_ A former Denver police officer (Derrick Curtis Saunders) is currently appealing his dismissal from the police force to the Denver Civil Service Commission, claiming that his termination was "unfounded and / or unsupported by the facts" and violated principles of fundamental fairness.

Mr. Saunders was dismissed after being caught driving 143 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone with a blood alcohol level of .089 percent, which is .009 percent above the legal limit of .08 percent. The appeal was filed by the Denver Police Protective Association's lawyers, which is the police officers union. Mr. Saunders pled guilty to driving while ability impaired and reckless driving, and was sentenced to five days in jail, a $300 fine, and 100 hours of community service.

The initial reaction that one may have to this story is “how does this guy have the audacity to try and get his job back as a police officer?” But, after a few minutes of reflection, I believe the real question is “how on earth did this guy get off so lightly?” Unfortunately, I believe that the cynical answer is the correct answer: he was a cop.

It shocks many people to discover that even if you have a blood alcohol level less than .08 percent, you may still be cited for a DWAI, or driving while ability impaired.  It is a similar but less severe charge to DUI that can be used as a catch-all provision when someone is pulled over and has been drinking, but has a blood alcohol level under the .08 percent limit for DUI.

Generally speaking, the police and the district attorney each have respective discretion in citing and charging a defendant. In this case, although Mr. Saunders was above the legal limit of .08 percent (probably half a drink over or so), he was clearly eligible for a DUI charge, and not the reduced DWIA. Moreover, it is frightening that not only did Mr. Saunders receive a less severe charge than he was technically eligible for, but he was also only charged with reckless driving. Statistically speaking, if Mr. Saunders had hit anyone, whether on foot or in another vehicle, while he was driving 88 miles per hour OVER the posted speed limit, they would not have survived the crash.

While I support the decision to dismiss Mr. Saunders, based solely on his arrest and conviction for this offense, I think the appropriate outcome should have involved a greater charge.  Where there is a statistical certainty of death, a charge along the lines of attempted vehicular manslaughter is more appropriate, and the fact that the person being charged with the offense is a police officer should not make a difference.

_ This week, a district court judge in Boulder held that the city-wide ban of medical marijuana dispensaries in Longmont, Colorado, does not constitute a “takings” under the Fifth Amendment. The three dispensaries that brought the case against the city have 45 days to appeal the decision, but for the time being the ban will remain in full force.

The ruling is based on the idea that there is no state or federal constitutional right to operate a dispensary, therefore no right has been taken away by implementation of the city-wide ban. However, an interesting issue that may develop down the road is whether the dispensaries can successfully make an analogy between marijuana dispensaries and adult entertainment.

On its face, it seems that the Longmont ban is based on morality. I can only guess that the citizens of Longmont have decided that they would prefer not to have marijuana sold within city limits, because they do not believe in the sale of marijuana, regardless of whether it is for health care or recreational purposes. This seems like the same argument that has been made for adult entertainment for 70 years. Basically, “we don’t want it in our community.”

Without delving into the litany of U.S. Supreme Court cases regarding adult entertainment, the short version is that adult entertainment is a form of protected speech, and therefore a community can limit where it occurs under the police powers of the state, but it cannot absolutely ban it.  There must be a time and place for adult entertainment.

While I don’t specialize in medical marijuana (I’ve never done a single case), this sounds like a persuasive argument.  The dispensaries have lost the first round arguing that they have Fifth Amendment protection, but maybe they can find success by arguing that the First Amendment applies.  While limitations on the time and manner for marijuana sales may not be ideal, at least it would be a way to operate within city limits.

Over the course of the past several months, I have fought the urge to write about the Occupy Movement. That is, until now.

Every day I read the news and learn about arrests, violence, traffic problems, soaring costs, destruction of public property, and the numerous other issues that have arisen as a direct result of the Occupy Movement. I drive down Broadway in downtown Denver and I see the shanty town that has developed at the front steps of the state capital.  Every time I hear or see something new about the Movement I cringe.

Most recently, Occupy Oakland protesters closed the Oakland Port, creating a ripple effect along the west coast, delaying cargo, stopping traffic, and preventing those who work in the port from actually going to work. The Movement’s major claim is that the elite 1% of the U.S. is controlling and manipulating the remaining 99%.  However, the truth is that a radical 1% has been spending and wasting the resources of the 98%.

Despite the favorable employment data that was released last month and the increased consumer spending for the holidays, the U.S. economy is still in the dumps.  It is completely understandable that there is wide-spread frustration with the way the system is being run. But, the Occupy Movement has become a golden calf.  In the name of changing the system for the better, the Occupy protestors are squandering precious little resources and undermining legitimate efforts for proactive change.

There is data showing that the protests in Denver alone have cost over half a million dollars in extra police forces and labor. Personally, I would have preferred to put those public funds into education or some other worthy program.  As an attorney, I certainly understand and respect the sanctity of the First Amendment and the freedom to express your political and social views.  But, as a taxpayer and a citizen, I believe it is time to try and put the genie back in the bottle.

_This week, the Massachusetts Attorney General filed suit against Bank of America, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and GMAC for their conduct in dealing with the mortgage and real estate crisis. The Massachusetts Attorney General claims that the banks used deceptive and illegal practices in foreclosing thousands of mortgages from 2008 through 2010, including the practice of “robo-signing,” where mortgages were transferred in the secondary market without following formal policies and procedures.

Each of the banks has taken a slightly different position in the lawsuit, some wanting to settle the suit as soon as possible, while others have stated that they will defend themselves aggressively. So, there is a possibility that this lawsuit could develop into a costly and protracted battle in Massachusetts state court.

The major issue that this lawsuit creates is whether the filing of an individual state’s claim against the banks will slow down the ongoing settlement negotiations involving both federal and state prosecutors for a nation-wide deal. The Massachusetts Attorney General stated that the nation-wide settlement discussions were taking too long, but this lawsuit could prolong those discussions even more.

While it may seem like a step in the right direction to file a lawsuit and get the ball rolling against the banks, this lawsuit significantly undermined the collective process. Now, as Massachusetts moves forward with its state-specific claim, there is a distinct possibility that no national settlement will be reached until the Massachusetts suit is resolved, and there’s no telling when that could be.

In short, it seems that Massachusetts has decided to take its bat and ball and go home, and has left the rest of us standing in the field wondering what to do next.