired over Medical Marijuana

Verde Independent:  Esther Shapiro a “registered nurse, formerly employed by a private Cottonwood hospice, has filed a letter of demand over her alleged firing after she disclosed she was a card-carrying medical marijuana patient. Her attorney believes the matter could be the first-ever Arizona case challenging discrimination against a card member”

By |2017-02-12T07:38:02-07:00September 30th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Cottonwood Woman Claims She was Fired over Medical Marijuana
Read More

Medical Marijuana and Guns Don’t Mix, Warns ATF in Letter; Federal Law Prohibits Pot Users From Owning or Buying Firearms

Phoenix New Times:  “The U.S. Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Bureau, the same agency that lets drug cartel members buy guns, is warning firearms dealers not to sell to medical marijuana users.  In an open letter to the nation’s licensed firearms sellers, the ATF reminds dealers that federal law prohibits any user of a controlled substance from possessing or buying guns.  A standard form filled out by gun buyers asks if the buyer is a ‘user of’ or ‘addicted’ to any controlled substance — checking ‘yes’ effectively cancels the sale.”

By |2015-04-06T18:52:31-07:00September 29th, 2011|Federal Dispensary Attacks, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Medical Marijuana and Guns Don’t Mix, Warns ATF in Letter; Federal Law Prohibits Pot Users From Owning or Buying Firearms
Read More

Scottsdale Revisiting Its Medical Marijuana Rules

Arizona Republic:  “Scottsdale is updating its rules on medical marijuana despite a halt of the statewide regulatory process.  As Arizona continues to grapple with the legality of its voter-approved law, Scottsdale has suggested changes to its ordinance governing marijuana dispensaries and other uses, including smaller ‘caregiver cultivation’ operations.”

By |2012-08-18T10:09:34-07:00September 20th, 2011|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off on Scottsdale Revisiting Its Medical Marijuana Rules
Read More

Marijuana Club’s Attorney Says Move to Shut Them Down Flouts Will of Arizona Voters

East Valley Tribune: The state cannot try to shut down medical marijuana clubs because Gov. Jan Brewer is ignoring the will of voters, an attorney for one of the clubs is arguing.  Michael Walz said he is not conceding that the clubs, where dues-paying members can get free marijuana, are operating outside the scope of the medical marijuana law approved by voters last year. Walz and lawyers representing other clubs believe their operations fit within an exception.”

By |2011-09-15T08:16:36-07:00September 15th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Marijuana Club’s Attorney Says Move to Shut Them Down Flouts Will of Arizona Voters
Read More

New Data Shows Arizona Medical Marijuana Thriving

Cheeba:  “The Arizona medical marijuana field is booming. On August 29th – after an unusual month-long wait – the Arizona Department of Health Services released new statistics on medical marijuana applications. The department had been releasing reports bi-weekly or earlier since April 20th, but has now decided to make reports available monthly.

By |2017-10-07T09:54:51-07:00September 8th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on New Data Shows Arizona Medical Marijuana Thriving
Read More

The ACLU and the DOJ Form a Medical Marijuana Alliance

Reason.com:  “The American Civil Liberties Union has strongly criticized the Justice Department’s mixed signals on medical marijuana, which some governors have cited in blocking plans to license and regulate dispensaries. But the ACLU and the Justice Department see eye to eye on the subject of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s lawsuit asking a federal judge to decide whether her state’s medical marijuana law is pre-empted by the Controlled Substances Act.”

By |2011-09-08T07:54:58-07:00September 8th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on The ACLU and the DOJ Form a Medical Marijuana Alliance
Read More

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio Says Medical Marijuana Patients Arrested with Pot Will Not Get Their Pot Back After They are Released

ABC15.com:  “If you’re a card-carrying marijuana user and arrested by Maricopa County deputies for any criminal violation, Sheriff Joe Arpaio has a message: you won’t be getting your product back after jail release.”

