There has been a debate raging lately among consumer bankruptcy attorneys about how to counsel a client who grows and cultivates medical marijuana.  The basic question is:  does a crop, illegal under federal laws, constitute property of the bankruptcy estate and need it be disclosed in the bankruptcy schedules.  The problem lies in the fact that, while legal in California if it meets certain standards for medical uses, the act of growing marijuana constitutes a crime under the laws of the United States.  Filing a bankruptcy petition could put the various federal government police agencies on notice of a crime that could ultimately lead to confiscation and prosecution.  A sad day indeed for the medical marijuana grower and erstwhile bankruptcy debtor. On the other hand, failing to list an asset is itself a Federal Bankruptcy crime.

What to do?  I would say that filing the bankruptcy case, as long as all assets are disclosed, has very little chance of leading to prosecution for illegal possession and cultivation.  The federal government has pretty much given up the fight against medical marijuana growers and dispensaries that are otherwise legal under state law.  But, such marijuana could be considered a valuable asset.  It seems like an unlikely proposition that a trustee would actual attempt to administer a marijuana crop by selling the asset for the benefit of creditors. However, I think the good advice here is to file the case only if the asset can be fully disclosed and fully exempt and simply avoid the issue.  A debtor usually has the choice of timing of the filing of the bankruptcy case.  I would recommend to only file when the assets have been consumed or otherwise disposed of in the ordinary course of the business and affairs of the debtor.  This could simply be after the debtor has sold some of his or her crop and spent down the proceeds to below the  exemption threshold that applies in the particular case.  Maybe it is time to invest proceeds into an IRA or other asset where a larger exemption might be available.

Read more: http://www.sflawyer.net/blog/?p=16

Every morning, they don their black robes, take their seats and listen to the pleas of a long line of immigrants desperate to stay in America. The pace is fast, the pressure intense, the stories sometimes haunting. The work, these judges say, is exhausting:

"The volume is constant and unrelenting.' ... 'There is not enough time to think.' ... 'Nobody gives a damn about us!' ... 'I know I couldn't do this job if I were not on medication for depression or did not have access to competent psychological care myself.' ... 'I cannot take this place anymore. What a dismal job this is!'"

These are the voices of immigration judges who determine the fate of tens of thousands of people every year - illegal border crossers, visa violators, refugees who flee China, El Salvador, Iran and other countries, each making a case to remain here.

These judges are at the heart of a bloated immigration court system saddled by explosive growth, a troubled reputation and a record backlog, according to one estimate, of nearly 268,000 cases. The problems are drawing increased scrutiny of a little-seen world where justice can seem arbitrary, lives can remain in limbo for years - and blame seems to be in abundance.

Gov. Chris Christie is warning that if the state Supreme Court rules the way it usually does on a long-running school funding case, it could doom other state services. The build-up about the immediate consequences gives the chapter of the court case known as Abbott v. Burke even more significance than many of the 20 other decisions in the case dating back to the 1980s.

The question now before the court is whether the state's cuts in aid to schools for the current academic year were so deep that New Jersey didn't live up to its constitutional requirement of providing a "thorough and efficient education" to all students.It's not clear when it might be decided.

But lawyers for the state and for children in the poorest school districts filed legal papers last week laying out their sides. Oral arguments are scheduled for April 20. Over the long history of the case, the state Supreme Court has consistently ruled that New Jersey should provide more money to the state's poorest school districts.

The rulings have led to free preschools for 3- and 4-year-olds in those cities. Those programs are often cited as national models and given credit for improving test scores of grade-school students. The infusion of money has also brought replacements and repairs for many of their decrepit school buildings, extra help for teaching key areas such as reading.

Wisconsin court officials fear the court's data management system, including a popular site that allows anyone to easily look up the criminal records of friends and neighbors, could be on shaky ground if the governor's proposed budget breaks up its funding mechanism.

Gov. Scott Walker's proposed budget would end a dedicated funding stream for Consolidated Court Automation Programs, the data management system for the state courts system. State law now gives the system $6 out of every $21.50 charged as part of the Justice Information System Surcharge included in most court filing fees. Under the new proposal, all fee revenue would go to the Department of Administration, which would give the money to the system and a range of other programs. It would also cut the system's funding by 10 percent.

Jean Bousquet, CCAP spokeswoman, said the switch would allow DOA to move money to other programs in the future. If that happens, Consolidated Court Automated Programs would have to consolidate or cut back on non-essential services, and the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access database would likely be on the shortlist of cuts.

The WCCA site provides detailed and updated information on all past and pending court cases in the Wisconsin circuit courts system and is accessible to anyone with an Internet connection. Bousquet said while they hope cuts are not necessary, the system would likely deal with budget cuts through gradual moves.

The INSIDER EXCLUSIVE will produce a Network TV Special on this tragic story of Injustice... detailing the "illegal activities" of the New Orleans DA's Office, and examine the "mindset" of the five Justices who sanction prosecutorial misconduct in America today.... putting innocent people in jail.

"Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"  - as John Thompson personally tells his own "nightmare story of injustice".

Last month, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 to overturn a case John had won against Harry Connick Sr's New Orleans DA Office who oversaw his case, ruling that they were not liable for the failure to turn over that evidence — which included proof that blood at the robbery scene wasn’t John Thompson's.

The prosecutors involved in his two cases, from the office of the Orleans Parish district attorney, Harry Connick Sr., helped to cover up 10 separate pieces of evidence. And most of them are still able to practice law today.

In addition, of the six men one of John's prosecutors got sentenced to death, five eventually had their convictions reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct.

In America today......This could happen to you 

Because of that, prosecutors are free to do the same thing to someone else today.


Read John's personal NY Times Opinion essay "The Prosecution Rests, but I Can’t".... and remember "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere".

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/opinion/10thompson.html?pagewanted=2&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

Please visit John's website:  Resurrection After Exoneration   http://www.r-a-e.org/home

The INSIDER EXCLUSIVE will produce a Network TV Special on this tragic story of Injustice... detailing the "illegal activities" of the New Orleans DA's Office, and examine the "mindset" of the five Justices who sanction prosecutorial misconduct in America today.... putting innocent people in jail.

"Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"  - as John Thompson personally tells his own "nightmare story of injustice".

Last month, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 to overturn a case John had won against Harry Connick Sr's New Orleans DA Office who oversaw his case, ruling that they were not liable for the failure to turn over that evidence — which included proof that blood at the robbery scene wasn’t John Thompson's.

The prosecutors involved in his two cases, from the office of the Orleans Parish district attorney, Harry Connick Sr., helped to cover up 10 separate pieces of evidence. And most of them are still able to practice law today.

In addition, of the six men one of John's prosecutors got sentenced to death, five eventually had their convictions reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct.

In America today......This could happen to you 

Because of that, prosecutors are free to do the same thing to someone else today.


Read John's personal NY Times Opinion essay "The Prosecution Rests, but I Can’t".... and remember "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere".

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/opinion/10thompson.html?pagewanted=2&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

Please visit John's website:  Resurrection After Exoneration   http://www.r-a-e.org/home