All Over Albany

Marijuana: Justice, Equity, Reinvestment at Albany Capital Center

A conference called Marijuana: Justice, Equity, Reinvestment will be at the Albany Capital Center December 11 and 12. It's backed by the New York office of the Drug Policy Alliance. Conference blurbage:

Creating a system to tax and regulate marijuana use by adults over the age of 21 is a sound economic investment for the state of New York. In the states with existing regulated markets, previously static economies have experienced a new small business boom coupled with technological advances that benefit a variety of industries. Additionally, legalization presents an opportunity for New York's agrarian community to foster the development of a new crop that is sustainable, resilient, and widely consumed. Similar to the rise of New York's craft wine and beer industries, a regulated marijuana market could also provide opportunities for small businesses in small towns across the state to cultivate a business model that is not reliant on access to large amounts of capital but is instead dependent on local resources as well as their own ingenuity and creativity.

The state of New York is well positioned to make a significant impact on the developmental trajectory of the nascent legal industry in a way that strongly favors diversity and inclusion. The history of marijuana prohibition in New York and lessons learned from other states have produced a wealth of information that can be used to preemptively address potential barriers to progress as the state transitions away from the failed experiment of prohibition.

That link above includes the conference schedule. The lineup includes all sorts of speakers: elected officials, advocates, academics, business owners, doctors.

It's free to attend, but registration is required.

(there's more)

The Albany County DA's office is going to stop prosecuting people for having small amounts of marijuana

David Soares at a community meeting about marijuana policy at APL Arbor Hill branch this past summer.

Albany County DA David Soares announced Thursday that his office will no longer be prosecuting people for "simple possession" of marijuana -- cases in which people are found to have less two ounces. The new policy starts December 1, and the DA's office says it will be seeking dismissals "where appropriate for cases currently pending where these are the sole charges."

The new policy does not cover cases in which people are openly using pot in public or in a car, or near children.

Soares held a series of community meetings about changing views toward marijuana earlier this year. And the announcement today's change referenced those meetings. Press release blurbage:

This policy has been developed after conducting a number of public meetings across the county in order to hear from the people we represent. In conjunction with the public meetings, we sought the opinion of residents via our website. The vast majority of our constituents indicated that they wanted to see a shift in the legal status of recreational adult use marijuana and in the enforcement of existing laws. Given the near certain impending changes in the law, and given the sea change in society's views of the issue, it is no longer the best use of our resources to prosecute these low-level marijuana offenses.

Recreational marijuana use is now legal in Vermont. And Massachusetts is in the process of starting recreational marijuana sales.

Here in New York, a Siena poll reported earlier this year that a majority of people favored allowing recreational marijuana. Cynthia Nixon made it a plank in her gubernatorial campaign. And a state Department of Health report released this past summer argued for legalizing recreational pot.

It would not be surprising to see a move toward legalization of recreational marijuana in New York State now that Democrats will control both chambers of the state legislature.

Past convictions
One of the important angles in the shift towards legalizing pot is the thousands of people who have been prosecuted in the past for something that is now being decriminalized or may even soon be legal.

(there's more)

The ruling when it comes to the cash vs. credit card price: There should be no math

New York is one of 11 states that technically prohibits retailers from charging customers a surcharge for using a credit card when making a purchase. But the state's law allows merchants to give people a discount for using cash instead of a card. So, in the end, you can still be charged more for using a card.

The question of how to describe the credit card versus cash price in New York has been working its way through courts for the last few years, and even circulated through the Supreme Court of the United States at one point.

A group of businesses had filed a lawsuit seeking to affirm their right to tell customers, for example, "a haircut costs $10.00, and if you pay with a credit card you will pay 3% extra." The Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, ruled this week that's not allowed. From the majority opinion:

... [W]e conclude that a merchant complies with [this provision of the state's general business law] if and only if the merchant posts the total dollars-and-cents price charged to credit card users. In that circumstance, consumers see the highest possible price they must pay for credit card use and the legislative concerns about luring or misleading customers by use of a low price available only for cash purchases are alleviated. To be clear, plaintiffs' proposed single-sticker pricing scheme - which does not express the total dollars-and-cents credit card price and instead requires consumers to engage in an arithmetical calculation, in order to figure it out - is prohibited by the statute.

