Wednesday, July 13, 2016

Never Too Late


  • Judge Gonzalez turned down the sale of the Moulin Rouge property. [RJ]
  • Murder charges seven years after the crime--even though an inmate passed on specific details to police a month after it happened. [RJ]
  • Switch sues the Nevada Public Utilities Commission in federal court. [Las Vegas Sun]
  • Several attorneys are involved in a group touting the economic benefits of recreational marijuana use. [Las Vegas Sun]
  • Rumor has it there is an arrest warrant for Judge Ochoa's son. Anyone have the details?

28 comments:

  1. Legalizing marijuana is just logical and economical. Tax revenue goes up, spending tax dollars jailing weed dealers goes down, hurts the mexican cartel's bottom line, and finally will give consistency in the quality of the product.

    Also, I fully support Switch for going after the PUC and NV energy. this backdoor conspiracy of screwing people who want to go solar has to stop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You leave out an important part of the equation. As the availability and use of marijuana increase, so will the percentage of the population availing itself of handouts like food stamps, Section 8 housing, Medicaid, Social Security Disability, and other government transfer payments. When fewer people feel like working, fewer people will work. So while tax revenues from sales may go up, tax revenues from personal income may decrease while demand for government handouts increases. Something to think about.

      It is, of course, possible to remain productive with a regular pot habit. But the number of people who cannot is much smaller that the number of people who can.

      Delete
    2. * substitute the word "smaller" for the word "larger" in the second paragraph above.

      Delete
    3. 10:36 your whole argument is assuming that people will not want to work simply because weed is legal. thats a bullshit premise and you know it. first of all, what make you think that just because weed is legal the numbers will rise? its not like weed is hard to get now anyway. secondly, other states that have already legalized the mary jane havnt seen such increases you speak of. frankly, im appalled with your perspective

      Delete
    4. It's not weed being legal that causes people to not feel like working; it's the ingestion of weed that makes people not feel like working.

      Regular ingestion of marijuana causes many other undesirable behaviors (like causing stoned people to think they sound smart when they actually sound like idiots); but the malaise part is very concerning. One thing society needs fewer of is unproductive leeches.

      Delete
    5. ok weed expert.. why dont you go smoke some weed so you magically feel like not typing on this blog anymore? like ever...

      Delete
    6. Okay weed endorser, here's the solution: Unfettered access to weed for everyone; but if one fails a pee test, no gub'mint help. None.

      Fair compromise?

      See, we don't care that you use weed, we really don't, it's not a morality play. But if you are unproductive and therefore welfare-dependent because of your decision to use weed, productive non-weed-using taxpayers shouldn't be compelled to support you. Fair?

      Delete
    7. No that is stupid. And not because I dont support drug testing for those on unemployment and so forth (because i do support that idea). However, if weed is LEGAL, then testing positive for it wouldnt matter. Its like saying people testing positive for nicotine shouldnt get government benefits since they smoke cigs...i am presuming you dont support that position so why would you support the weed position? Now if it was ILLEGAL drugs then sure I am all for it. But since this conversation is about making weed LEGAL, then you have to factor that into your "solution." So no, your compromise isnt "fair" because it leaves out the whole point we are having this argument: MAKE WEED LEGAL. now please, go smoke the dope and stop typing your nonsensical shit on here. thanks

      Delete
    8. Is it a fair compromise if we also tell big business to pay their tax or favorable tax breaks go away? Everybody loves to be paternalistic with the poor, but what about the other side of the coin?

      Delete
  2. I am not sure if I agree with the supporters of legalized marijuana in making promises that have not been proven, yet. However, I do agree with decriminalizing marijuana as we already have the highest incarceration rate of any industrialized nation and am not sure why smoking marijuana should be criminal. What people decide to consume should be their own choice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marijuana is already decriminalized in Nevada. You are drinking the Koolaide. No one is in prison for marijuana unless they are a major trafficer. You will still have a drug problem and illegal trafficking in drugs even when you legalize. Example: Oxycontin has taken the place of heroin and is sold on the street illegally after it is obtained legally. Marijuana will be regulated then there will be a black market like cigarettes. It is so easy to get a medical marijuana drug card. If you smoke the stuff, you can't drive. Do you want your doctor or lawyer stoned when they have you as a patient or client? In Colorado, the voters wish they could vote it down. Once recreational use passes there is no turning back. Other countries that experimented with this long before we did like Denmark and Holland have attempted to go back to stricter laws.

