SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. C.N.

  The client was charged with forcible confinement against an ex-spouse. The client began and completed counselling immediately after being charged. Upon discussions with the crown, I was able to negotiate a 9 month peace bond oft the client. The charge of forcible confinement was withdrawn once the client entered into the peace bond.

• R. v. P.W.

  The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The client was an upstanding member of society. He had had issues that lead to the allegation that were beyond his control. In working with the client to gather all of the information and documentation necessary, the crown agreed to drop the charge entirely. This left the client without a conviction, and without a criminal record.

• R. v. W.B.

  The client was charged with a domestic assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm. The client had a previous history of domestic allegations, but none which resulted in convictions. Under my suggestion, the client began counselling Initially the crown prosecutor was seeking a term of jail (90 days). However, once I was retained to assist the client, I was able to negotiate a guilty plea for a sentence of 18 months probation. I was able to argue for a lesser sentence, and the client was sentenced to only 12 months probation.

• R. v. K.L.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. The allegation was that the client, who was not far off in age as to the complainant (they were both young), had forced a sexual touching. The crown offered a period of probation for the young person, and the young person was sentenced to probation after electing to plead guilty to the offence.

• R. v. D.K.

  The client was charged with assault with a weapon, mischief, and multiple traffic tickets. After early case resolution discussions with the Crown, the client was approved and accepted into the Alternative Measures Program. The charges and tickets were withdrawn upon completion of the program. The client was left with no criminal record and no convictions for any of the criminal charges. The traffic tickets were also withdrawn.

• R. v. L.S.

  The client was charged with uttering threats and two counts of assault causing bodily harm. The allegation was that the client had been intoxicated, and assaulted two individuals outside of a bar. The injuries were serious with each complainant being transported to the hospital. I was able to gather information and documentation from the client that allowed me to put together a proposal for the prosecutor to consider a conditional discharge. The prosecutor agreed to the resolution on the basis of all of the information I had provided. This was an unusual resolution for such serious charges, but I worked hard to help the client achieve the desired outcome of a discharge.

• R. v. M.V.

  The client was charged with offences under the Cannabis Act including possessing and producing cannabis with the intention to sell or distribute it. After a thorough review of the extensive disclosure (the evidence the police had gathered), I determined that there was no evidence of knowledge, consent or control over the drugs. That is, the crown would not be able to prove possession. With that, the crown agreed to drop the charges against the client. This left the client without a conviction.

• R. v. D.H.

  The client was charged with assault and theft under $5000. After early case resolution discussions with the Crown, the client was approved and accepted into the Alternative Measures Program. The charge was withdrawn upon completion of the alternative measures program. This resulted in the client having no conviction or record for the charges of assault and theft under $5000.

• R. v. A.K.

  The client was charged with uttering a forged document. The circumstances of the allegation were that the client had changed a document without the other party's consent and then used that document. I approached the prosecutor about the file with a view to having the client enter into the Alternative Measure's Program. The prosecutor agreed after I provided information and documentation to them that helped confirm that although the allegation was serious, the diversion referral was warranted. After the client completed the program, the charge was dropped against the client, leaving the client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

• R. v. A.T.

  The client was charged with impaired operation and refusal to comply with a demand. The client pled not guilty and the matter was set for trial. After a period of time, but before the trial of the matter, the crown dropped the charges against the client, which resulted in the client having no conviction or criminal record for the charges.

• R. v. E.L.

  This was a long drawn out matter. The client was charged with sexual interference with a minor, and sexual assault of a minor. The allegation was made in the context of the complainant being a dependant. There were signfiicant issues with the complainant's crediblity, and the reliability of her evidence. The matter proceeded to a preliminary inquiry. After I cross-examined the police officer who investigated the matter, and the complainant, the crown agreed to drop the charge. The matter was resolved so that the client did not have a criminal record.

• R. v. M.S.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. I reached out to the crown regarding resoltuon and possible re-election. The crown agreed to the re-election and we proceeded with resoltuion discussions. This client woudl have faced a term of jail for a period of two to three years. I was able to negotiate with the crown to re-elect to proceed by summary conviction (versus by indictment), which allowed for the possiblity of a conditional sentence order (no actual jail, but restrictive conditions within the community). The client took the offer and was sentenced to an 18 month conditional sentence order (no actual jail).