In other words, the price listing can't be something like "$10 (+ 3% when using a card)." It must be something like "$10 / $10.30 when using a card."

Over at the New York Law Journal, Dan Clark has more context for the case and highlights one of the judges' dissents over the it's-a-surcharge/it's-a-discount issue.

Earlier: New York State and credit card "checkout fees" (2013)

New York's moving closer to marijuana legalization -- thinking about what could that mean for local communities

David Soares at Wednesday's meeting in Arbor Hill.

It would not be surprising for New York State to legalize recreational marijuana sometime during the next few years.

Massachusetts will start legal sales of recreational pot this July. That same month in Vermont it will become legal to have and grow small amounts of marijuana. Legalization had majority support among respondents to a Siena New York State poll earlier this year. Cynthia Nixon's made it a plank of her gubernatorial campaign. And Andrew Cuomo, who has been against legalization, ordered the state Department of Health to study it.

If/when legalization happens, there will be a lot of things to sort out -- not just details about how pot will be sold and taxed, but also how to deal with the significant ethical and legal issues that rise from legalizing a product that's been the subject of so much law enforcement and crime for decades.

So how do people want that future to play out? And what can be done in the interim?

Those were some of the questions at the heart of a community discussion with Albany County District Attorney David Soares in Albany this week.

(there's more)

No precedent: The life of Kate Stoneman

The bar exam is one of the toughest tests anyone seeking a professional license must take. Imagine spending months studying for this one test, cramming different areas of complicated law and legal principles into your brain, hoping you only have to take the test once. And, congratulations, you did it!

Now imagine going to apply for membership in the state bar association -- and you're denied the ability to practice law solely because of your gender.

That exact scenario happened to Albany resident Katherine "Kate" Stoneman in 1886.

And here's what she did about it.

(there's more)

An attorney for religious organizations?

M. emails:

Do you have any suggestions for area law firms sensitive to the laws/financial regulations for religious organizations and who have experience working with small religious communities?

This might be a tough question because it's narrowly focused, but we're surprised how often when we get a question like this and then someone pops up with just the right suggestion. We're curious if maybe an attorney who often works with non-profits might also be of help.

So, got a suggestion for M.? Please share! And a sentence or two about why you're suggesting a certain attorney or law firm can be a big help.

photo: Flickr user Edinburgh City of Print (CC BY 2.0)

Resources for dealing with possible labor violations?

Anonymous emails:

A friend of mine, who is a salaried employee for a local small business, is running into some pretty serious difficulties with her boss that she feels could be infringing on her rights (forced unpaid overtime, threats to slash salary, verbal abuse, etc). Do any of your readers have any experience dealing with this kind of thing or know of anywhere she might be able to turn to learn more about her rights as a worker and find an acceptable solution?

This sounds like a stressful situation, even more so if you don't know where to start in figuring out how to address it.

So, have a suggestion for resources, strategies -- maybe even an attorney -- for Anonymous and their friend? Please share. And including sentence or two about why you're recommending a resource or person can be a big help.

LGBT Law Series at Albany Law

Albany Law School starts a series of informational events about legal issues in LBGT communities next week. The lineup:

January 30: The State of LGBT Rights in 2017 panel discussion (6-7:30 pm) and reception (7:30-8 pm)

February 16: Legal issues facing LGBT older adults

March 23: Legal issues facing transgender individuals

April 20: Legal issues facing LGBT military personnel and veterans

All events are from 6-7 pm (except where noted) and include networking afterward. See the first link for registration info.

The series is presented by the LGBT Pro Bono Project of Albany Law School, Pride Center of the Capital Region, and In Our Own Voices.