By |2017-02-12T07:38:02-07:00September 1st, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio Says Medical Marijuana Patients Arrested with Pot Will Not Get Their Pot Back After They are Released
Read More

Arizona Medical Marijuana Law Doesn’t Ask State Workers to do Anything Illegal, Lawyers Say; “Bad Faith” Prosecution by Feds Deemed Unlikely

Phoenix New Times:  “The Arizona U.S. Attorney isn’t likely to launch a ‘bad faith’ prosecution against state workers administering the new medical pot law, says a group opposing Governor Jan Brewer’s federal lawsuit on the issue.  Besides, say lawyers for the group of defendants, those state workers wouldn’t be violating federal law, anyway.”

The defendants reply in support of its motion to dismiss in Arizona vs. United States is below.

Pot Lawsuit Reply Defs

By |2011-09-01T07:21:58-07:00August 29th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Medical Marijuana Law Doesn’t Ask State Workers to do Anything Illegal, Lawyers Say; “Bad Faith” Prosecution by Feds Deemed Unlikely
Read More

The Six Arizona Medical Marijuana Lawsuits

The following is a list of the six lawsuits now pending in Arizona courts that involve Arizona’s medical marijuana laws enacted as a result of Proposition 203.

1.  Arizona vs. United States – U.S. Federal District Court

Plaintiffs:  STATE OF ARIZONA; JANICE K. BREWER, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her Official Capacity; WILL HUMBLE, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, in his Official Capacity; ROBERT C. HALLIDAY, Director of the Arizona Department of Public Safety, in his Official Capacity

Plaintiffs’ Attorneys:  THOMAS C. HORNE, Attorney General, Firm Bar No. 14000; Kevin D. Ray, No. 007485; Lori S. Davis, No. 027875; Aubrey Joy Corcoran, No. 025423; Assistant Attorneys General; 1275 West Washington Street; Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2926; Telephone: (602) 542-8309; Facsimile: (602) 542-8308; Email: [email protected]

Defendants: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of the United States of America, in his Official Capacity; DENNIS K. BURKE, United States Attorney for the District of Arizona, in his Official Capacity; ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF DISPENSARY PROFESSIONALS, INC., an Arizona corporation; JOSHUA LEVINE; PAULA PENNYPACKER; DR. NICHOLAS FLORES; JANE CHRISTENSEN; PAULA POLLOCK; SERENITY ARIZONA, INC., an Arizona nonprofit corporation; HOLISTIC HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC., an Arizona nonprofit corporation; JEFF SILVA; ARIZONA MEDICAL MARIJUANA ASSOCIATION

2.  Arizona vs. The 2811 Club, LLC – Arizona Superior Court

Plaintiffs:  STATE OF ARIZONA and WILL HUMBLE, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, in his Official Capacity

Plaintiffs’ Attorneys:  THOMAS C. HORNE, Attorney General, Firm Bar No. 14000, Michael Tryon (#003109); Evan Hiller (#028214); Assistant Attorneys General Office of Senior Litigation Counsel; Kevin D. Ray (#007485); Lori S. Davis (#027875); Aubrey Joy Corcoran (#025423); Assistant Attorneys General; Education and Health Section; 1275 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2926; Telephone: (602) 542-8328; Facsimile: (602) 364-0700; Email: [email protected]

Defendants:  THE 2811 CLUB, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; THE ARIZONA COMPASSION ASSOCIATION, INC., a pending Arizona non-profit corporation; MICHAEL R. MILLER, Director of the Arizona Compassion Association, Inc.; YOKI, INC. d/b/a YOKI A MA CLUB, an Arizona non-profit corporation; ARIZONA COMPASSION CLUB, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company

3.  Sobol vs. Arizona – Arizona Superior Court

Plaintiff:  Alan Sobol

Plaintiff’s attorney:  none

Defendants:  State of Arizona; Janice K. Brewer, Governor of the State of Arizona; Will Humble, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services in his official capacity.

