My Cases

My Cases

When someone is criminally charged, the possibility of the variety of serious consequences can be frightening.  These consequences may often include the possibility of jail time, deportation for non-citizens, or a criminal record that would impair your ability to travel to certain countries, or work in certain professions.  Often times, your reputation and the reputation of your family may be put into question.  When you hire an experienced defence lawyer, their job involves a complex mix of research, negotiation, and strategy.  Your lawyer will hear your story, examine the evidence, and give you a good sense of whether or not the Crown prosecutor will be able to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.  In criminal defence, strategy and preparation can mean everything.  Below are a just a sampling of the variety of the firm’s recent cases, separated into Criminal Driving Related Cases and Other Criminal Cases.

Criminal Driving Related Cases

R. v. M.J.

My client was charged with Impaired Driving and Over 80 stemming from a single motor vehicle accident in which my client drove off the road into a ditch.  It turned out that the Crown had failed to subpoena one of their witnesses and on the day of trial this witness did not show up.  I knew that the Crown could have proven their case without this particular witness but for some reason, the Crown considered this witness to be crucial to their case and requested an adjournment from the judge.  I argued that my client was prepared to have his case tried that day, that there was no excuse for the Crown and police neglecting to serve this witness and that my client would be severely prejudiced by having to come back on some future date to have his case heard.  The judge agreed and denied the adjournment request.  The Crown subsequently withdrew the case against my client.

R. v. F.Z

My client had been charged with Impaired Driving, Over 80 and Dangerous Driving stemming from an incident in which he had driven into a house.  His breath tests revealed that his Blood Alcohol Concentration was well over the legal limit. My client had made several statements on the scene both to the residents of the home and to the police, even after he was advised of his rights to counsel and cautioned that he did not have to say anything.  My client admitted several times that he had too much to drink and should not have been driving.  To make matters worse, my client could not remember what had happened.  On the day of trial I convinced the Crown to pull the Impaired Driving and Over 80 charges in return for my client pleading guilty to the Dangerous Driving charge.  My client was fined and although his driver’s license was suspended automatically by the Ministry of Transportation, the judge declined to make a separate Order prohibiting him from driving anywhere in Canada.  Because my client was not found guilty of the drinking and driving related charges, he avoided the requirements of having to take Ontario’s Remedial Measures Back on Track Program  and of having an ignition interlock device installed in any vehicle he drove for the year after he got his license back.  These requirements would both involve significant monetary expenditures.  My client also likely avoided significant increases in his insurance premiums.

R. v. C.P

My client had been charged with Refuse to Provide a Breath Sample at the side of the road. I argued that the officer’s demand that my client provide breath samples was defective and that the judge should have doubts concerning the reliability of the officer’s testimony.  The judge agreed and my client was acquitted.

R. v. N.S

My client was charged with Drive Over 80.  Prior to the trial, I filed a Charter Application alleging that my clients right to a trial within a reasonable under section 11(b) had been infringed. The likelihood of a judicial stay of my clients charge as a result of the delay was borderline considering the length of the delay and the nature of the prejudice my client suffered as a result.  On the morning of trial, I had discussions with the Crown Attorney who agree to my client entering a guilty plea to Careless Driving under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. This is a non-criminal charge that results in no criminal record or mandatory license suspension.

R. v. B.M

My client was charged with Impaired Care or Control and Over 80.  After the trial began and the arresting officer testified, I convinced the Crown that they had significant problems with their case.  The Crown subsequently agreed to drop the drinking and driving charges and offered my client a plea to Careless Driving under the Highway Traffic Act instead.  I pointed out to the Crown that my client had not been driving and therefore could not enter a plea to Careless Driving.  Ultimately the Crown agreed to having my client enter a guilty plea to being Intoxicated in a Public Place contrary to the Ontario Liquor Licence Act.

