SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. L.S.

  The client was charged with the offence of making an agreement with another person to commit a sexual offence against a child. A conviction for the offence would have left the client with a criminal record, implications for custody and access to their children, and jail time. The client suffered from mental health issues and provided documentation to support that. Child Family Services were involved as the allegation involved the client's children, but Child Family Services ultimately decided that the children were safe with the client along with the children’s wishes to remain with the client as they did not fear their safety. After speaking to the prosecutor and providing documentation to support the Child Family Services decision along with the client's mental health issues and counselling completion, the prosecutor agreed to resolve the matter by withdrawing the charge if the client entered into a 12-month peace bond. This left the client without a conviction and without a criminal record.

• R. v. D.B.

  The client was charged with uttering threats. The client provided me with the information and documentation that I asked them for, and enrolled in counselling. With that, I was able to convince the prosecutor to drop the charges if my client entered into a common law peace bond. This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

• R. v. B.B.

  The client was charged with sexual exploitation. The client pleaded not guilty and a  preliminary inquiry date was set. I had reviewed all the evidence against the client, and it was clear to me that the crown prosecutor would not be able to prove the offence. I explained this to the crown prosecutor and they agreed to drop the charge against the client. This was a very serious allegation that could have resulted in a lengthy jail sentence. However, with the charges dropped, my client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

• R. v. J.H.

  The client was charged with unlawfully discharging a firearm with intent to wound, maim or disfigure, possession of a prohibited firearm, and failure to comply with a recognizance order. These are very serious charges, especially unlawfully discharging a firearm with intent, which, at the time of the alleged offence, carried a mandatory minimum sentence of five years of imprisonment when a restricted firearm is used. After a preliminary inquiry, the client instructed me to see what kind of deal I could get from the prosecutor. An offence like this would have meant a jail sentence of over five years. However, I was able to persuade the crown prosecutor to agree to a sentence of three years jail. The other charges were dropped.

• R. v. S.B.

  The client was charged with sexual interference and sexual assault. These were very serious charges involving a child. Prior to the preliminary inquiry which had been set, I was able to persuade the crown prosecutor that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and to agree to withdraw (drop) all of the charges. This saved the client from a criminal record for very serious offences.

• R. v. R.R.

  The client was charged with domestic assault based on an incident that caused the complainant a serious injury. Despite that, I was able to convince the prosecutor to drop the charge if my client entered into a peace bond. The client entered into the peace bond, and the charge was withdrawn.

• R. v. R.H.

  The client was charged with two counts of domestic assault. The client completed counselling and anger management courses which helped me negotiate with the prosecutor the best possible outcome. With proof of the client’s counselling and anger management course completion, I was able to persuade the crown prosecutor to agree to resolve the matter through a 12-month peace bond. The client entered into the peace bond, and the charge was withdrawn, saving the client from a criminal record.

• R. v. S.K.

  The client was charged with assault with a weapon, simple assault, criminal intimidation, and uttering threats. These charges were based on allegations of domestic violence. Though the charges were very serious, I was able to the crown prosecutor agreed to drop all of the charges if my client entered into a 6-month peace bond. The peace bond was entered into and the charges were withdrawn.

• R. v. J.D.

  The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference. This was a serious allegation and the client was at risk of a jail sentence if convicted. I was able to convince the prosecutor that the matter could be resolved by way of the client entering into a common law peace bond. The prosecutor agreed and the charges were dropped.

• R. v. D.K.

  The client was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired, and with operating a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol level over 0.08 (also called “over 80”). The client elected to have a trial in Provincial Court. The trial date was rescheduled to a later date because of court closures during the Covid-19 pandemic and scheduling backlogs created by the same. I determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction based on deficiencies in the evidence against the client and the unreasonable delay caused by the trial rescheduling. I discussed this with the crown prosecutor, and the crown prosecutor withdrew the charges so the client had no conviction and no driving prohibition.

• R. v. C.D.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). After receiving information and documentation from the client to help me negotiate with the prosecutor, I was able to convince them to refer the client to the  Alternative Measures Program. Once the client completed the program requirements I had the charge dropped. That left the client with no conviction and no criminal record.

• R. v. S.B.

  The client was charged with assaulting and choking  their adult stepchild. The allegations were serious because the victim was injured. I looked at the file and determined that there was likely a self-defence argument that I could make. The client had no prior criminal history, and completed counselling on my direction. At first, the crown prosecutor refused my request to refer the matter to a diversion program, but after lengthy discussions, I was able to convince the crown prosecutor to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. The client successfully completed the Alternative Measures Program and the charges were withdrawn, leaving the client with no criminal record.

• R. v. K.Y.

  The client was charged with domestic assault. The crown prosecutor was going to prosecute the client which could have resulted in a conviction and a criminal record. However, after much negotiations with the prosecutor I was able to have the charge dropped outright. This left my client without a criminal record.

• R. v. M.M.