4.  Elements Therapeutic Dispensary vs. Humble – Arizona Superior Court

Plaintiffs:  ELEMENTS THERAPEUTIC DISPENSARY, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation; ARIZONA DISPENSARY SOLUTIONS, LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company; ARIZONA ALTERNATIVE RELIEF CENTERS, INC., an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation dba MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES; PROTECT ARIZONA PATIENTS, INC., an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation; CULTIVATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES, an Arizona Limited Liability Company; HEATHER TORGERSON, a married woman; STEPHEN JOHNSON, a single man; ROBERT LILES, a married man; GREGORY DELUCA; a single man, HEIGHTENED HEALING, LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company; ALAN J. CITRIN, M.D., P.C.

Plaintiffs’ Attorney:  David W. Dow; Law Office of David Dow; 3104 E. Camelback Rd., #281; Phoenix, AZ 85016-0001; (602) 550-2951; AZ State Bar#: 007377; ddowhiw I @gmail.com

Defendants:  WILL HUMBLE, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, in his Official Capacity; THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona

5.  Serenity Arizona, Inc. vs. Arizona Department of Health Services – Arizona Superior Court

Plaintiffs:  SERENITY ARIZONA, INC., an Arizona nonprofit corporation; and MEDZONA GROUP, INC., an Arizona nonprofit corporation; JANE CHRISTENSEN, a married woman.

Plaintiffs’ Attorney:  Ken Frakes, #021776; Ryan Hurley, #02460; ROSE LAW GROUP PC, 6613 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 200, Scottsdale, Arizona 85250, (480) 5o5-3931; (480) 951-6993; Fax: [email protected]; [email protected].

Defendants:  THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, an agency of the State of Arizona; WILL HUMBLE, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, in his Official Capacity

6.  Compassion First, LLC vs. Arizona – Arizona Superior Court

Plaintiffs:  COMPASSION FIRST, L.L.C., dba Compassion First, an Arizona limited liability company; SCOTT TIDEMANN, a single man; KIMBERLY REARDON, a single woman, MARK BROOKMAN, a married man; KEITH LOWELL RABIN, a single man and DANIEL MEDINA, a single man.

Plaintiffs’ attorney:  AIKEN SCHENK, HAWKINS & RICCIARDI P.C., 4742 North 24 Street, Suite 100, Phoenix, Arizona 85016-4859; Telephone: (602) 248-8203; Facsimile: (602) 248-8840; E-Mail: [email protected]; E-Mail: [email protected]; E-Mail: [email protected]; E-Mail: jc@ashrlaw .com; J. Tyrrel Taber; Alfred W. Ricciardi; James M. Cool; THE LAW OFFICES OF JEFFREY J. HERNANDEZ 7047 East Greenway Parkway, Suite 140, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254; Telephone: (480) 624-2765; Facsimile: (480) 607-2215; jjhernandez@az-law .net.

Defendants:  STATE OF ARIZONA a governmental entity; JANET K. BREWER, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her official capacity; ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES (ADHS), an Arizona administrative agency; and WILLIAM HUMBLE, Director of ADHS, in his official capacity.

By |2011-10-13T00:29:20-07:00August 26th, 2011|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on The Six Arizona Medical Marijuana Lawsuits
Read More

Lawsuit Targets Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Dispensary Rules

Arizona Republic:  “As if medical marijuana wasn’t being litigated enough in Arizona, yet another lawsuit takes aim at the rules governing dispensaries.  The special action, among six suits involving the state’s fledgling program, claims the rules give unfair advantage to local businesses in violation of federal law and the state and federal constitutions.”

The new lawsuit was filed by Compassion First, LLC, dba Compassion First AZ.  Gerald Gaines is the manager of the company.

We’ve predicted that somebody would sue because DHS’s dispenary rules violate the U.S. constitution.

By |2019-06-14T08:25:41-07:00August 25th, 2011|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Lawsuit Targets Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Dispensary Rules
Read More

Arizona Republic Editorial: DHS Weeding out Shady Doctors

Arizona Republic:  “Those who want Arizona’s medical-marijuana law to serve only people who have a genuine medical need should regard Will Humble as a hero. . . . The medical-marijuana law becomes a sham if a patient can get certified for pot just by saying: ‘Doc, I got this terrible pain and nothing else works.’ That’s why regulations require doctors to look at medical history and find out what medication has been tried.”