• R. v. S.R.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. The facts of the case were very unique. The crown made a last minute plea offer for two years incarceration. The client accepted the plea deal. The client was easily facing a lenghty term of incarceration well above the two years.

• R. v. N.K.

  The client was a young professional originally charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit. The client was then later also charged with assaulting a peace officer and resisting. These charges would have greatly impacted her career. Upon resolution discussions with the Crown, I was able to have all charges dropped with a plea to just the impaired driving with the minimum fine and driving prohibition. This left the client in the best position considering the other charges she otherwise could have been convicted of and allowed her to remain in her professional career.

• R. v. S.S.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000. Upon early case resolution discussions with the Crown, I was able to convince them there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction such that the charge should be dropped. The issue was the crown's inability to prove intent. This was the best possible outcome at the earliest possible opportunity.

• R. v. R.B.

  The client was charged with two separate allegations of break and enter. The matters for set for trial. The week before each of the two trials was supposed to proceed seperately, the crown prosecutors both withdrew (dropped) each of the two separate break and enter charges. In each of the two cases, there were issues including a lack of evidence on the essential elements of the offences. The client was left without convictions for both allegations.

• R. v. M.K.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. The allegation arose in the context of internet dating. Had the case proceeded to trial, it would have been a "he said", "she said" situation. However, it was clear that there would have been potential issues with parts of the facts and the issue of consent and how far that consent extended. With those facts, I was able to neogtiate a plea to a simple assault (section 266 of the Criminal Code) with a sentence of probation. The client was able to avoid a lenthy jail sentence, as well as avoiding registration on the Sex Offender Registry. This was an amazing outcome for the client.

• R. v. G.P.

  The client was charged with sexual assault and uttering threats. This was a clear case of a situation where, with the complainant's evidence, there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. Given that, the client proceeded with instructions to elect to have preliminary inquiry and then a trial with a jury. After the preliminary inquiry, it was even more clear that there were issues with the crown's case. The lack of evidence and inconsistencies were evident. I was persistent in trying to convince the crown of the issues with the case. Finally, my efforts came to fruition and the Crown agreed to enter a stay of proceedings, leaving my client with no criminal record.

• R. v. V.K.

  The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit and one traffic ticket was issued. The client gave me instructions to proceed with negotiating with the crown for the best possible plea deal. The crown sought a $2000 fine and a driving prohibition. While a fine and the prohibition were mandatory with minimums established, the crown sought a higher than minimum fine. I fought for the minimum fine, and the court agreed with me. The charge of refusal to provide a sample of breath was withdrawn.

• R. v. J.L.

  The client was charged with mischief and break and enter. I was able to convince the crown to divert the charges from the justice system and the client successfully completed the Mental Health Diversion Program. The charges were then withdrawn.

• R. v. K.D.

  The client was charged with assault in relation to a dependent. The matter took patience and tenacity in terms of negotiations with the crown, but finally, I was able to convince the crown to have the charge dropped after the client completed counselling. This left the client without a criminal record and allowed the family to be reunified.

• R. v. P.R.

  The client was charged with simple possession of a controlled substance arising out of a traffic stop. There were two people in the vehicle at the time. Upon reviewing disclosure it was clear that the crown could not prove the possession charge against my client. The client had no knowledge or control over the drugs in the vehicle, and with that the crown could not prove the possession charge. The client would have faced immigration issues with a conviction. This was the best possible outcome for the client as it left the client with no conviction and no criminal record.

• R. v. R.B.

  The client was charged with assault and careless storage of a firearm. Upon a detailed review of the disclosure, I determined there were issues with the way the police dealt with my client, and in particular, the search of the residence and seizure of the firearm. Armed with that information, I approached the crown to resolve the matter by way of a withdrawal of the firearms charge right at the outset, and then a withdrawal of the assault charge after the client entered into a peace bond for that charge. This was the best possible outcome in this case as the client avoided a conviction.

• R. v. K.H.

  The client was charged with impaired operation and failing or refusing to comply with a demand. The matter was set for trial as there were significant issues with the crown's ability to prove the allegations. Eventually, the crown stayed (dropped) the charges. This resulted in the client having no conviction or record.

• R. v. J.B.

  The client was charged with mischief (damage to property). The client had previously completed a diversionary program for other charges and those charges were dropped. I was able to negotiate with the crown to have this new charge dropped as well.