Last July, various police agencies in Spokane County raided several areas spas as part of an investigation into an alleged prostitution ring in the area. One of the spas was Joe Jean’s Health Spa on Division. This business had been in operation for years. At the time the police stated “we don’t think anyone was going for a legitimate message.”

On Friday, a local TV news channel posted a list of hundreds of men whose credit cards had been used at the spa. The list was apparently obtained from a public records request. The list had the name from the credit card, the date of the transaction, and the amount authorized.

Posting the list online was controversial, and some other local media outlets decided against naming names. Some people commenting on the site pointed out that the credit cards may have been stolen. Others said that it was improper to post the list because the nature of the service is unknown. In terms of the law, it does appear the TV station was acting within their rights under the first amendment. The station used the word “john” in the url. See: //ftpcontent.worldnow.com/khq/johnslist.pdf. That file name may have been intended for internal use rather than a public characterization of the list of names.

Will the men be charged with prostitution? It appears that that would be unlikely. The statute of limitations is one year, and many of those transactions are from quite a while ago. It would seem a case could only be made with direct testimony from the person rendering the service. No one has been charged with prostitution as a result of the raids.

In Washington State, the laws surrounding DUI allegations can be confusing if the defendant is under 21 years of age. It is commonly thought that the “legal limit” for DUI for an underage driver is .02. However, this is not quite true. The legal limit for DUI is .08 irrespective of the age of the driver. However, for underage drivers who blow under .08 (but over .02) there is a special crime called Driver Under 21 Consuming Alcohol under RCW 46.61.503. This is a less serious offense than DUI.

These statutes can even cause confusing for law enforcement. Just about every DUI lawyer has seen cases where a driver under 21 is cited for the lesser charge even when his or her breath is well over .08. It is sometime the advice of the defense lawyer to simply plead guilty to the offense as soon as possible before the prosecuting attorney can catch the mistake.

A DUI charge is a gross misdemeanor and is punishable by up to 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. Driver Under 21 Consuming Alcohol is just a misdemeanor and is punishable by up to 90 days in jail, and a $1,000 fine. These is no mandatory minimum jail sentence for the lesser charge.

The statutory difference between these offenses is confusing, and DUI lawyers occasionally see the offense incorrectly listed in the newspaper. Defense lawyers are usually slow to request that the paper make the correction because that will mean that the client’s name will simply be in the paper twice.

Driver Under 21 Consuming Alcohol is sometimes referred to as “minor op” or “baby DUI”. For this offense, it is not necessary that the prosecutor prove that the .02 level caused the driver to be impaired or under the influence. Also, despite the name of the statute, it is not necessary that the prosecutor prove that the consumption actually occurred when the minor was behind the wheel.

A defense lawyer representing a person on this charge will occasionally be able to get the charge reduced to a non-driving offense like Minor Publicly Exhibiting the Effects of Alcohol. This crime is also a misdemeanor but it looks better on a person’s record.

For related subjects, see our past posts on MIP, and DUI charges under .08, and Marijuana DUI

[Todays post is by my friend Adam Rosenblum of New York. He tells us a little bit about New York law.]

Being Charged With A Crime In New York

Having the police charge you with a crime, read you your rights and handcuff you can put a life changing experience. The criminal justice system is quite complex and has many rules and guidelines that the average person does not know. If you happen to be visiting the State of New York and have been charged with a crime you should understand that you do not have to go through the process alone.
In New York State anyone who has been charged with a crime has an absolute right to defend themselves. If you have been charged with a crime you should contact a criminal defense attorney to help defend you and better understand your rights. Crimes in New York State are categorized in three separate classifications based on the seriousness of the crime and the penalty or sentencing guidelines involved. Below is some information to help you understand a little more about New York criminal law and how crimes are structured under New York Penal Law Section 10.00.

What Is A Felony?