Startup Law Day at Albany Law 2017

Albany Law School is hosting a Startup Law Day January 28 with info sessions on various issued related to running a business. It's organized by the law school's pro bono program. Here's the lineup:

9:30 am -- Legal Formation

10:00 am -- Human Resources (Regulatory Issues, Hiring, Working with Contractors)

10:00 am -- Intellectual Property (Patents, Technology Transfer, Licensing)

11:30 am -- Working with Banks

11:30 am -- Building a Capitalization Structure to Work with Investors

12:45 pm -- Lunch and Panel: Words of Wisdom from New and Seasoned Business Owners

There will also be free legal consultations available -- by reservation -- with representatives of Tully Rinckey PLLC and Hoffman Warnick LLC.

Registration for the event is required. Details are at that first link above.

"The grievous error ... cries out for resolution"

You might have heard about the case of Marquis Dixon, the Albany teen convicted of stealing a pair of sneakers from another teen in downtown Albany in March of 2014. His case has gotten has a lot of attention -- from advocates such as Capital Area Against Mass Incarceration, and a series of columns written by Chris Churchill at Times Union -- because Dixon was sentenced to nine years in prison for the crime.

Advocates for Dixon have argued that sentence is unfairly harsh, especially given the limited evidence that he might have displayed or implied he had a gun during the crime (Dixon admitted to stealing the sneakers but said he never had a gun).

On Thursday a state appellate court ruled on Dixon's appeal. And the short story is that it decided Dixon should get youthful offender status and that his sentence be reduced to 1-3 years in prison.

You can read the decision online, which walks through the various elements in the case. For example: The court was unpersuaded that the limited evidence about the gun -- basically, the word of the victim that he saw something black and blocky tucked into Dixon's waistband -- should knock out that part of the case.

But the part about considering Dixon for youthful offender status is remarkable. (Presiding justice Karen Peters raised the issue during the oral arguments in the appeal.) The court basically concludes that everyone involved in the case screwed up on the question of whether Dixon should be eligible for the status.

(there's more)

Discussions about the sharing economy at Albany Law

This might be a bit wonkish*, but it's a topic that a lot of people here are interested in: Albany Law is hosting an event next Tuesday, April 19 about regulating sharing-economy services such as Uber, Lyft, and AirBnB.

The event includes a series of talks and discussions about various topics. Here's the lineup for an afternoon panel discussion at 1 pm about "ride sharing and the future of transportation":

Moderator: Dean Antony Haynes
John T. McDonald III, NYS Assemblymember
Josh Gold​, Esq., Senior Policy and Research Associate, Uber
Peter Mazer, Esq., General Counsel, Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade
Bhairavi Desai, Executive Director, New York Taxi Workers Alliance

As you might remember, taxi-app services such as Uber don't currently operate in New York State outside of NYC because of the way state law is currently structured. There's been a push to change that, though publicly at least, it appears the effort has recently been in the slow lane because of the budget.

"Law and The Sharing Economy: How to Regulate Collaborative Consumption" is Tuesday, April 19 with events from 12:30 pm through 6 pm. It's free and open to the public. It's a presentation of the Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology and The Government Law Center.

*Not necessarily a bad thing.

Earlier on AOA: A few more thoughts about the push for Uber, Lyft, and similar services upstate

Thinking about police body cameras in Albany

Albany police chief Brendan Cox addressing the crowd at the start of the forum.

The Albany Police Department is planning to pilot test officer body cameras this summer, with an eye toward eventually expanding the program to the whole department. And the APD is facing a range of questions as it works out the details: When should the cameras be on? What should they capture? Who should get to see the video?

Those were some of the questions discussed at a public meeting to gather input about the topic this past Tuesday at the Albany Public Library main branch. As Albany police chief Brendan Cox told the media beforehand:

"[Body cameras] can seem very simplistic until you start getting into the nitty gritty and recognize that you're dealing with human beings, you're dealing many times with human beings in crisis, but then you're also dealing with human beings in just regular interactions. So you want to try to get it right. Because you don't want to set up false expectations, you don't want to hurt anybody, you don't want to cause any more trauma. So you really want to try to do your best to set up policies, to set up procedures, and to set up trainings."

The hope is, of course, that officer body cameras will provide more and better information about what happens between the police and the public -- from stuff like complaints about rudeness, all the way up to situations in which a person dies during an interaction with police, such as in the death of Dontay Ivy.

