Driving Offences
R v. P, T
Charges: Impaired Operation (Drugs)
Result: Charges dismissed at trial. The client was charged with impaired operation after he crashed his vehicle into a ditch and made an utterance to consuming marijuana. At trial, through successful cross-examination of the DRE & Arresting officer, counsel was able to satisfy the Judge that P,T’s ability to operate a motor vehicle was not impaired. He was acquitted of all charges.
R v. S, G
Charges: Impaired Operation & Over 80
Result: After a thorough review of all the evidence, counsel was able to highlight a number of Charter violations allowing him to secure a favourable disposition for his client. The Crown Attorney carefully considered the constitutional breaches and offered to withdraw the criminal charges for a plea to a Highway Traffic Act offence of careless driving. This avoided a criminal conviction and allowed the client to maintain his driving privileges. More importantly, as the client held a student visa, a criminal conviction would have had severe collateral consequences including deportation.
R v. A, A
Charges: Impaired Operation & Over 80
Result: The client was charged for impaired operation and over 80 resulting from an incident while working for Uber Eats. After lengthy discussions with the crown and highlighting the Charter violations, the client’s criminal charges were withdrawn. The matter was resolved by way of a Careless Driving charge under the Highway Traffic Act for a fine. This avoided a criminal conviction and allowed the client to maintain his driving privileges. As a permanent resident, a criminal conviction for the charged offence(s) would have had severe collateral consequences including deportation.
Sexual Assault
R. v. A, M
Charges: Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference (Minor)
Result: Charges dismissed at trial. A pre-trial application was brought for the production of third-party counselling records of the complainant. The application was granted and the records were provided to counsel. At trial, counsel challenged the evidence, including statements contained in the third-party records, highlighting issues with the reliability and credibility of the complainant. The client also testified. Following the trial, the court dismissed all charges against the client.
R. v. C, K
Charges: Sexual Assault x2 & Extortion
Result: Charges dismissed after a five-day trial. At trial, counsel challenged the evidence of the complainant, highlighting issues with the reliability and credibility of the complainant. The client had provided a statement to the police in which he lied to them. Despite this damaging piece of evidence, the client testified and gave an explanation that the judge accepted and, in the end, he was found not guilty of all charges.
Assault
R. v. T, W
Charges: Assault x 3
Result: Charges dismissed at trial. Following a marriage separation, the client was charged three counts of assault. At trial, counsel was able to demonstrate a number of inconsistencies in the complainant’s evidence. As a result, all charges against the client were dismissed.
R v. H, K
Charges: Assault
Result: The client had a number of domestic-related convictions on his record. Despite this, counsel secured a withdrawal of his charge by highlighting credibility issues with the complainant’s statement. As a result, the criminal charge was withdrawn and he received a 12-month peace bond.
Human Trafficking
R v. K, A
Charges: Human Trafficking and Related Offences
Result: As a result of the complainant’s credibility issues, counsel was able to persuade the Crown Attorney to withdraw all charges as there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. The client entered a peace bond and all his criminal charges were dismissed prior to the preliminary hearing.