The most serious crimes are considered felonies and anyone convicted of a felony crime is known as a felon. Under federal law felonies can be punishable at a minimum of one year or more (life sentences) and also can be punishable by death. Each individual state makes distinctions as to defining the sentencing guidelines and seriousness of crimes.

Felony crimes generally include: murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery, burglary, arson, copyright infringement, fraud, perjury, larceny, manufacture and sale of illegal drugs. Felonies can be further categorized as violent or nonviolent offenses. Violent offenses generally carry harsher penalties than nonviolent offenses.

What Kind Of Punishment Could I Face For A Felony In New York?

New York does not practice capital punishment or the death penalty for a felony. New York classifies felonies from “A Felonies” that carry the toughest penalties down to “E Felonies” which are the least serious.

• A Felonies- divided further into A-I and A-II
o A-I – minimum of 15 to life in prison
o A-II- carries a maximum of life in prison
• B Felonies – maximum penalty of 25 years
• C Felonies – maximum penalty of 15 years
• D Felonies – maximum penalty of 7 years
• E Felonies – maximum penalty of 4 years

As a matter of law if you have a prior felony conviction within the past ten years of the current offense than you will be faced with a more severe penalty. Also, convicted felons will lose their right to vote and are likely to lose any current professional licenses or the ability to seek a professional license in the future. Convicted felons have a difficult time finding employment because employers regularly request criminal background checks before making a hire.

What Is A Misdemeanor?

Misdemeanors are considered a lesser criminal act than a felony and as such carries lesser penalties. The maximum punishment allowed for a misdemeanor in New York is 12 months. In general misdemeanors include: simple assault, public intoxication, drug possession, petty theft and prostitution. Misdemeanors are still considered crimes and will be made a part of your criminal record.
With misdemeanors the courts have more flexibility to punish individuals using other methods like heavier fines, community service, probation, monitoring devices or limited jail sentences. If you have prior convictions on your criminal record than the judge will be less inclined to use these measures and will likely impose a jail sentence.

What is A Violation?

A violation is an offense where the potential jail sentence cannot be greater than fifteen days. Violations are not considered criminal and as such you will not have a criminal record for a violation however there are fines that can be imposed. Some examples of violations include: trespass, unlawful posting of advertisements, loitering, public intoxication, low levels of marijuana possession, failing to respond to a ticket.

How Do I Exercise My Rights When I Am Being Charged With A Crime?

Anytime that you are faced with a charge you have the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney present. Remember that you are innocent until proven guilty, which means that the police and the prosecutor (the attorney representing the State who is pursuing the case against you) must do all the work to build a case.
If you remain silent you are making it harder on the state to establish a case against you. It is the prosecutor’s responsibility and burden to prove their case. If they do not have enough information or evidence to build a case against you, you will likely be let free. Once you are under arrest or being interrogated by the police, tell the officer that “I am exercising my right to remain silent” and that “you would like to have an attorney represent you”.

What Can An Attorney Do For Me If I Am Being Charged With A Crime?

A lawyer can fight on your behalf to make sure you get the best outcome possible given the charges you are facing. An experienced defense attorney will work to have the charges brought down to the lowest level possible and in some cases dismissed all together.

If the prosecution presents an offer that exposes you to a penalty, an attorney will be able to recognize and advise you on whether you should accept the offer. If the prosecution does not have the evidence to support the criminal charges you are facing, an attorney can take your case to trial and show a jury that you are not guilty of the charges.

If you have been arrested or charged with any type of crime call The Rosenblum Law Firm today to schedule a free consultation with a criminal defense lawyer.

It’s not everyday that you get to hear the advice of a former police officer turned medical marijuana patient. Especially on the matter of how best to avert the law and stay out of handcuffs.

I recently read The Medical Marijuana Survival Guide by Nate Bradley and found it to be a very informative read. Bradley lends years of knowledge about the legal use of marijuana both from the standpoint of a medical marijuana user and a police officer.