  The client was charged with assault by choking. The client pled not guilty and the matter was set for trial. I explained to the crown prosecutor why I thought there was no “reasonable likelihood of conviction", and the crown prosecutor ultimately agreed to withdraw (drop) the charge prior to trial.

• R. v. R.G.

  The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference (with someone under 16 years of age). The client was in a position of trust over the victim. The client decided to plead guilty and wanted to get as little jail time as possible. There were problems with the evidence, which I explained to the crown prosecutor. I was able to get the crown prosecutor to agree to withdraw the sexual assault charge if the client pleads guilty to the sexual interference charge and join me in recommending a sentence of six months of jail and 18 months of probation. The client instructed me to accept that “plea deal”. The judge accepted our joint recommendation. The client pleaded guilty to sexual interference, the sexual assault charge was withdrawn, and the client was sentenced to six months of incarceration and 18 months of probation. This was an excellent outcome for the client, especially considering that the 2020 Supreme Court of Canada decision R v Friesen directed sentencing judges that prison sentences of five to ten years or more should be “the norm” for many sexual interference cases.

• R. v. K.E.

  The client was charged with one count of break and enter with intent to commit an indictable offence, one count of theft under $5000.00, and two counts of assault. The victims were the client's ex-spouse and child. The client decided to plead guilty. The client had a related criminal record. I was able to get the crown prosecutor to withdraw the break and enter with intent and theft charges and join me in recommending a 12-month probation sentence. The judge accepted this position, meaning the client did not have to go to jail.

• R. v. K.A.

  The client was charged with assault with a weapon and two counts of assault based on three separate domestic allegations by one complainant. The complainant gave several detailed statements to police. The client provided me with evidence of ongoing parenting litigation between the client and the complainant. I reviewed the statements and other evidence very carefully, and it became apparent that the complainant was falsely accusing the client in order to gain the upper hand in the parenting litigation. I was able to convince the prosecutor that they had very serious issues with their case. The crown prosecutor ultimately agreed with me that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and withdrew (dropped) all of the charges, saving the client from a criminal record.

• R. v. B.P.

  The client was charged with not following an Emergency Protection Order and several charges of breaching a probation order. Unfortunately the client struggled with an alcohol addiction. I was able to provide him with some supportive referrals. With confirmation from the client that he accessed those referrals, I was able to speak to the prosecutor and convince them to refer my client to the Mental Health Diversion program, which was unusual for them to agree to given the type of file we were dealing with. Once the client was enrolled he completed the requirements of the program, and I had all of the charges against him dropped.

• R .v. M.J.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. I reviewed the disclosure very carefully and determined that there was no evidence to support the charge of sexual assault that the client faced. Eventually, the crown prosecutor reviewed the file as well and agreed to drop the charge (withdraw it). This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction for the very serious charge of sexual assault.

• R. v. D.V.

  The client was charged with domestic assault. I worked together with the client to provide information as to what I needed to help me to help negotiate the best possible resolution for their case. Initially the crown prosecutor did not want to agree to a peace bond for the file, but were insisting that the client have a conviction and a criminal record. Eventually, the crown prosecutor agreed with my review of the file and the client was offered a peace bond. Once the client entered into the peace bond the charge was dropped, leaving the client without a conviction.

• R. v. L.C.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. The allegation was that it was a very serious sexual assault arising from a "hook up". I reviewed the disclosure (evidence) in detail and came to the conclusion that the crown prosecutor did not have a strong case against my client. The client told me they wanted to plead not guilty and have a trial. I booked the case for a trial and prepared extensively for my client's defence. Prior to the trial beginning, the crown prosecutor agreed to drop the charge, leaving my client without a criminal record and without a conviction for the very serious charge of sexual assault.

• R. v. S.D.

  The client was charged with domestic assault. This was a matter where the complainant elected to come forward with the assistance of their own independent lawyer to confirm that the matter was not criminal, but was the result of a misunderstanding. I was able to review that information and correspond with the crown prosecutor and counsel for the complainant, and the charge was dropped. This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

• R .v. J.S.

  The client was charged with assault. Because of my client's immigration status, there could have been serious consequences for them if they were found guilty of the assault. I had the client complete some tasks for me that helped me to convince the crown prosecutor to refer the case to the Alternative Measures Program. Once the client had completed the program requirements I appeared in court for them and the charge was dropped, leaving my client with no criminal record and no conviction.

• R. v. T.B.

  The client was charged with uttering threats, fraudulently obtaining food (dine and dash) and not showing up for court. The client was really struggling with personal issues, including substance abuse, at the time. I was able to have the client complete some tasks for me that helped me convince the crown prosecutor to refer all of the charges to the Alternative Measures Program. The client completed the AMP program requirements and all of the charges were withdrawn.

• R. v. M.M.

  The client was charged with assault, assaulting a police officer and intimidation. Because the client had a past history involving alcohol and criminal charges, and because this allegation involved alcohol, it took a lot of convincing to have the crown prosecutor agree to refer the case to the Alternative Measures Program. Once they did agree to the referral, the client completed the program requirements and the charges were all withdrawn, leaving my client without a criminal record and without any convictions.