Members of the public at the meeting had a lot of questions about the program. (It sounds like both the police and the public are still sorting through what they think about the idea.) But there were also a lot of suggestions.

Here are four thoughts about the topic...

(there's more)

The New York State AG's attempt to tackle daily fantasy (and the state's complicated relationship with gambling)

If you had Eric Schneiderman starting in your state attorney general attention fantasy league this week, you're rolling up a lot points.

New York State's AG caused a big splash yesterday when his office sent cease and desist letters to the two biggest daily fantasy sports companies ordering them to stop operating in the state because his office had concluded they're "illegal gambling" operations. A clip from the press release:

"Our investigation has found that, unlike traditional fantasy sports, daily fantasy sports companies are engaged in illegal gambling under New York law, causing the same kinds of social and economic harms as other forms of illegal gambling, and misleading New York consumers," said Attorney General Schneiderman. "Daily fantasy sports is neither victimless nor harmless, and it is clear that DraftKings and FanDuel are the leaders of a massive, multi-billion-dollar scheme intended to evade the law and fleece sports fans across the country. Today we have sent a clear message: not in New York, and not on my watch."

If you're thinking "Daily fantasy what?" or "Billions of dollars?" right now, this New York Times article includes a lot of background.

Fantasy sports was already immensely popular. And it's changed the way a lot of people view sports -- following individual players and performances rather than teams. You could argue the games have, in a way, just become number generators for the fantasy games.

(there's more)

A future that's up in the air

State Police say this drone collided with a chimney on the state Capitol in September and ended up on the building's roof. / photo: New York State Police

The recent incident in which a guy is accused of crashing a drone into a chimney of the state Capitol building got us thinking about how we should look at a future in which all sorts of machines could be buzzing around buildings and treetops -- and what sort of rules there should be for such a future.

Up to this point the feds have set general guidelines for how private citizens can use drones, while setting stricter rules for commercial use. Meanwhile, states have passed all sorts of laws. Arkansas and Georgia have banned drone use around their capitols. Others have laws aimed at keeping drones from being used for voyeurism. And Michigan has a law prohibiting drones from being used to... harass hunters. Here in New York State a bill has been hovering in the New York State legislature the last few sessions that would restrict the use of drones for surveillance by both private individuals and law enforcement.

So we got in touch with Albany Law professor Robert Heverly, who studies these sorts of intersections between the law and tech -- he's written about attempts by governments to set rules for drone use.

Our conversation floated from topics like whether it's trespassing to fly something above a person's property, to privacy, to whether we're headed for a dystopian drone future...

(there's more)

LGBT Law Day at Albany Law

Albany Law's annual LGBT Law Day is coming up this Saturday. Blurbage:

At LGBT Law Day, Albany Law students and volunteer attorneys will provide attendees with free legal assistance on such issues as: name changes, adoptions, child custody, immigration, employment discrimination, gender marker changes, and upgrading dishonorable discharges under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

This year's keynote speaker is state Assemblyman Daniel O'Donnell.

The event is October 17 from 10 am to 3 pm at the Albany Law campus. It's free to attend, and "advance registration is appreciated."

"Bridging the Gap: Police and Community Relations" at Albany Law

Albany Law is hosting an event -- Bridging the Gap: Police and Community Relations -- this Wednesday (September 16) to "to discuss police relations with minorities and young adults in the community."

Panel members include:

+ Albany Law professor Christian Sundquist, moderator
+ local attorney Gaspar Castillo
+ Albany police commander Michael Hicks
+ Jasper Mills, assistant district attorney in the Albany County DA's office
+ local attorney Mark Mishler
+ Reverend Edward Smart, chair of the Albany Citizens' Police Review Board
+ Albany Law professor Donna Young

Questions for the panel can be submitted to bridgingthegappoliceforum@gmail.com.

The discussion is in the Dean Alexander Moot Courtroom (80 New Scotland) at 5:30 pm. It's an open event -- no pre-registration required.

LGBT Law Day at Albany Law

Albany Law School has organized its first LGBT Law Day for this Saturday. The day is free and open to the public.