Much of his advice in the book The Medical Marijuana Survival Guide revolves around the medical marijuana usage in California, pertaining to California’s prop 215 and S.B. 420, the allowance of people who were criminally charged with cultivating and/or possessing marijuana to use an affirmative medical defense in court, and the voluntary ID card program throughout the California Department of Health Services. With this card patients are immune from arrest as long as they cultivate no more than 6 mature marijuana plants and possessed no more than 8 ounces of marijuana.

However, after reading this book I thought that so much of it could be applied to the new recreational law and the usage of medical marijuana here in Washington. Much of the book goes over scenarios of how not to get put in handcuffs by police officers looking to bust you for exceeding the amount of marijuana you are allowed to carry. Bradley covers everything form how to get out and avoid traffic stops, officer arrest strategies, home encounters, home gardening, private transfers, the social scene, and the red flags that go along with each of them.

According to Bradley “This book is a guide to help you avoid arrest and navigate the rough legal and personal challenges you may face as a medical marijuana patient. It is not a ‘know your rights’ type of book. Most medical marijuana patients have very few ‘rights’ other then a good legal defense in courts.”

For the average Washington resident, this book will inform you not as much on your rights, but rather, on how you can avoid being arrested for not fully understanding the laws in Washington. While Washington voters have passed I-502, it is still unclear how law enforcement is going to uphold the law. According to Bradley, there are always “drug warriors” out there that are determined that they are going to make a big impact on your life if they arrest you, even for the smallest infraction when it comes to marijuana. In this book, Bradley tells you how to avoid situations like these by telling you the psychology of not only an experienced patient, but also as an experienced officer. The combined knowledge of both lifestyles lends the reader a very good base on what the best form of action is, and what are the best ways to avoid arrest or citation.

One particular part that I thought was very interesting were the chapters on traffic stops and home encounters, the two places where people are most likely to encounter the police. Bradley scripts out for the reader the exact way for a person carrying marijuana, whether it is medical or a legalized amount, to fly under the radar and reduce the risk of getting arrested. As many people may know, talking to a police officer during a traffic stop or a home visit, is a very nerve-racking experience that often leads people to say things that can be interpreted by an officer to mean something very different than what you meant to say. Bradley walks you through a series of scenarios that will lessen your chance of being arrested.

Overall, this is a very quick read that lends a vast amount of knowledge about our current situation here in Washington. While, it is not directly targeted at the laws here in Washington, much of the public attitudes towards marijuana from state to state are very similar. It’s all about understands your rights, the situation that you are in, and what is your best form of defense if you do get arrested.

Bradley also offers medical marijuana consulting, including strategic consulting, public relations, defense investigations, and collective security plans.

 

 

While reading an article the other day, I came across a piece of information that really made no sense to me. While I knew about it prior, I could never understand the reasoning for not compensating wrongly convicted criminals for the wasted life they spent in jail for crimes that they did not commit.

According to the Innocence Project 40 percent of all the people that have been exonerated after proving their innocence have no been compensated for the life they wasted while incarcerated.

There are currently 27 states that provide some form of compensation and help for the wrongfully convicted to immerse themselves back into society. Texas for example, provides $80,000 every year for a person that was wrongly convicted and an additional $25,000 per year for being on death row. Other states like California value their time per day, offering $100 for every day spent incarcerated.

However, despite much fight and a number of more than relevant cases, the state of Washington has opted out of this compensation, forcing the wrongly convicted to fight for any hope of a normal life before the state took it away from them.

In 1993, Alan Northrop’s life changed forever. Northrop was playing pool at a local bar, when he was arrested and charged for the rape and kidnapping of a housekeeper. According to the victim’s testimony, although she was blind folded for the majority of the attack, the jury sentenced Northrop, a father of three, to 23 years in prison.

During much of his time in prison, Northrop tried time and time again to reach out and prove his innocence. He was going nowhere, until he decided to contact the Innocence Project at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle in 2000.

