Blog

Wednesday, December 12, 2018 - 12:01pm
AB 1810, passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown this past summer and codified as Penal Code section 1001.36, is among California’s raft of recent criminal justice reforms. The law provides for pretrial diversion of individuals with specific DSM-V diagnoses if the defendant agrees to engage in a mental health treatment program targeting his or her specific treatment needs, and if the Court is satisfied that other conditions are met. Unsurprisingly, the law itself has been met with both optimism and a healthy dose of skepticism.
 
Ultimately, the law represents something of an experiment to attempt to address a long-existing crisis in the criminal justice system: the fact that incarceration paired with the badge of a criminal conviction and patchwork services offered by overburdened and underfunded Probation Departments and County Mental Health Departments has been shown to be the wrong method of handling cases involving severely mentally ill criminal defendants. If you or someone close to you suffers from one of the mental disorders listed in section 1001.36(b)(1) and has been charged with a crime, consider consulting with one of Janssen Malloy LLP’s experienced criminal attorneys. We have existing relationships with qualified mental health experts and can assist in evaluating whether the case would be a good candidate for this relatively new diversion program and, if it is, presenting this outcome as the best one to the District Attorney and Court.
Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - 6:53am
We are pleased to announce that our partner Amelia Burroughs has been reappointed to the Board of Directors of the Legal Services of Northern California.  The term of Ms. Burroughs’ appointment began November 16, 2018 and runs to August 31, 2021.  Janssen Malloy LLP has been a long-time supporter of the organization and its mission, and we continue to be proud to be able to contribute with Ms. Burroughs’ participation.
 
Legal Services of Northern California serves 23 counties in Northern California.  It has offices in Eureka, Ukiah, Redding, Sacramento, Auburn, Chico, Vallejo, and Woodland.  Its mission is to empower the poor and to defeat the causes and effects of poverty, with an emphasis on housing, health care, economic stability, and assisting clients with family safety and stability. 
Saturday, November 24, 2018 - 6:22am
Among the many things we at Janssen Malloy LLP are thankful for this holiday, we’re glad to welcome William H. (“Willie”) Stein to our firm as our newest attorney and colleague. Willie is a graduate of UC Davis School of Law, Class of 2018 and originally hails from Lawrence, Kansas. He brings with him an outstanding record of academic achievement, a midwestern-nice personality, and a great sense of humor.
 
Willie began working on some legal research and writing and regulatory projects under the supervision of the firm’s attorneys in early September. You may have even noticed he’s already tackled his first post on this very blog. But Willie got some outstanding news ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday: he, along with 3,383 relieved test-takers, passed the July 2018 California Bar Exam. We’re thrilled that Willie has joined our firm and if you’re a client, you will be too once you have the chance to meet him and work with him. 
Thursday, November 15, 2018 - 6:22am
Lately, there has been an uptick in the number of cannabis farms holding either a local or state license being bought and sold throughout the County. From a regulatory perspective, purchasing a cannabis farm presents issues with respect to business continuity, disclosure requirements, and other responsible agency requirements for transfer of required permits and authorizations. The following is a brief overview of the regulations that impact the transfer of a cannabis farm, some techniques for avoiding potential interruption of business, and other regulatory requirements that should be taken into consideration when purchasing a cannabis business.

It must be noted that cannabis is a Schedule I controlled substance and under the Federal Controlled Substances Act, the cultivation, possession, manufacture, transportation, and distribution of cannabis is a felony and may expose violators to both criminal and civil liability. The following should not be construed as legal advice and is merely provided for informational purposes pertaining to California state cannabis laws.

Title III, Division 8, Chapter 1 of the California Code of Regulations regulates the cultivation of cannabis in California. Under section 8202(c) cultivation licenses are not transferable or assignable to any other person, entity, or property. Likewise, applications for licenses are not transferrable or assignable.

Licensees are required to notify the California Department of Food and Agriculture within ten (10) calendar days of any change in ownership that does not affect the business entity type. The new owners of the licensee shall submit all of the information required to be disclosed by the owner at time of initial permit application pursuant to section 8102 within ten (10) days of the change of ownership. To change ownership information of a license application for an annual or temporary state license, California Department of Food and Agriculture (CalCannabis) requires a separate profile be created for the new owner and a new application submitted for CalCannabis review.