By |2011-08-24T07:37:17-07:00August 24th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Republic Editorial: DHS Weeding out Shady Doctors
Read More

Tempe May Tax Sales of Medical Marijuana

Arizona Republic:  “Last week, the Tempe City Council had its first hearing on the possibility of amending the city’s tax code so that those purchasing the drug in Tempe could be charged a 2-percent municipal sales tax.”

By |2011-08-24T06:33:19-07:00August 24th, 2011|Stories & Articles, Tax Issues|Comments Off on Tempe May Tax Sales of Medical Marijuana
Read More

Arizona Department of Health Services Investigates 8 Doctors Who Have Written Almost Half of 10,000 Medical Marijuana Recommendations

Yuma Sun:  “The state’s top health official wants an investigation of eight Arizona doctors who together have written nearly half the nearly 10,000 recommendations for medical marijuana since the program started. . . . Humble said his staff extracted the names of any doctor who had written at least 200 recommendations in the 100 days since the law took effect. . . . One of those doctors alone had more than 1,300 recommendations in just 100 days.”

Arizona Republic:  “State health officials have filed complaints against eight physicians who have recommended nearly half of the 10,000 Arizonans certified to use medical marijuana, saying they failed to check patients’ prescription-drug histories, as required. . . . In one case, a naturopathic physician issued recommendations to about 1,000 people but checked the state Board of Pharmacy’s controlled-substances database just 56 times”

Phoenix New Times:  “Eight doctors who have written nearly half of the state’s 10,000 or so medical marijuana recommendations didn’t check in with a DEA-monitored database as required, state officials allege. . . . [ADHS Director Will Humble] asked employees to pull the names of all physicians who’d written more than 200 certifications since the program began in April.  The list proved 10 doctors long — and eight of the ten ‘had discrepancies between what they said they’d been doing’ and the DEA-database search log, Humble says.”

By |2015-04-06T18:52:31-07:00August 20th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Department of Health Services Investigates 8 Doctors Who Have Written Almost Half of 10,000 Medical Marijuana Recommendations
Read More

AZ Physicians Referred to Licensing Boards due to Questionable Medical Marijuana Certifications

The following is the text of an August 19, 2011, post Arizona Department of Heatlh Services Director Will Humble made on his blog:

“One of the criteria on our official medical marijuana Physician Certification Form includes an attestation by a physician that they’ve reviewed their patient’s profile on the Arizona Board of Pharmacy’s Controlled Substances Prescription Monitoring Program database before signing the certification.  We included this requirement to ensure that physicians are acting in their patient’s best interest- and making sure that they’re using best practices and checking to see whether their patient has been prescribed other controlled substances before signing the marijuana certification.  Another requirement that we included asks physicians to attest that they’ve reviewed the patient’s medical history including examining the last 12 months of the patient’s medical records before signing.  We also think these requirements are important because other states that have medical marijuana programs have found that some physicians are more focused on getting revenue from signing certifications than on their patient’s health.

As a routine quality check in our certification system, we’ve been asking the Board of Pharmacy to verify whether or not certifying physicians are actually accessing the system (as they have attested).  We’ve identified 3 MDs and 5 Naturopaths that appear to have been routinely attesting that they’ve checked the Controlled Substances Prescription Monitoring Program when they appear to have not.  Dr. Nelson and I sent letters to their licensing boards recently notifying them that it looks like these 8 physicians may be falsely attesting that they’re checking the Prescription Monitoring Program database.  In each case, they appear to have written more than 100 certifications (some several hundred) that included attestations that cannot be verified by the Board of Pharmacy.

