Arizona Republic: “A boycott of Arizona in the wake of a controversial immigration law has cost the state more than $140 million in lost meeting and convention business, a new report released Thursday shows.”
Arizona Republic: “An independent prosecutor has reiterated what federal law-enforcement officials previously concluded: Criminal charges are not justified in several public-corruption investigations conducted by former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio. . . . nine cases he reviewed had no merit.”
The vote count on Arizona Proposition 203 is now official. The Arizona Secretary of State finished counting all of the November 2, 2010, ballots, and voters approved the sale and use of medical marijuana in Arizona. Yes votes out numbered No votes by 4,341. The final vote count is:
No = 837,005 = 49.87%
Yes = 841,346 = 50.13%
More Arizonans (1,678,351) voted on Proposition 203 than any other proposition on the November 2, 2010, ballot.
See stories in the Arizona Republic called “Arizona voters have approved medical marijuana measure” and “Arizona pot measure pulls ahead by 4,421 votes.”
To learn more about Arizona’s new medical marijuana law, see my article called “Arizona Proposition 203 – Legalization of Medical Marijuana” and the actual “Text of Prop 203 that Would Legalize the Prescription and Sale of Medical Marijuana in Arizona.”
How to Hire Arizona Medical Marijuana Attorney Richard Keyt to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation
To learn about forming and operating Arizona entities that could be used as a medical marijuana dispensary, see the Arizona LLC Law Library and the Arizona Corporation Law Library. To hire Arizona business attorney Richard Keyt aka the Arizona medical marijuana lawyer to form an Arizona nonprofit corporation, read my articles called “How to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation” and “Arizona Nonprofit Corporation Formation Service” or just complete my online Nonprofit Corporation Incorporation Questionnaire.
Arizona Republic: “The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and county management cannot permanently sidestep the County Attorney’s Office in civil litigation by asserting conflicts of interest.”
Arizona Republic: “Top prosecutors in the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office had repeatedly cautioned Andrew Thomas over the last year and a half against filing criminal charges and a racketeering suit against judges and county officials. But according to detailed interviews and e-mails gathered for an administrative investigation of a prosecutor at the center of those cases, Thomas ignored the advice and instead bypassed experienced prosecutors to assign the cases to attorneys who would prosecute them.”