The innocence project tried for years to prove Northrop’s innocence by requesting to use more advanced DNA testing on the evidence. However, it wasn’t until a new state law was enacted in 2005 that gave judges the power to order additional testing did Northrop get his request. It took an additional five years for the testing to be completed before the court would even consider the controversy results. The DNA showed that it was not Northrop’s DNA on the victim.

In 2010 Northrop was released from prison after serving 17 years behind bars for being wrongly convicted. One would think that his life was on the upswing, that he was free and eager to start a new life.

Northrop found out that because he was imprisoned in Washington, that was certainly not the case. He left prison with $2,500 to his name, which included the 42-cent-an-hour prison job that he had accrued over the 17 years he was there. With little money to his name and no work experience from the past 17 years, Northrop had nowhere to go. In addition he was hit with a child support bill of $111,000 that he had no way of paying.

Northrop currently works fulltime but has to live in a small room in a friend’s house because he is unable to afford anything else.

According to Northrop, it is not just the money that he wishes the state would pay him; it is also training and counseling for the punishment that the psyche undergoes after spending 17 years in prison.

Money would give Northrop a fighting chance to get his life started again. But because he doesn’t live in the one of the 27 states that compensates the wrongly convicted, he is out of luck and forced to figure it out on his own.

Innocence Project Northwest attorney Lara Zarowsky, who helped free Northrop, said that she and the Innocence project are lobbying for a law in Washington state that would provide not only the much needed compensation but also job training and counseling for exonerated prisoners. Possibly even the same type of job training and counseling that is available to guilty former prisoners.

More information of Northrop and the Innocence Project can be found here. There are cases like Northrop’s all over the country.  Another can be viewed here. The full story and video on Northrop’s case can be viewed online at CNN entitled Time doesn’t pay, wrongfully imprisoned find.

You have to wonder what criteria writers use when coming up with newspaper stories.   When the bar association announced that it would consider complaints filed against Grant County Prosecutor Angus Lee, you wouldn’t think that would even be a story.   It is an allegation only.    But journalist Ken Armstrong used it as an opportunity to track down everyone who dislikes Angus Lee to discuss everything they think he has ever done wrong.

The title of the article was “Chief Prosecutor, predicted to be an unmitigated disaster, now facing disciplinary charges.”    How is that a news headline?  Particularly when the people who made the “prediction” are the ones who are making the accusations against him? 

How do you measure a prosecutor’s success?  How about whether he and his staff are working hard?  Treating people fairly and equally without regard to race or class? Getting justice for victims?  Keeping a court system running smoothly?  Making do with less fiscal resources?  We don’t hear about this in Ken Armstrong’s piece.  Instead we hear 1) Angus Lee had little experience 4 years ago, 2) Angus Lee uses corny salutations in emails 3) he got a DUI charge back when he was 20 years old, 4) he has an employee working for him that has a criminal record [the employee was already there from the prior administration] 5) he has been accused by political rivals of having a conflict of interest but the bar hasn’t made a decision on this.

I understand the Ken Armstrong is a hotshot writer who has won a Pulitzer prize, but this story on Angus Lee doesn’t seem to be news at all.

The article went into detail about how Angus Lee got a DUI charge, and attracted the attention of the police by slamming on the breaks, and then the gas, and that he admitted to showing off for some girls in the car.   But this happened when he was 20 years old, and in college!    Contrast Armstrong’s story with the toned-down Seattle Times coverage of Bobbi Bridges’ drunken rampage when she was a 58-year-old Supreme Court Justice!  Or how about when the State School Superintendent got his DUI!   Two years later the Seattle Times endorsed Randy Dorn for re-election!

 

 

I recently read Special Agent Man by Steve Moore and I think it was great. I recommend this book to anyone who enjoys the thrill of the chase.