      Delete
    2. " No one is in prison for marijuana unless they are a major trafficer"

      This is where everyone can stop reading this uninformed list of talking points because it's not true.

      Delete
    3. Dear Lawyer Bird: I'm not saying you're wrong, but your position is totally opposed to what I have seen. I externed for a federal district judge and then clerked for another. The only marijuana cases that came through the courts I worked in were major shipments. Both judges said they don't remember ever seeing the USAO pursue marijuana cases that didn't involve major shipments. I have done just about zero criminal work since I left my clerkship, so I'm the first to admit that I could be wrong here. I'm hoping you can send me some case cites where people have been charged for minor marijuana possession in Clark County or the District of Nevada in the last 5 years.

      Delete
    4. dear 11:44, unlike you, I externed in NV supreme court and clerked in in the EJDC...ive seen COUNTLESS amounts of defendants in cuffs for maryjuana charges that do not meet the trafficker standard. you fail to realize that most of the time it is up to the State to report for violations to the Feds, and most of the time they do not. I have seen people put in jail over marijuana. it is the stupidest waste of tax dollars. and i clerked in state court 2014-15 so this is recent still

      Delete
    5. Nobody goes to prison for FIRST-TIME marijuana possession. In fact, it's not even a felony the first time and even the third offense (first felony) is a mandatory-probation felony. BUT, people do violate probation and end up in prison when their only underlying charges are for possession (or better yet, being "under the influence" of marijuana which is a felony).

      The feds won't prosecute possession because their shit doesn't stink and they can't be bothered to prosecute anything that won't get Danny on the news.

      Delete
    6. 9:50 A.M., here: The statutory fine for possession of less than one ounce of marijuana (1st Offense) is $600.00, plus $140 AAs. I have seen cases where police have either cited or arrested people for having as little as one gram in their possession. Marijuana should be treated under the law the same as alcohol.

      Delete
    7. 11:53 and others. A person who is in prison on a marijuana charge pled guilty from a possession for sale or a large amount (i.e. trafficking) and pled down to possession or something else. I challenge anyone to find one case where someone is in prison on a first time marijuana charge. Instead of resorting to names and calling someone stupid, how about coming up with some arguments or facts. This is after all a legal law blog.

      Delete
    8. @11:53, I actually have two in mind that fit the scenario I described above. I can't reveal them for fear of revealing my awesome identity.

      REGARDLESS, pleading down means you're guilty of the offense you pled to. Unless you're fuckin' Conrad Hafen then what you pled to controls your sentencing. I don't care what you were charged with, especially in a county full of prosecutors so out of control that state law had to be changed to prevent every shoplift being charged as a felony burglary.

      Delete
    9. And, I'm retarded. I meant to address @ 5:10

      Delete
    10. 5:10, this is 11:53...Also remember just because you may not go to jail but instead get probation for your weed charge, that will lead to arrest and detention in lovely CDC for anytime you violate your probation WHICH I HAVE SEEN TIME AND AGAIN IN COURT. although the arrest is technically based on the violation, it is still indirectly related to the underlying weed charge that got them there in the first place. this is what you are missing

      Delete
  3. Looks like stupid came in and conquered all the anti-marijuana arguments. Its like listening to Trump, only dumber.

    ReplyDelete
  4. He has more than one son, might want to be more specific.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marcus Ochoa...the non-attorney son that robbed the balloon store for 76 dollars last year and has a case pending...Scotti is the judge. Failure to appear arrest warrant from Justice Court on another matter.

      Delete
    2. https://lvjcpa.clarkcountynv.gov/Anonymous/Search.aspx?ID=100
      2 active warrants for the Ochoa kid. Daddy will get him out of it...

      Delete
    3. He's a heroin addict.

      Delete
  5. This discussion is gross. The son is not a public figure and does not deserve to be skewered on the Internet like this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell that to George Assad, it cost him an election.

      Delete