Local jurisdiction requirements vary. For instance, under Humboldt County’s ordinance, to transfer an application, the prior and previous owner must execute an application transfer form, pay a fee, and provide updated application documentation. Changes or modifications to the permit or project, including any change of owner, requires notification, review, and approval by the County Planning Division prior to granting the modification. Conversely, a commercial cannabis permit issued by the City of Arcata is non-transferable to another location, and no transfer to another owner or modifications may be made without the following: (a) for a transfer of ownership, a request for permit ownership transfer must be submitted to the Building Official on a City form at least sixty (60) days prior to the transfer, together with a fee; (b) a new owner shall meet all requirements for applicants of an initial permit; and (c) all identifying information required in the original application shall be submitted, a written certification by the new owner certifying the owner will abide by all terms and conditions of the permit and ordinance, the specific date the transfer is to occur; and acknowledgement of full responsibility for complying with any existing permit.  

Any one looking to acquire a cannabis farm should take the above regulations into account when structuring the purchase of a permitted cannabis cultivation site. First, contingencies should be set to allow buyer and seller to provide the sufficient notices to both CalCannabis and other regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over cannabis cultivation sites. These agencies include the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards. All documents requesting transfer of the various permits should be carefully reviewed by counsel prior to submission to the agencies to ensure timely processing. Any landlord should be consulted with early in the acquisition process for purposes of obtaining landlord consent to new ownership as applications will require evidence of owner authorization for the activity and a lease. Likewise, when setting a closing date, the regulatory notice and waiting periods should be considered. For instance, the City of Arcata’s waiting period of sixty days should be considered when choosing a closing date for an acquisition to provide proper noticing and to avoid any business interruption. In a similar vein, all licensees and state license applicants are required to have obtained a local authorization for the proposed cannabis activity. Any transaction of a cannabis business should provide for the submission and issuance of the local permit with the new owner information prior to close of the business to facilitate any application or modification of state license. Therefore, when state licensing authorities inquire with the local jurisdiction to determine whether the applicant is authorized to engage in the proposed activity, the ownership informatation shared between the locals and the state remain consistent.

Lastly, counsel should check with other responsible agencies having jurisdiction over cannabis projects to determine how and whether certain permits are transferable, run with the property, or will require new applications. Some of the permits required by CalCannabis include Water Quality Discharge Permits pursuant to State Water Resources Control Board Order R1-0023-2017, any Lake and Streambed Notification (F&W Code Section 1600/1602), and enrollment in any regional board orders as well.

If you are considering buying or selling a cannabis business, be sure to review the regulations of the agency regulating your specific activity. If you need help, the attorneys at Janssen Malloy LLP are here to assist.
Wednesday, November 7, 2018 - 9:34am
You pick yourself up off the ground and assess your injuries. You will surely need medical attention, which is rarely cheap in 2018. Who is responsible? When you fall prey to a dangerous condition on public property, whether it is an improperly maintained street, a hole in the sidewalk, or one of many dangers associated with public utilities, it is often unclear who has the legal duty to fix it. It can be disheartening to know that an accident is someone’s fault, but not to be sure who that is.

At Janssen Malloy LLP, we have the tools to bring clarity to murky facts to help you recover from accidents caused by the negligence of others. We regularly use a full range of investigative tools to find those responsible for dangerous conditions so our clients can recover.

Born from California’s public policy favoring transparency in government, the California Public Records Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 6250 et. seq.) allows citizens to request and receive records from state and local agencies. This has proven to be a powerful tool for attorneys trying to determine responsibility for dangerous conditions on public property. It is not only useful for finding public entity defendants, but in many cases can also help us piece together relationships between private entities who might be responsible. These records requests can be difficult to use, because public entities require them to be carefully drafted and very specific. The attorneys at Janssen Malloy LLP are adept at tailoring these requests to get the information we need.

Janssen Malloy LLP maintains relationships with private investigators. Our investigators generally have extensive backgrounds in law enforcement and are adept at using a human touch to get what others might miss. A good investigator can shed light on complex facts in an invaluable way, allowing us to tell your story clearly and persuasively. We have relationships with some of the best in this area.

We also work with scientific and medical experts across a broad spectrum of knowledge in our trial preparation. Experts help us to understand the difficult medical issues that arise in personal injury cases. They also testify at trial to the causes and effects of an injury. 

Janssen Malloy LLP’s personal injury attorneys are skilled investigators in their own right, but we don’t stop there. When complex accidents occur, Janssen Malloy LLP attorneys often reach out to other skilled professionals to help us make our case. If you are wondering what’s next when you’ve been injured by a dangerous condition of unknown origin, we are ready to bring new clarity to help you recover the full amount of your damages.