Our larger concern is that if these physicians aren’t completing this simple requirement (and making false attestations)- it’s likely that they’re taking other short-cuts that may be jeopardizing their patient’s health- such as not reviewing the patient’s medical history before writing medical marijuana certifications (also required in the series of attestations).  Since these 8 physicians have signed nearly half of the 10,000 medical marijuana medical certifications, we think it’s important that the boards know about this so they can decide if the physician is acting in the patient’s best interest.  The referrals may also have a side effect of discouraging physicians from writing recreational certifications.”

By |2011-08-21T06:43:14-07:00August 20th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on AZ Physicians Referred to Licensing Boards due to Questionable Medical Marijuana Certifications
Read More

Obama Stumped by Question on Marijuana Legalization

Huffington Post:  “It’s become pretty clear that the president is going to be asked about marijuana legalization absolutely any time he takes questions from the public, so it kind of amazes me that he is actually getting worse at talking about it. This latest exchange is just embarrassing:

“If you can’t legalize marijuana, why can’t you just legalize medical marijuana?” a woman asked the president.  “A lot of states are making decisions about medical marijuana,” Obama explained. “As a controlled substance, the issue is then that is it being prescribed by a doctor as opposed to… you know, well, I’ll leave it at that.”

By |2011-08-18T20:03:58-07:00August 18th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Obama Stumped by Question on Marijuana Legalization
Read More

Holbrook Schools To Be Proactive If Medical Marijuana Remains Legal

Arizona Journal:  “With a medical marijuana debate brewing between state and federal officials, it’s become difficult for municipalities to determine what outcome to expect. In addition, school districts face the uncertainty of how medical marijuana use should be handled in schools as students are taught to stay away from drugs, especially since prescription-drug abuse is most common among young people.

By |2019-06-14T08:25:40-07:00August 18th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Holbrook Schools To Be Proactive If Medical Marijuana Remains Legal
Read More

Alan Sobol’s August 15, 2011, Motion in His Cannabis Club Lawsuit

The following is the text of a motion filed by Alan Sobol in his lawsuit against Arizona to establish the legality of his cannabis club.

1.  Plaintiff Allan Sobol, pro/per files this brief memorandum as his Motion for Immediate Summary decision or in the alternative  Expedited Hearing on his Complaint for Declaratory Judgment. This motion is filed because of the extreme controversy that is effecting the community at large and which demands immediate Court  resolution.

2.  Summary decision is appropriate because the facts are clear and undisputed that the Plaintiffs  2811 Club business model is not in violation or conflict with any Arizona Laws.

3.  Moreover, summary decision is appropriate because of the significant amount of  Arizona citizens that are being adversely effected by the on going controversy.

4.  On November 2, 2010, Arizona voters were asked to consider whether the State should decriminalize medical marijuana. Proposition 203, an initiative measure identified as the “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act” (“The Act” or “AMMA”), envisioned decriminalizing medical marijuana for use by people with certain chronic and debilitating medical conditions. Qualifying patients would be able to receive up to 2 ½ ounces of marijuana every two weeks from medical marijuana dispensaries or to cultivate their own plants under certain conditions. Proposition 203 provided that its purpose “is to protect patients with debilitating medical conditions, as well as their physicians and providers, from arrest and prosecution, criminal and other penalties and property forfeiture if such  patients engage in the medical use of marijuana.”

5.  Arizona voters passed Proposition 203 in November 2010; the Governor signed it into law on December 14, 2010.

6.  The defendants in this Action have been very vocal in their opposition to Prop 203, and apparently are displaying sour grapes over the voters choice.

7.  Defendant  Brewer, as Governor,  is vested with the supreme executive power of Arizona and regardless of her personal beliefs, she  is responsible for the faithful execution of all laws,  including the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act,

8.  Furthermore, The Act requires the Arizona Department of Health Services (“ADHS”) to be responsible for implementing and overseeing the Act.

9.  Specifically, the Act provides for the registration and certification by the, ADHS of “nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries,” “nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary agents,” “qualifying patients,” and “designated caregivers.”\

10.  On April 14, 2011, the ADHS began accepting applications from persons who sought to be certified as Qualifying Patients and Designated Caregivers. As of August 15, 2011, there were over 8000 Qualifying Patients certified by the ADHS including the plaintiff herein.

