Just a short blog about a long article, notably copyrighted at law.com, relating to the ethical dilemmas lawyers face in California when advising clients about medical dispensaries.
As a dual resident of California and Florida, I have seen up close and personal the drastically disparate ways each state deals with marijuana issues. In Florida, its 'okay, out of the car, hands on the door.' In Cali, its 'do you have a 'scrip for that baggie?' That's a whole 'nother blawg for a different day. **
The law.com piece carefully scriptures the dichotomy lawyers face when advising clients who grow pot or run dispensaries. You see, the dilemma is this. California citizens passed prop 215 and legalized marijuana for medical uses. Many people like me have scrips. But the Feds have said we do not care what the states do: it's illegal and in case you have not noticed it we are raiding the dispensaries.
Now if you are a lawyer, what kind of advice do you give the client? I mean, if you show him how to comply with state law, you are in effect advising him to break federal law. Not a comfortable position to be in, and this piece details the trials and tribulations of attorneys in reconciling the consequences thereof. The article talks about this murky area that lawyers have to find a comfort zone in, thus the title, 'Pot Lawyers Walk a Fine Line'. Meanwhile, your clients are also facing jail from federal indictments. This article tracks one such victim, and I think that is the right word. He is not a criminal. He is a drug war victim.
I see that the Media Awareness Project has now posted the article on their site, and that is my link below, but full credit goes to Dan Levine from The Recorder. You google it and it is all over the 'Net, drawing worldwide attention.
**(Even that is not a guarantee as every county enforces the regs differently and today someone sued the DMV for targeting medical marijuana smokers in California. Here is the LA Times link: