A federal judge rejected a request for a temporary restraining order barring peace officers from seizing money from the vehicles of a national armored car company that provides cash transportation services to marijuana businesses.
It was the company’s first court battle with federal and California law enforcement agencies.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Judge John Holcomb of the U.S. District Court in Riverside ruled that Denver-based Empyreal Logistics – which has sued the U.S. government and California’s San Bernardino County sheriff’s office – failed to meet the requirements for a restraining order.
“Empyreal may very well have an excellent case on the merits – the court respects Empyreal’s zeal and does not doubt its sincerity – but Empyreal’s counsel does their client no favors by cutting procedural corners and ignoring the court’s guidance,” the judge wrote in his opinion.
In a lawsuit filed last month, Empyreal alleges that law enforcement officers have engaged in “highway robbery” from its company vehicles by seizing cash they knew came from state-legal marijuana businesses.
Holcomb also didn’t agree with the plaintiff’s argument that the FBI was breaking federal law by seizing cash proceeds from marijuana sales, despite a federal statute that prohibits the U.S. Department of Justice from interfering with state medical marijuana laws, the Times reported.
Growing is all about the lighting
Read our exclusive guide for strategies and tips from expert cultivators who have amassed decades of experience studying horticulture lighting. Curated by MJBizDaily.
Inside the MJBizDaily Lighting Buyers Guide:
- Horticultural professionals debunk 8 common lighting myths in cannabis.
- How cannabis extraction companies can reduce energy costs.
- Why experts say the future of horticultural lighting is in LED technology.
- Cannabis lighting Glossary of Terms.
- Buyers checklist & more!
“Put simply, there is not enough evidence at this time to suggest that Empyreal’s constitutional rights were violated,” Holcomb wrote.
The case remains active, but no further hearings have been scheduled, according to court records.