11.  However, on or about June 1, 2011, in an attempt to thwart the will of the voters and impose her own personal beliefs on the citizens of Arizona, defendant Brewer suspended the dispensary portion of the ACT. This represents a bad faith abuse on the part of  the Governors  authority.

12.  Defendants suspension of the dispensary program effectively denied most qualified patients the ability and right to obtain the medical marijuana authorized under the ACT.

13.  The very purpose of the Act was to provide for a qualifying patient, who has a “debilitating medical condition” to obtain an “allowable amount of marijuana” from a nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary” and to possess and use the marijuana to treat or alleviate the   serious debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the medical condition

14.  Denial of relief to these seriously ill patients equates to cruel and unusual punishment , a violation of the Voter Protection Act and a  clear abuse of the Governors authority.

15.  The majority of qualified patients are some of the most vulnerable members of our society. Many are confined to wheel chairs with disfigurements, missing limbs or simply weak and frail resulting from their debilitating conditions. These individuals suffer daily from chronic pain and other ailments that this Act was intended to alleviate.    Absent a safe and legal way to acquire their medication these qualified patients are forced into the very risky black market to acquire the medication they so desperately desire. This exposes many qualified patients to the criminal elements including con artist and robbers.

16.  Absent a viable dispensary program where a qualified patient could purchase affordable small quantities of medical marijuana as needed, denies these patients the right under the Act to possess and use medical marijuana.

17.  The only recourse available to these disfranchised qualified patients is to seek and acquire free quantities of medical marijuana from other qualified patients who are willing to donate their excess marijuana as it may be available.

18.  Under the ACT,  (36-2811 B-3),   “patient to patient” transfers of medical marijuana is specifically permitted provided nothing of value is exchanged.

19.  The inherent problem is the fact that under the ACT all qualified patient records maintained by AHDS are confidential. In fact, the ACT makes it a crime for any AHDS employee to release patient information to a third party.  Consequently, there is no way, other than high risk internet   Craigslist type classified advertising, for a patient looking to acquire free marijuana to locate another donating patient with excess marijuana.

20.  In an effort to assist qualified patients, plaintiff  Sobol developed a business  model concept intended to provide qualified patients with a venue to network. A place they could come to meet other qualified patients.  The 2811 Club, LLC, (Named after the provisions of the Act which allow patient to patient transfers ), The 2811 Club, hereinafter referred to as the” CLUB”, is  a is a professionally operated, membership only entity.

21.  For marketing purposes the business is called a club,  However, the Club’s primary function is that of a Educational and Resource center for qualified patients. Through the Club’s affiliation with Plaintiff Sobol’s other business, the Arizona Cannabis University, ( previously known as the Arizona Dispensary University) , the Club offers extensive educational services to qualified patients.  The Arizona Cannabis University has been offering classes to the general public since September 2010, and has built a credible reputation for providing  one of the most extensive marijuana related curriculums in the country. The University has been repeatedly featured on all local TV and print media  and  some national news organizations.   The University has from time to time offered classes across the state utilizing hotel conference rooms as needed. Additionally, like most Universities, the Arizona Cannabis University comes complete with a private campus. The physical, permanent classroom and  campus is located at 17233 N. Holmes Blvd Suite 1615, Phoenix AZ 85053 and features, extensive  on-line research services, free wi-fi, an extensive marijuana related book and video library, daily entertainment, a school discount  store, pain management demonstrations, political advocacy programs, even spiritual sermons but most importantly, a lounge area for qualified patients to interact and network together. This is a closed campus where only qualified patients who possess a AZDHS medical marijuana card are permitted to enter.  The University and Club interact together in a clean, professional  and safe environment to provide much needed services to qualified patients.  This unique  one-of-kind  facility provides  professional armed security and  a  state of art  surveillance system together with  patient verification and tracking to assure full compliance with the ACT.