R. v. C.L

My client was charged with Impaired Driving and Over 80. The allegations included high breath test results and what was described as very bad driving. At trial, after the crown had completed their case and I had cross-examined the officers, it was revealed that a video taken of my client at the police station had been recorded but not disclosed to me despite my previous requests.  Furthermore, in my cross-examination of the witness who observed the driving, it was revealed that the driving was not as bad as the allegations had suggested and that the reliability and credibility of this witness was questionable. Finally, I caught on to a technical defect in the breath technician’s evidence that would have resulted in a conviction on the Over 80 charge being an impossibility. Ultimately, the Crown agreed to my client pleading guilty to Careless Driving under the HTA and thus avoiding a criminal record and the serious consequences that accompany a drinking and driving conviction.

Other Criminal Cases (Assault, Theft, Utter Threats, Drugs)

R. v. D.B

My client was charged with Uttering Death Threats and Mischief.  These charges stemmed from an incident in which my client texted threats to his ex-girlfriend and the window of one of her friends was found broken.  After negotiations with the Crown, the Crown agreed to withdraw the criminal charges in return for my client entering into a peace bond requiring him to stay away from the complainants for one year.

R. v. R.T

My client, who had a criminal record, was charged with three Domestic Assaults stemming from incidents that occurred on three separate days.  As well my client was charged with breaching a term of his bail by contacting the complainant mere minutes after he was released on bail. The Crown was originally seeking a jail term, but ultimately my client avoided jail and was placed on probation instead with terms that he not contact or communicate with the complainant without her consent and that he go for alcohol counselling.

R. v. T.S.

My client was charged with Possession of a Controlled Substance stemming from a police search of his vehicle.  He had intentions of going to medical school in the United States and could not face the prospect of a conviction for a drug offence.  At first he tried to handle the matter without hiring a lawyer, and the Crown’s position was tough — they wanted to proceed on the charge and would not consider any sort of diversion program.  After T. came to see me, I reviewed the disclosure and had a meeting with the Crown to negotiate my client’s position.  Within a month, the charged were dropped, and medical school is still in the cards.

R. v. D.T

My client had been charged with Assault Causing Bodily Harm.  Other lawyers had told my client that he stood very little chance of winning at trial and that they were able to negotiate a deal with the Crown for a suspended sentence, meaning that my client would have avoided going to jail.  He still, however, would have been placed on probation and most significantly, he would end up with a criminal record.  My client was convinced of his innocence because he felt that he had acted in self defence and was not prepared to enter a guilty plea.  At trial, I was able to establish that the complainant and other Crown witnesses at trial could not be believed.  Ultimately both the Crown and the judge thought my client should be acquitted which is what happened.

R. v. E.S

My client had been charged with Assault with a Weapon, Theft and Mischief stemming from an incident that occurred at a convenience store late at night.  My client had already received two conditional discharges on separate occasions for similar types of offences.  My client told me he was innocent of the theft and admitted to the Assault although he told me that it was not as bad as the victim alleged. There were two innocent bystanders who witnessed the incident so my client stood little chance of being acquitted at trial.  After negotiations with the Crown, the Crown agreed to pull the theft and mischief charges and my client entered a guilty plea to the assault with a weapon after the Crown amended the facts that my client would admit to.  After submissions to the judge, my client received a conditional discharge.

R. v. B.M

My client was charged with Failing to Remain at the scene of an accident, Possession of a Controlled Substance and Breach of an Undertaking to a Peace Officer.  These charges all stemmed from a single motor vehicle accident in which it was alleged that my client had crashed his car and afterwards had fled the scene.  At the time he was on an Undertaking from previous outstanding charges with conditions that he not drive and that he not consume alcohol or non-prescription drugs.  The police also found a garbage bag with approximately one pound of marijuana outside the car.  I convinced the Crown that although there was some circumstantial evidence to suggest my client had been driving the vehicle, there was not enough to sustain a finding of guilt at trial.  Ultimately the Crown agreed to withdraw the charges in return for a $300 charitable donation.

R. v. A.L

My client, a young offender, was charged with Mischief along with several other youths for breaking into and causing significant damage to a school bus. Negotiation with the Crown resulted in the Crown agreeing to withdraw the criminal charge in return for my client completing ten hours of community service and entering into a common law peace bond with the condition that he stay away from the location where the incident occurred for one year.