Special Agent Man is a good and easy read that takes the reader through the day-to-day life choices of an FBI agent. Moore reminisces on his journey from a college fraternity member to a FBI agent, terrorist hunter, helicopter pilot, and certified sniper. Moore challenges the stereotypical edgy, suit wearing FBI agent that is regularly portrayed on television, movies and popular culture. Moore strips away much of these falsities and gives a first hand account of a long career in the FBI from the Academy to retirement, including exciting accounts of SWAT teams, counterterrorism activities, and dangerous undercover assignments. Moore describes what it’s truly like to be a “special agent” and the amazing people that hold that honor. Through self-deprecating humor, Moore narrates many of his successes and mistakes. Including the tension that his career had on his marriage and his victory over aggressive cancer that sidelined him for a year, and his return to the Bureau with renewed dedication and insight on life that brought him some of the most thrilling assignments of his career.

As an agent in the Salt Lake City and Los Angles offices Moore was at the center of much of the most important FBI cases during his 20 plus years of service. Moore was also the supervisor of Al Qaeda investigations in LA.

The most amazing part of this book is Moore’s humility, both in the beginning of his career when he was an incoming agent at the academy and as a retired special agent. Moore brings his experiences to life by expressing his emotions during many of these adventures. Early on in his career, when he was stationed in Salt Lake City, Moore described his gripping fear during his interactions with the Aryan Nations, A white supremacy group in rural Idaho. The author does not hide his mistakes due to his inexperience and openly admits how fear nearly defeated him on many occasions early on in his career. Moore explained that as he became more experienced, fear rarely entered his mind and he very much looked for dangerous situations as a self-prescribed adrenaline junkie.

Much of this book is a memoir of Moore’s most exciting memories but it is also very much a dedication to his fellow agents who sacrificed everything to protect our freedoms.
The toll that this career has on a person’s family and health is truly unbelievable and hard to imagine. The inserts that Moore includes about how his career consistently conflicted with his family life, tearing him away from his wife and children, adds a nice dimension to Moore’s story. The section that Moore met and romanced his wife is especially well written and is a nice break from many of Moore’s narratives about tracking down criminals.  If you get the chance, you definitely want to pick this book up.

 

 

When does Initiative 502 go into effect?

The short answer is December 6th, 2012.  However, different prosecutors across the state are taking different positions.  For example, prosecutors in King County and Pierce County announced last Thursday that they would be dismissing all pending marijuana charges.

But in Spokane County, a lead prosecuting attorney gave the opinion that he felt that Initiative 502 only permitted the possession of marijuana if it was bought in a state-license store.  The Spokane prosecutor explained: “The only thing that is legal is selling marijuana through those stores. That will be regulated by the state. You can’t under this initiative have an ounce of marijuana that doesn’t come from a state-issued provider. You still can’t have black-market marijuana.”  If that is the case, there would be a significant delay until Initiative 502 goes into effect because the state stores will not be set up until 2013. Additionally it is highly unlikely that the federal government would even tolerate the existence of state stores.

The position of Spokane prosecutor seemed to be more of an off-the-cuff remark rather than a declaration of an official office interpretation.  Under legal traditions in the country, if a law is ambiguous, it is to be construed to favor the individual over the government.  In law, this is often called “the rule of lenity” that “penal statutes are construed narrowly.”  Several criminal defense lawyers across the state are currently making the argument that I-502 should be applied retroactively.

Poet, songwriter and community activist Nicole “Nyki” Kish was convicted on March 1, 2011 of second degree murder for allegedly stabbing to death Ross Hammond in Toronto Canada, on August 8, 2007.

The physical altercation that resulted in Hammond’s death began when a women identified as Faith Watts allegedly asked for money from George Dranichak and Hammond. Dranichak testified at the preliminary hearing and at the trial that he and Hammond had responded to Watts with sexual derogatory remarks, such as telling her that she must perform sexual acts if she wanted the money.  Dranichak admitted that this was the initial cause of the altercation.

The request for money quickly escalated for a exchange of heated words a large brawl that involved both Dranick, Hammond, Watts, Watt’s boyfriend, Kish, and other unnamed individuals, both males and females.

