Biography

Hannah L. Nelson, an attorney for more than 30 years,  has a deep history in cannabis law, originally as a criminal defense and civil rights attorney, and currently as a business, land use, partnership, contract, and compliance attorney who helps clients navigate all aspects of local and state cannabis regulation. She combines her legal and regulatory knowledge with her practical business implementation skills to ensure her clients have the best chance at success. Hannah has represented many cannabis businesses since representing the first cultivation permit holder in Mendocino County in 2009. In addition to her historical participation in regulatory and legislative efforts, she continues to advocate for legislative, regulatory and procedural change. Hannah is the Law & Policy Advisor to Origins Council, a nonprofit education, research, and advocacy organization dedicated to sustainable rural economic development within cannabis producing regions. OC conducts State regulatory and legislative policy work in addition to research and public education informed by impacts to rural legacy producing regions.

Though Hannah has a great deal of experience in cannabis regulation and business law, she is probably most well known for the landmark 1996-1999 Brown case in which she obtained the first-ever court-ordered return of medical marijuana, a ruling upheld by the California Supreme Court despite the government’s three appeals. After the Supreme Court refused to overturn the order, she then successfully fought the Attorney General’s attempt to require that the medicine be returned only through an attorney. Eventually, her client was the first patient to ever walk out of a law enforcement building with their medicinal cannabis returned. She conducted the entire case pro bono for years because she felt strongly that these rights needed to be secured for patients. She continued to fight that case for free for an additional six months because she believed that securing the rights of patients to get their medicine back would be effectively meaningless if they were required to have the return of property go only through an attorney.