The keynote speaker will be Cathryn Oakley from the Human Rights Campaign -- she works with state and local legislators on issues that affect the LGBT community and heads up the org's Municipal Equality Index.

Also: "Albany Law students and volunteer attorneys will provide attendees with free legal assistance on such issues as name changes, adoptions, child custody, immigration, employment discrimination and civil rights."

LGBT Law Day is this Saturday, March 21 from 10 am-3 pm. Albany Law says advance registration is appreciated.

New York State's highest court rejects bid to ban large sodas

The state Court of Appeals building in downtown Albany.

New York State's highest court -- the Court of Appeals -- issued a decision today that blocks New York City's much-talked about attempt to cap the size of containers for sodas and other sugary beverages at certain outlets. The 4-2 ruling rejected an appeal of lower court decisions by the city's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

There are a lot of issues that intersect at the point of a 16-ounce soda -- health, business, personal liberty -- but the court's ruling was focused on... separation of powers.

(there's more)

On tiger selfies

There's been some media hubbub the last few days after the New York State legislature passed a bill that would ban "tiger selfies" -- yep, exactly what it sounds like, apparently it's a guys-on-Tinder thing. (Because of course it is.) [NY Post]

As it happens, the the actual bill is aimed at prohibiting direct contact between the public and big cats (like tigers) at places such as "roadside zoo exhibitors" as a safety measure for people and a welfare measure for the animals. The Assembly sponsor, Linda Rosenthal, said she hadn't even heard of the tiger selfies until after the bill passed her in chamber. ] [CNet]

If this sounds like a Colbert Report segment, you would be right (embedded above).

Joe Bruno retrial verdict

The jury in the Joe Bruno retrial found the former state Senate majority leader not guilty on the charges that a consulting arrangement involved kickbacks or bribes for his influence in state government. [TU CapCon]

In the 2009 trial he had been found guilty -- and sentenced to two years in prison -- of essentially the same accusations, but a 2010 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States changed the criteria for the "theft of honest services" law he had been convicted under. Federal prosecutors decided to try prosecuting him again, which is what led to this retrial.

After today's verdict, the TU's Rob Gavin reported that Bruno went to Jack's (where else) to celebrate. [@RobertGavinTU]

Wider perspective: Jimmy Vielkind over at Capital, after the verdict: "State lawmakers, exhale: Joe Bruno, and the system as you know it, has been acquitted."

That photo on the right is a file photo, not from today.

Washington Ave Armory dance party court decision: It depends on what you mean by "auditorium"...

The Washington Ave Armory. / photo: CC-BY-SA-3.0/Matt H. Wade at Wikipedia

A state appellate court today reversed a decision by the Albany Board of Zoning Appeals last year that prohibited the Washington Ave Armory from holding "rave"-type dance events.

A year ago the BZA ruled such events violated the Armory's zoning. That decision hinged on the definition of the word "auditoria," the category under which the Armory is classified. The BZA ruled that an auditorium includes fixed seats, and because these dance party events didn't have fixed seats for each person in the audience, they were not allowed. The BZA's ruling was upheld by a state Supreme Court in Albany County last May. (The issue had grown out of an October 2012 foam party event at the Armory at which Albany police say crowd members had gotten combative while waiting to enter the venue.) [TU 2013] [Justia] [AOA 2012]

Like that BZA decision, this new ruling from an appellate division of state Supreme Court also focuses on the term "auditorium" and its definition -- or, rather, definitions.

(there's more)

Albany Common Councilman calls for city ban on therapy aimed at "converting" gay people

Albany Common Councilman Judd Krasher announced today a plan to introduce legislation to ban "conversion therapy" -- in which a therapist attempts to change the sexual orientation of a gay person -- in the city, in part to prompt the state to act on the matter. Said Krasher in a press release:

"This ordinance is important on many levels. Most significantly, it will further protect Albany's LGBT youth. Additionally, the case is closed and the scientific community is in consensus; being an LGBT individual is not a disease or mental disorder and attempts to 'cure' people of their sexual orientation severely hurts a youngster's well-being. The City of Albany is a city of inclusion, a place that embraces diversity. Restorative therapy does not belong in Albany or civilized society. With that said, I hope the introduction and eventual passage of the ordinance sends a strong message to state government to act swiftly and ban this barbarism statewide."

