This is an example of our medical marijuana Jury Instructions
Allison B. Margolin Article in Daily Journal on Florida v. Jardines
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.
Allison B. Margolin Florida v. Harris Article in Daily Journal
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
Margolin and Lawrence Cover Story in Hustler
Hung Jury Where Client Sold Marijuana to an Undercover Officer
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.
HUNG JURY - Domestic Violence Case
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 Protects Skate Merchandise Trademark
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.
Hung Jury Leads to Traffic Ticket in DUI Case
People v. S.L. (2009)
Attorney Allison B. Margolin was hired as trial counsel in a DMV case where the client’s vehicle was found driverless after hitting two vehicles. Client was found shirtless and with a BAC of 0.19. Counsel had argued that because client was not observed actually driving the vehicle, she could not have been guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol. After deliberations, there was a hung jury leading to a mistrial. When the district attorney’s office re-filed the case, client only plead to a traffic ticket.
DMV Refusal Hearing Win
DMV v. Client (2012)
California is an implied-consent state where every driver, by receiving a driver’s license, consents to make themselves available to a chemical test when they are driving under the influence. The penalties for refusing a chemical test, eiher breath, urine, or blood, are heavy - 1 year suspended license for the first refusal.
In 2012, Margolin and Lawrence won a DMV Refusal Hearing where the client refused to take a chemical test at a DUI checkpoint - an exceptionally rare result.
Alternative Writ of Mandate Ordering a Medical Marijuana Jury Instruction
People v. E.L.S. (2012) Yuba County
The California court system has been flooded with medical marijuana cases since the inception of the Compassionate Use Act in 1996. This primarily stems from judges’ ignorance of the case law surrounding medical marijuana. Medical marijuana is one of the few places where the law is constantly shifting due to new case law and therefore causes much confusion amongst the judiciary who often see marijuana in the same light as other drugs. Margolin and Lawrence is one of the few criminal defense firms who regularly write writs of mandate to the Court of Appeal challenging erroneous rulings by judges. Often times judges will brush off counsel’s protestation by simply stating, “Take me up on writ then!” Well unfortunately for them, our office takes these challenges with gusto.
Below you will a recent alternative writ of mandate ordering in a medical marijuana case. Here, the client was merely transferring medical marijuana from his collective to representative of another collective. He had pre-verified the representative as a qualified patient and was in the process of having the representative fill out the collective paperwork. Unfortunately, police officers intervened and arrested the client on alleged sales of marijuana. Before trial, counsel made a motion to allow a medical marijuana jury instruction but was denied. Hearing of our writ prowess, client contacted Margolin & Lawrence to write a petition for a writ of mandate. After writing to the Court of Appeal, an alternative writ of mandate ordering the jury instruction was issued.