Case History

Driving Offence

R v. P, T
Charges: Impaired Operation (Drugs)
Result: 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 favorable 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 After lengthy discussions with the crown and highlighting the Charter violations, his criminal charges were withdrawn. The client plead guilty to the charge of Careless Driving 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.

Drugs & Firearm Offences

R v. L, T
Charges: P4P X3 (Fentanyl – 567.1 Grams, Cocaine – 25 Grams, Fentanyl Patches – 16, Marijuana)
Result: After a diligent review of the disclosure and multiple discussions with the prosecutor, counsel was able to highlight the frailties with the case, notably, knowledge of the drugs. After lengthy pre-trial discussions, the client resolved by entering a plea of guilty to one count of simple possession of cocaine (2.7 grams), and all her remaining charges were withdrawn.

R v. F, D
Charges: P4P Fentanyl, Possession of Heroin, Carry a Concealed Weapon & Possession of a Weapon for Purpose Dangerous to the Public
Result: As a result of ongoing discussions with the prosecutor and a number of Charter breaches, the prosecutor agreed to withdraw all charges.

R v. L, T
Charges: Unauthorized Possession of Firearm and RelatedCcharges
Result: After reviewing the disclosure, counsel was able to convince the Crown Prosecutor to withdraw all charges as the case lacked the requisite knowledge to prove she had possession of the gun.

R v. E, T
Charges: P4P Crack Cocaine (60 Grams), P4P Xanax, P4P Marihuana, Possession of Oxycodone & Possession of Proceeds of Crime
Result: On the day of the SCJ trial, the prosecutor agreed to a plea on only one count of P4P of Cocaine (31 Grams) where the client received a significantly reduced sentence of 90 days to be served intermittent.

Human Trafficking

R v. K, A
Charges: Human Trafficking and Related Offences
Result: The client entered a peace bond and all his criminal charges were dismissed prior to the preliminary hearing. As a result of complainant’s credibility issues, counsel was able to convince the Crown Attorney to withdraw all charges as there was no likelihood of success.

R. v. L, V
Charges: B&E (Residential)
Result: At trial, counsel argued that the individual captured on camera was not his client and the frailties associated with such evidence, leading to an acquittal.

R v. B, T
Charges: B&E (Residential)
Result: After thorough discussions with the Crown, he agreed that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction and all charges against client were withdrawn prior to trial.

Fraud

R v. D, A
Charges: Fraud Over & Related Charges
Result: The client was arrested at a banking institution for attempting to defraud. After diligent research pertaining to the implications of a criminal record on the client’s standing with her regulatory body, FSCO and detailed discussions with the crown, counsel was able to secure a withdrawal of all charges upon client making a charitable donation.

YCJA

R v. M, R
Charges: Attempted B&E, Attempted Theft, FTC x 2
Result: On the trial date, after considering the inherent frailties with identification evidence, the Crown Attorney agreed to withdraw all charges upon successful completion of community service hours.

Domestic Charges

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.

Recent Posts