22.  The Facility charges a yearly membership fee of $25.00 to qualified patients. Thereafter, the Club/University charges a usage fee of $75.00 per day which entitles the patient/member to full access of the facility and all it’s services. The Club maintains a policy of fee waivers for individuals with limited income. This fee pays for the overhead, (cost of operations), of the facility including the rent, electric, security, insurance, payrolls, educational services, etc.

23.  The  word “Club” is merely the vessel that brings qualified patients together. The Club facility is simply a  venue for qualified patients to interact with other  qualified patients. Contrary to the allegations of the Defendant, the Club does not sell, produce, transport, transfer or distribute Marijuana in any form. The defendants have produced no evidence that suggest otherwise.  The Club does allow qualified patient/members, pursuant  to ARS 36-2811 B-3, to exchange their  own marijuana with  other patients. Everyone in the club facility is a qualified patient. These are direct “ patient to patient” transfers that are in no way associated with the Club management or the usage fees charged. The Club has strict written rules that limit marijuana transfers to no more than 2.5 ounces and there can be no exchange of  any value. Violation of these rules mean immediate and permanent expulsion from the Club.

24.  Additionally, the Club donates space to a private not-for-profit Association; The Arizona Compassion Association, Inc.  This association is not a collective.  The association is comprised of approximately 50 qualified patients who each, individually,  grow their own medical marijuana. This association  was formed to advance their mutual beliefs to share knowledge and otherwise network together for the betterment of the industry. This association is protected under the First and Fourteen amendment of the US Constitution.

25.  The qualified patients of the association, who are all members of the club, bring  very limited amounts of their excess marijuana into the club and transfer  it “FREE OF CHARGE/VALUE”  to any Club member that request it.  These are also direct “patient to patient” transfers as permitted under the ACT and are in no way connected to the operation of the Club, or the fees that are charged.  Again, the Defendants have produced no evidence to suggest otherwise. These transfers are not conditioned upon payment of entry to the club. If two qualified patients  are enrolled in ASU, or perhaps a local community college, and conducted a patient to patient transfer  in the lounge of that school, would the Attorney General  threaten to  criminally prosecute  and close down the School? .  In fact,  the Act does not limit where such patient to patient transfers can take place. Qualified patients could meet on a street corner, a movie theater, or even a Mcdonalds.  These transfers can take place outside of the Clubs facilities, however, our patient/members voluntarily elect to conduct the transfer in the Club while  enjoying the Clubs facilities, services and security.

26.  The club owners, and the plaintiff have no legal affiliation with the association, other than a simple agreement that provides some donated space and the requirement that the association conduct themselves in a professional business-like manner, in full compliance with Arizona Law. Any perceived benefit the association may receive from the donated space  is being realized by the legal entity ( The Association) and not by any individual patient/member. There simply is nothing of value being exchanged directly from the Club to any individual qualified patient.

27.  For these reasons the Club is operating within  full compliance of the law.

28.  Having effectively stopped the Dispensary portion of the law, the defendants are  now unjustly taking aim at the only remaining option  qualified patients have to obtain their medication.

29.  While the  defendants have not produced one scintilla of evidence  demonstrating any illegal activity at the 2811 Club, the defendants have nevertheless threathen the club owners with criminal  arrest and prosecution.   This Club/university is being singled out for prosecution because of its marijuana curriculum.   The defendants  have relied on  marketing materials, news reports, hearsay, and  speculation. But have not presented this Court with any substantive evidence to support their allegations. In fact, the marketing materials produced by the Defendants supports the argument of the Plaintiff.

