Los Angeles Marijuana Defense Lawyers

Marijuana Possession, Cultivation and Sales Defense Attorneys:
Violation of Health and Safety Code Sections 11358, 11359, 11360
Kestenbaum Eisner & Gorin, LLP, is rated in the top 5% of U.S. pre-eminent law firms by the Martindale-Hubbell national lawyer review. Our criminal defense attorneys have been helping clients obtain superior results for over 50 years. Our firm specializes in the defense of all drug crimes. We do everything possible to ensure our clients receive reliable and aggressive representation in and out of court.

Our firm partners are former Los Angeles prosecutors and specialize in defending marijuana possession, cultivation and sales charges, including violations of Health and Safety Code Sections 11359 (Possession for Sale of Marijuana), 11358 (Cultivation of Marijuana) and 11360 (Sale and Transportation of Marijuana).
Marijuana Possession for Sale, Cultivation, and Transportation:
Health and Safety Code Sections 11358, 11359, 11360
California law defines these offenses as felonies, which carry the strong possibility of a state prison sentence. For each offense, the prosecution must prove that the defendant knew the drugs were in his or her presence, and that the defendant intended to sell, cultivate, or transport the marijuana.

If the police do not obtain fingerprints from the wrapping or container the drugs are located in, the defense can contest to whom the drugs truly belonged and argue that the defendant is not responsible for the drug sales or transportation allegations. Constitutional violations committed by the police may lead to the entire case being thrown out of court.

It is extremely important that you retain the legal services of an experienced San Fernando Valley criminal defense attorney who understands how to successfully defend marijuana charges. Our law firm has secured the dismissal of numerous marijuana cases through aggressive representation before charges are filed, at preliminary hearings, and in court.

Medical Marijuana

Despite the passing of Proposition 215 in California, some LAPD and LASD officers choose arrest suspects and seize legally held medicinal marijuana and settling the issues in court. This conflict between state and federal laws has led to abuses of power by the local police. Our aggressive defense to marijuana charges has led to the dismissal of numerous cases of marijuana sales and possession.

In a recent case handled by our firm, a client had substantial monies and several ounces of marijuana returned to him by the LAPD after the case was dismissed in the middle of a preliminary hearing due to a lack of evidence. The LAPD “expert on drug sales” was not familiar with the provisions of Medical Marijuana laws and as a result, the case was dismissed.

In another recent case, our attorney’s were successful in preventing a criminal filing and seizure of property against a Medical Marijuana Clinic after a search warrant led to arrests and the seizure of a large quantity of cannabis.

In cases not involving medical marijuana our defense lawyers can argue that the marijuana was possessed for personal use, and that the case merits a drug-treatment program, not jail time. The quantity, method of packaging, amount of money seized, and evidence of pay/owe sheets are all factors the defense can use in arguing the marijuana was not possessed for sale.

The Law of Attraction for Children

A new book contends that children understand a lot more than adults think. Free of the “realism” that filters most adult’s creative thinking, children seem to gobble up the most esoteric mental meals. Developing this plethora of intellectual real estate should be every parent’s goal. In her enchanting interpretation of an ancient Polynesian tale, author Christina Hanser makes this task easy and fun as she revels her own version of The Secret in her book, The Law of Attraction for Children 

The Law of Attraction for Children is based on the ancient tale of the Huna philosophy of Polynesia. The tale, passed down from generation to generation by the Kahunas (priests and priestesses who were keepers of “the secret”), lays out the fundamental idea in Huna philosophy – that we create our experience of reality. In short, we are co-creators with the universe.

The Huna is a knowledge that comes from the oldest inhabitants of the earth. Its origins date back to the lost continent of Mu, also known as Lemuria. In fact, “huna” means “hidden secret.”

Imparting this knowledge in a charming storyline, The Law of Attraction for Children follows Thaynna, a little girl growing up in Polynesia, who learns the law of attraction. In following Thaynna, young readers learn how to use their creative minds to facilitate their daily lives.


ACLU Report: Reclaiming Michigan’s Throwaway Kids: Students Trapped in the School-to-Prison Pipeline

the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan released a report entitled “Reclaiming Michigan’s Throwaway Kids: Students Trapped in the School-to-Prison Pipeline,” which argues that there is trend among school districts to enforce disciplinary policies and practices that expel students from schools without regard for the long-term impact.  The report defines the “the school-to-prison pipeline” as a statistical correlation between students who are expelled or suspended from school and the likelihood they will be incarcerated as adults.

The ACLU argues that race also plays a factor in the findings.  Mark P. Fancher, ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project staff attorney and principal author of the report, said “we found that black kids are consistently suspended in numbers that are considerably disproportionate to their representation in the various student populations.”

The study found that one significant contributor in Michigan’s school-to-prison pipeline is a lack of “due process.”  Suspension and expulsion policies and procedures to remove students from Michigan’s public schools vary from district to district.  The ACLU argues that a uniform policy should be adopted for all school districts to follow statewide.

The study also blames Michigan’s zero tolerance expulsion law as contributing to the school-to-prison pipeline.  Michigan law  requires the expulsion of students who possess a “dangerous weapon.”  In many instances, well behaved, unsuspecting students have faced serious consequences for carrying items that do not necessarily reflect this definition.

Information within the report was obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests to school districts across the state, interviews with students, parents, and educators; information obtained while providing advocacy work to students facing discipline; scholarly reports and studies; legal analyses; and information collected while providing aggrieved students with legal representation.

The ACLU recommends amending Michigan’s expulsion law to conform more strictly to the scope of federal requirements by making only firearm offenses subject to mandatory automatic expulsions. In addition, school administrators should explore alternatives to suspension and expulsion, including restorative practices to correct the problem rather than punish the deed. Other ACLU recommendations address alternative education and offer guidelines on when to involve the criminal justice system with disciplinary matters.

While I am sympathetic to the points made by the ACLU, I think they go too far.  While I understand the notion that students who present discipline problems are entitled to an education, I would also argue that all students have a right to an education.  This education should be free from distraction, harassment and violence caused by other students.  The ACLU’s recommendation that only firearm offenses should be subject to automatic expulsions is absurd.  Under the ACLU’s position, students in school should feel safe from gun violence, but expulsion for a good old fashioned knife fight (ala West Side Story) is going too far.  The simple truth is students who are disruptive and violent should be removed from the classroom to give an opportunity for the rest of the students to have a quality education.  We should not hinder the entire student body’s education because of a few bad apples.

Further, many of these students would be removed by the juvenile justice system and not because of any action by the school district.  I feel compelled to point out that the prosecutor has the authority to prosecute juvenile offenses.  Thus, the school district has very little to say about whether the criminal justice system becomes involved.