The brawl took place at the Toronto intersection of Queen and Bathurst, a very well lit area with shops and restaurants on both sides.

At the conclusion of the brawl, Hammond lay bleeding having sustained 5 stab wounds to the chest, and several others on the back. The one that took Hammond’s life was a cut that completely penetrated the anterior right ventricle of his heart. Nyki was the only other one who has been injured by the knife, with a stab wound to her arm.

The entirety of the incidents that occurred on August 8, 2007 can be viewed here: case overview

The difficulty surrounding this case revolves around the variety of recollections of what occurred that night. Prosecuting Crown, Warren Thompson, called upon 20 witnesses to testify, however, because of the nature of the incident, many of the recollections and accounts of what transpired were inconclusive and contradicting.

Few things were known for certain. The first one was that the knife that was used to stab Hammond was not Nykis, but former co-accused Faith Watts. Faith testified that it was indeed her knife and she produced the knife after becoming terrified for her life and the life of her boyfriend Doug, who was being beaten unconscious by Hammond at the time. She also testified that either Dranichak or Hammond quickly disarmed her.

The second piece of information that we know for certain is that the there was DNA evidence of both Nyki and Hammond on the knife; the same knife was used to stab Hammond and Nyki.

And lastly, the mot important piece of information is that there was only one miniscule piece of Hammond’s DNA present on Nyki’s sole of her shoe. Whereas, Watts had several spots of DNA on her boots and two spots on her shorts.

You can listen to the Mother of Nicole Kish speak out here.

There are several pieces of this case that do not add up and truly show a disconnection between what really happened and what Nyki is being changed with.

Detective Sergeant Gary Giroux was the detective assigned to the case. Giroux stated on the stand that he based his murder charges against Nyki because of the eyewitness testimonies of molly Stopford and Jonathan, both of which admitted later on in the trial that it was possible that they could be interchanging two, maybe three girls that she had seen involved in the brawl.

With all the confusion surrounding what actually happened that night through the eyes of the witnesses, would it not be easier and more accurate to view the surveillance tapes that were located on both sides of the street? The defense thought so, however, when asked to present the video footage in court it was determined that both tapes were either lost or recorded over while in police custody or under police supervision. One VHS tape from a Jewelry store was placed into an evidence box, and by the time it came into Giroux’s possession, the video was no longer present anywhere in the Toronto Police Department.

The second video, which was taken from One of a Kind Pasta, the only camera that could possibly see who stabbed Hammond, was recorded over by surveillance specialist Detective Olver, which was deemed unacceptable negligence on behalf of the Toronto Police Department.

The DNA test, and testimony from Faith Watts is another facet to this case that is very unusual. Justice Nordhiemer came to the conclusion that even though Watts testified to be the owner of the knife and had several DNA spots on her clothes, she was not the murderer, but rather, it was Nyki who had only one small piece of DNA on the side of her shoe. It seems very hard to believe that a woman can overpower a man and stab him five times in the chest with no contact, and no trace of DNA except for a minuscule spot on the sole of her shoe, all while already suffering a stab wound to her arm.

Nordheimer attributed the DNA findings as being the “limitations of Physical evidence,” and while he acknowledged that the knife belonged to Watts, it most likely changed hands several times before it was fatally used. Nordheimer focused less on the physical DNA evidence and more on Nyki being stabbed, stating that there is an “irresistible inference” that she must of killed Hammond.

The final interesting and inconclusive piece of information about this case is the “Unidentified Male.” There is a substantial amount of evidence that has come forward to suggest that the fatal stabbing that claimed Hammond’s life involved three males, not a female. Cam Bordignon testified that he recalled a man shout out, “you die tonight.” Shaun Park also witnessed this man pull up his shirt and showed off a stab wound that he received in his chest. Park recalled that the man said that it didn’t matter, that he had been stabbed in the chest 19 times.

