
The Medical Marijuana Act in PA and Employment
The Medical Marijuana Act in Pennsylvania prohibits patients under the influence of medical marijuana from performing employment duties at heights or in confined spaces. 35 P.S. § 10231.510(2). Also, in regards to employment of patients, employers have discretionary authority in certain instances. An employer may prohibit a patient who is under the influence of marijuana from performing any...
The Need to Know for Potential Medical Marijuana Patients in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania’s Medical Marijuana Act provides the guidelines to obtaining medical marijuana. Under the Act, medical marijuana can only be dispensed to a patient who “receives a certification from a practitioner and is in possession of a valid identification card issued by the department,” and also to caregivers who have a valid identification card. 35 P.S. § 10231.303. The caregiver is someone...
Medical Marijuana Growing Licenses Granted
Pennsylvania’s Department of Health has issued 12 licenses for medical marijuana growers. The winners of the bids included many wealthy and powerful business firms. The medical marijuana industry is not for people with small bank accounts. There is a non-refundable application fee of $10,000 in addition to a permit fee for growers of $200,000. This permit fee is refundable if you are not...
The SCOTUS recently addressed several issues that will impact blood alcohol testing in Pennsylvania Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. ___ (2016)
This decision consolidates three appeals dealing with petitioners’ refusal to take a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test, either via breathalyzer or drawn blood. Case 1: A North Dakota state trooper arrested Birchfield for driving while impaired. He told Birchfield that refusing to take a blood test would expose him to criminal penalties. Birchfield refused and was convicted. On appeal to...
by Marc Neff
Third Circuit Rules Senator’s Acts Not Protected
U.S. Senator Robert Menendez was indicted by a grand jury for soliciting and accepting gifts from friend Dr. Salomon Melgen in exchange for influencing an enforcement action against Melgen for Medicare overbilling, and intervening on Melgen’s behalf in a contract dispute between Melgen and the Dominican Republic. Menendez also failed to disclose reportable gifts from Melgen, as required by the...
by Marc Neff
Third Circuit Says Government Can’t Infringe upon the Right of Allocution (U.S. v. Jason Moreno)
From July 2005 to November 2007, the defendant (Moreno) was an appraiser in a mortgage fraud scheme who for payment provided inflated appraisals to other scheme members. He also acted as broker, buyer, or seller in other fraudulent transactions. A federal jury convicted him of multiple counts of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. After receiving a 96-month prison, he appealed to...
by Marc Neff
A defendant who is convicted for committing federal sexual exploitation and child pornography crimes and who pays criminal restitution to the victim can be sued in a civil action by the victim for damages for the same offense (under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2225)
The plaintiff-appellant (“Doe”) was adopted by the defendant-appellee (“Mancuso”) when she was five years old. During the next five years, the Mancuso sexually abused her, photographed and videotaped the acts, and distributed the media in internet chat rooms. He was investigated and eventually arrested. Under a plea agreement, he pled guilty to the charge of sexual exploitation, and the...
by Marc Neff
Arizona’s Highest Court Resolves Questions regarding DUI Convictions of Medical Marijuana Users (Dobson v. McClennen, 238 Ariz. 389 (2015))
The two petitioners were each charged with and convicted of two counts of driving under the influence: first, driving while impaired to the slightest degree under ARS Sec. 28-1381(A)(1); and second, driving while any amount of an impermissible drug or its metabolite is in the body under ARS Sec. 28-1381(A)(3) (emphasis added). Arizona’s DUI laws identify these as separate offenses. The trial...
by Marc Neff
Pennsylvania Courts Uphold Institutional Sexual Assault Statute as Applied to Teachers’ Aide and 18 Year Old Student
A teacher’s aide who worked at a high school and admitted to engaging in sexual activities with an 18-year old male student was unsuccessful in her appeal of the trial court’s judgment of sentence. Appellant asserted that section 3124.2(a.2)(1) of the Commonwealth’s institutional sexual assault statute was both unconstitutionally vague and unconstitutionally overbroad. The court rejected both...
by Marc Neff