There is currently a bill in the New York State legislature that would prohibit mental health professionals from "engaging in sexual orientation change efforts" with patients under the age of 18. Doing so would be considered professional misconduct and could result in the therapist's license being revoked or suspended.

Two states currently have such bans in the place -- California (passed in 2012) and New Jersey (in 2013).

(there's more)

A good attorney for writing a will?

Kate emails:

Could anyone recommend a good, reasonable lawyer to prepare a simple will?

A will is one of those things most people, especially younger people, are probably like, "Me? I don't need a will."

But you might surprised, even for the non-Warren Buffets of the world -- a will can help can help smooth the way a bit for your loved ones after you die. And while there are online services that now offer to help with preparing a will, an actual attorney might be able to ask you better questions for writing a more helpful will.

So, suggestions for Kate? Bonus points for explaining why you're suggesting that attorney. And extra bonus points for mentioning roughly how it much it cost, so Kate and everyone else has a good idea of what they might expect to pay.

Earlier on AOA:
+ Ask AOA: A good divorce attorney?
+ Ask AOA: Attorneys for small businesses?

photo: Flickr user Edinburgh City of Print (cc)

Wandering Dago's request for injunction against the state denied

A federal judge has denied the Wandering Dago food truck's request for a preliminary injunction against the state Office of General Services and NYRA over being kept from the food vendor program at the Empire State Plaza and Saratoga Race Course this past summer.

The decision from US District Court judge Mae A. D'Agostino is after the jump. The judge's decision largely boiled down to a determination that WD waited too long to file for the injunction after originally being denied a spot at the ESP (there was a gap of about three months). JCE has more on the decision over at Capitol Confidential.

The vending season at the Track has ended for the year (of course), as has the season at the ESP.

The request for an injunction was just one part of original WD's complaint in the case. The food truck is also seeking damages and a judgement that the state's actions -- specifically, keeping the truck out of vendor programs because of the name -- is unconstitutional.

The owners of the Wandering Dago -- Andrea Loguidice and Brandon Snooks -- started the food truck last year in Schenectady. The term "dago" has been used as a slur against people of Italian descent, and sometimes people from Spain and Portugal as well. But Loguidice and Snooks have said they picked the name as a nod to their Italian heritage and an effort to reclaim the word.

(there's more)

Nite Moves' Supreme Court peitition denied

The petition by the Latham strip club Nite Moves to get the Supreme Court of the United States to hear its appeal of a ruling by New York's highest court on a sales tax exemption was rejected today by SCOTUS. (The application is listed under "CERTIORARI DENIED" as "677 NEW LOUDON CORP. V. NEW YORK TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL.") Having cert denied isn't necessarily a comment on the case by the court, it just means not enough justices decided it was worthy enough to be taken up by the court.

The case in question revolved around an argument by Nite Moves that it shouldn't have to pay sales taxes on cover fees and private dances because such, um, services qualified for a "dramatic or musical arts performances" tax exemption. Last October, the New York State Court of Appeals -- the state's highest court -- rejected the argument 4-3. It's an interesting case and the opinions -- especially a dissent by Judge Robert Smith -- are good reading.

Attorneys for Nite Moves had framed their petition to the Supreme Court as a First Amendment question, asking whether the state had the right "to selectively administer a tax exemption for dramatic or musical arts performances in a way that imposes a higher tax on content that a government functionary disfavors" (more links to related docs). The group of attorneys representing the club's case included a high-profile First Amendment lawyer who had successfully petitioned for a posthumous New York State pardon of Lenny Bruce. Nite Moves' case had also gotten support from attorneys for Larry Flynt. [Media Coalition] [WSJ] [TU]

So now we all miss out on the opportunity to hear the Supremes discuss the artistic merits of lap dances. But we'll still have that Colbert Report segment starring Steve Barnes.