September 2, 2014

Tenth Circuit: Opinions, 9/30/10

The Tenth Circuit on Thursday issued one published opinion and four unpublished opinions.

Published

In United States v. Washington, the Court reversed the district court’s denial of Petitioner’s motions to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence. Petitioner claimed that his counsel was constitutionally deficient in defending him from charges of possession of cocaine and carrying a firearm in connection with a crime. The Court agreed, finding that Petitioner’s “counsel’s failure to understand the basic mechanics of the sentencing guidelines and, in particular, his failure to advise [Petitioner] regarding the impact of relevant conduct on his potential sentence prior to meeting with the probation officer, amounted to constitutionally deficient performance under Strickland v. Washington.”

Unpublished

United States v. Carter

United States v. Ackerman

Olseth v. Larson

Bryner v. Barrett

Medical Marijuana Patients Now Have 35-Day Waiting Period

On September 27, Matt Cook, head of the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division for the Colorado Department of Revenue and recent CLE speaker, issued a memo to clarify the Division’s position regarding a Medical Marijuana Center selling marijuana to its patients within the first 35 days from the date the paperwork is sent:

A patient with application paperwork that is less than thirty-five days old may be denied a card by the CDPHE in the remaining portion of the thirty-five days. Therefore, it is the position of the (Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division) that if a MMC sells medical marijuana to persons having evidence of the proper filing of applications with the Patient Registry which are not dated at least thirty-five days prior to the sale, that MMC is doing so at its peril.
If MMCs sell medical marijuana to patients having evidence of the required applications being filed with the medical marijuana registry, but not dated at least thirty-five days prior to the date of the sale which are later denied by the CDPHE, or the patient has presented fraudulent documents, the MMC may face administrative and criminal sanctions as provided in law.
The memo is available here. H/T: Face the State