This raises the question about the unidentified male’s motives and the possibility of a second knife that was present in the brawl. Watts testified that the knife that she originally produced that night was serrated, which is consistent to the wounds inflicted to Hammond’s Back. However, the wounds on Hammond’s chest, including the one that claimed his life, had little to no resembling characteristics. In fact, Dr. Pollan, the doctor who preformed the autopsy could not rule out the possible of a second knife.

Nyki was convicted and sentenced to life in prison with no chance for parole for 12 years.

“…innocent people will continue to be damned to this until more Canadians are made aware of the workings of our judicial system and vital changes are made. I’m ashamed that our police forces tunnel vision to prosecute me against all obvious facts will leave many without true closure and equally ashamed that our media is not the public watchdog it ought to be.” -Nyki Kish

You can read more about this case at Injustice Anywhere or at Free Nyki. Both of these websites give a thorough account of the events on that occurred on August 8, 2011 and all actions following. These websites also offer collections of her music and writings. The best way to keep up on recent developments in Nyki’s life and trial is to look at the Free Nyki facebook page.

As Initiative 502 passes into law tonight, no one in our criminal justice systems will know for sure what it means.  Will the passage of I-502 be the first crack in the Berlin Wall that is nationwide prohibition?  Will the passage spread through to other States in 2013 and 2014?  To what extent will the federal government tolerate the open sale of marijuana?  Will the law be applied evenly throughout the state, or will eastern Washington continue to lag behind in the liberalization of marijuana laws?  Here are my predictions:

1.  The Feds adopt a wait and see approach.

Although the possession or sale of marijuana remains illegal under federal law, the federal government will likely take no immediate action against I-502.  As with our passage of medical marijuana 14 years ago, the federal government will be slow to completely invalidate a state policy decision on a controlled substance.  The federal authorities sat back until 2010 to begin action against the larger medical marijuana dispensaries in Washington, and we certainly won’t see any immediate action from the federal authorities now.

2. Increased marijuana DUI enforcement. 

Marijuana-related DUI charges have traditionally been rare in this country.  The effects of marijuana intoxication are more subtle than with alcohol, and the scientific studies indicate that marijuana does not have a predictable effect on a person’s ability to operate a motor vehicle.  However, I-502 has set a legal limit of 5 nanograms of THC per milliliters of blood.  I predict that the Department of Licensing and the law enforcement of the state will begin to enforce that new provision immediately.  Although I-502 will likely not lead to many new marijuana users, the perception of law enforcement will be that marijuana use will increase ten fold overnight.  Starting today, every law enforcement officer will feel he or she has a new job – standing as a bastion against “stoned” driving.

 3.  Zero tax revenue.

Initiative 502 was sold on the Washington voters as a good source of tax revenue.  While the voter initiative calls for such a regulatory structure, timid state officials will not license marijuana stores out of fear of being viewed as an “accomplice” to a violation of federal law.  If the state isn’t licensing the stores, they will find it difficult to collect any taxes.  My prediction is a net tax revenue for 2013 of zero dollars.  The more likely scenario is that sales of marijuana will continue on a gray market to people who believe they are buying marijuana legally because they voted for Initiative 502.

4.  Prosecutions continue in eastern Washington.

The legalization provisions of I-502 did not go into effect as of 8 p.m. tonight.  Rather, the law takes effect on December 6th.  As pointless as it may seem, hundreds of people will be arrested and cited for marijuana possession between now and then, particularly in rural eastern Washington.  Additionally, even after December 6th, prosecutors in eastern Washington will find ways around Initiative 502.  For example, during a traffic stop, if a person admits to sharing a little marijuana with a friend, or admits to intending to share, they will be charged with felony charges of delivery of a controlled substance, or possession with intent to deliver.  Likewise, people could be charged with possession if they admit to having possessed the marijuana in Washington State prior to December 6th.  This might sound silly if you have never practiced over there, but this is the difference between the Seattle area and the rest of the State, and this uneven and inconsistent enforcement will continue post I-502.