Ukiah Superior Court—Margolin & Lawrence secured a dismissal for a client who was arraigned on 700 lbs of marijuana.
People v. I.N.C (2013 – Glendale, East LA)
Client was arrested for lewd conduct on two occasions, with potential for sex offender registration, and assault in another. Client has had long standing mental health issues and defense counsel declared a doubt as to his mental competency. The three cases were suspended while he was evaluated by Los Angeles County Mental Health Court and was found to be incompetent and unlikely to gain competency. As a result, all three cases were dismissed.
People v. K (2011)
In Fresno, CA, Client was pulled over by police officers. Upon searching the vehicle police officers found 18 pounds of marijuana. Client was released on bail. While on bail, the Fresno District Attorney’s Office was alerted to his arrest in Northern California for trafficking marijuana. Intervention by Margolin Lawrence led to the dismissal of the Northern California Case. In addition, Client was also suspected of mailing marijuana out of state via the US Postal Service. Margolin Lawrence successfully negotiated a plea agreement with the Fresno District Attorney’s Office for Client to plead to a misdemeanor which can be expunged upon completion of his probation period.
People v. L.C.
Officers of the Los Angeles Police Department raided a local Van Nuys dispensary for possessing marijuana for sale. Upon searching the dispensary, firearms were located along with marijuana. The District Attorney’s office prosecuted Client for possession of marijuana for sale. Attorneys for Margolin and Lawrence brought a motion to suppress in Van Nuys Courthouse stating that there was no probable cause to authorize a search warrant because Client’s dispensary was lawfully operating under California’s Medical Marijuana law. The Court suppressed all evidence in the case, resulting in the dismissal of the case. All money and firearms were returned the the client.
Attorney Allison B. Margolin wrote this article on the newest dog-sniff case, a companion to the earlier Florida v. Harris case, from the United State Supreme Court for the Los Angeles Daily Journal – Litigation Section.
The Daily Journal printed Allison B. Margolin’s article on the newly published Florida v. Harris case by the Supreme Court. Daily Journal Dog Sniff
People v. R (2012) -Alhambra
Client was operating a mobile dispensary in the San Gabriel Valley and was contacted by an undercover police officer. The officer claimed that he was a medical marijuana patient throughout the transaction but had failed to give his recommendation the client. When the police officer approached the client for the exchange, the Client felt pressured and feared for his life after observing a bulge on the officer’s belt which turned out to be his service firearm. Not wanting to risk his life, Client exchanged the marijuana for cash and drove away.
At the jury trial, Attorney David F. Poblete presented a mistake of fact defense. The be specific, the client could not have formed the requisite intent to illegally sell marijuana because he had a reasonable belief that the officer was a medical marijuana patient. After deliberations, the judge ruled a mistrail due to a hung jury.
People v. GV (2013) – West Covina Courthouse
Client was caught in an altercation with his baby’s mother’s family during a custody exchange. Client fought with the baby’s mother’s brother leading to a criminal battery case. Client was seen on tape by police dash cam footage being beaten by the brother as police officers arrived. At the conclusion of the jury trial, the judge declared a hung jury and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Margolin and Lawrence helped its client, a skateboarding merchandise manufacturer, reach a favorable monetary settlement with a major drink producer. Has your intellectual property been infringed upon? Margolin and Lawrence can help.
Margolin and Lawrence’s client had been making its products and distributing them to skateboarding outlets and fans. A company behind a major soft drink identified the product as appealing to its audience. Rather than license the merchandise and brand from its creator, the soft drink maker simply released a copycat product of its own. Margolin and Lawrence made sure its client was quickly and justly compensated for its invention.