30.  Moreover,  the plaintiff has been completely transparent and forthright  in the development and operation of the Club.  The Plaintiff has made numerous good faith efforts  to explain and demonstrate the operation of the Club to the Defendants.  Sobol has invited the defendants to visit the club on at least three separate occasions for a first-hand  on-site inspection, the defendants  have  ignored all such requests. The plaintiff has repeatedly conveyed the following proposition to the defendants; that if defendant can produce a specific Arizona Statute showing that the Club is in violation of the law, Sobol will agree to withdraw his license and  close the Club.  The defendants have failed to respond to this request The defendants have failed to present any specific Arizona Statute whereby they can support their allegations that the Club has violated any State law. (Ubi jus incertum, ibi jus nullum). The fact is, the Club is a legally registered, fully compliant, and legitimate business operation

31.  The defendants have clearly voiced their personal opposition to The Medical Marijuana Act. The defendants, acting in concert with each other,  are conspiring to use the power of their office to further their personal beliefs and agenda regarding marijuana, all  in dereliction of  their official duties.  As Governor  Brewer is vested with the supreme executive power of Arizona and is responsible for the faithful execution of all laws, including the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act. Instead, the Governor and Mr. Humble are abusing their authority  by threatening  and intimating legitimate business owners out of existence  in an effort to thwart the will of the Arizona voters.

32.  The Club operation is fully compliant with Arizona State Law and the Defendants have produced no evidence to suggest otherwise.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Sobol respectfully requests declaratory relief as follows:

A.  Grant  Summary Decision in this matter or, in the alternative, Grant an Expedited hearing in this matter.

B.  Deny all the Defendant requests.

C.  Find in favor of Plaintiff,  that Sobol’s specific 2811 club business model is not in violation of any Arizona State Laws.

D.  That the Court grant such other and further relief as it deems appropriate and proper.

Dated this 15th day of August, 2011.

ALLAN SOBOL pro per
Plaintiff/Counterdefendant

/s Allan Sobol___________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 15th day of August 2011. I electronically transmitted a PDF version of this document to the Office of the Clerk of the Superior Court, Maricopa County, using Turbo Court ECF System, with a copy also mailed to :

Office of the Arizona Attorney General
Att: Lori Davis
1275 W Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007-2926

INDEX OF EXHIBITS

  1. Sobol’s Medical Marijuana card issued by AZDHS
  2. Arizona Cannabis University  media publicity
  3. 2811 Club Marketing Materials
  4. Memorandum of Agreement  between 2811 Club and Arizona Compassion Association, Inc.
  5. Communications  from 2811 Club to Law Enforcement
  6. Letter to Attorney General offering to close 2811 Club
  7. Defendants opposition to Prop 203 and medical marijuana.
By |2011-08-16T07:54:55-07:00August 16th, 2011|AZ Marijuana Law Lawsuits, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Alan Sobol’s August 15, 2011, Motion in His Cannabis Club Lawsuit
Read More

Hippie Town Chafes under Colorado’s Medical Pot Rules

Sacramento Bee:  “The Green Rush has gone bust in [Nederland, CO] the town Rolling Stone dubbed ‘Stonerville, USA.’  Kathleen Chippi, who runs the One Brown Mouse boutique but recently shut down her medical marijuana dispensary and smoking room, cursed as she blamed the government. . . . Colorado now has the most heavily regulated marijuana industry in America.”

By |2019-06-14T08:25:40-07:00August 15th, 2011|Colorado News, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Hippie Town Chafes under Colorado’s Medical Pot Rules
Read More

Confusion Surrounds California’s Medical Marijuana Laws

Digital Journal:  “The former owner of a Los Angeles County marijuana dispensary will learn of his sentence in the coming month in a case (LACBA368181-01, Los Angeles County Superior Court) that brings to light the confusion still surrounding California’s medical marijuana laws . . . . Under California state law, marijuana dispensaries must be operated on a non-profit basis. In many cases, however, authorities have raided dispensaries and charged them with operating on a “for profit” basis.  According to the Culver City Patch, prosecutors alleged that the Organica Collective dispensary near the Culver City-Los Angeles border had earned an average of $400,000 per month.”

By |2011-08-15T21:54:12-07:00August 15th, 2011|California News, Marijuana Crimes, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Confusion Surrounds California’s Medical Marijuana Laws
Read More
Go to Top