SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. T.G.

  The client was charged with assault with a weapon and common assault. The allegations were serious. Once I had reviewed the disclosure, I approached the crown to discuss resolution of the matter. After discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charge and allow the client to enter into a one-year peace bond. The client was left without a criminal conviction.

• R. v. R.D.

  The client was charged with assault. I received a copy of the crown's disclosure (evidence against my client). I reviewed the same, and quickly came to the realization that there was no basis for the allegation against my client. I booked a meeting with the prosecutor to discuss the file. The crown agreed that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction and the charge was dropped so the client was left with no criminal record.

• R. v. D.T.

  The client was charged with assault, mischief, and failing to remain at the scene of an accident. The allegations were serious and arose in a domestic situation. I approached the crown with respect to resolution of the matter, and after much negotiating, the crown ultimately agreed to stay the charge.

• R. v. J.K.

  The client was charged with criminal negligence causing bodily harm and careless use of a firearm. The allegation was that there was an unlawful discharge of a firearm which caused injuries to the complainant. After lengthy negotiations with the crown, the client entered a plea of guilty to a lesser included offence of careless storage of a firearm. The crown sought a conditional discharge. I asked that the sentencing judge consider an absolute discharge. The court agreed with my arguments for an absolute discharge for the carless storage of a firearm, and the client was thus left without a conviction and without a criminal record. The remaining charges were dropped.

• R. v. H.K.

  The client was charged with assault. The allegation was that the client had assaulted their domestic partner. There were serious ramifications that resulted from the allegation in relation to custody and access to the couple'’s child. I was able to have the client'’s conditions changed from the conditions imposed at the bail hearing prior to being retained. The client was then able to communicate with his wife and to see his child. Ultimately, I had the client complete some counselling, and the crown withdrew the charge.

• R. v. M.H.

  The client was charged with possessing a restricted weapon, careless use of a firearm, two counts of improper storage of a firearm and assaulting a peace officer. The client plead guilty to careless use of a firearm, improper storage of a firearm and possessing a restricted weapon. The remaining improper storage charge and the assault charge were withdrawn. The client received a suspended sentence plus probation for 18 months. A weapons prohibition clause was implemented. The client was also required to complete community services hours and pay a victim fine surcharge. This is a matter where the crown sought a term of incarceration to be served within the community. I managed to convince the judge that a suspended sentence and probation would adequately address the purpose and principles of sentencing and a term of incarceration within the community was thus avoided.

• R. v. R.P.

  The client was charged with assault in the context of a domestic violence allegation. Very early on, I had the client complete some tasks which assisted me in negotiating for a resolution that would leave my client without a criminal record. A conviction would have resulted in my client having issues with future employment. Once the client completed tasks I had requested of him, I approached the crown to have the charges withdrawn. The crown withdrew (dropped) the charges and the client was left without a conviction or criminal record.

• R. v. C.W.

  The client was initially charged with the careless use of a firearm. Upon discussing the matter with the crown, they agreed that the wrong charge had been laid. The crown agreed to amend the charge to the lesser and included offence of the unsafe storage of a firearm. I then asked the crown to consider referring the matter to the alternative measures program after providing them with materials in support of the proposition. The crown agreed, and upon my client's completion of the requirements of the program, the charge was withdrawn/dropped.

• R. v. Z.R

  The client was charged with assault involving an altercation at a restaurant. The charge was serious. I met with the crown to negotiate a resolution of the matter, after having reviewed the file and concluding that there were likely issues with the crown'’s ability to prove that this wasn't just a consensual fight. The crown agreed that there was in fact no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and the charge was withdrawn on the client'’s first court date. The client avoided a conviction which would have compromised their employment.

• R. v. T.B.

  The client was charged with possessing a weapon for a dangerous purpose and unauthorized possession of a weapon. After meeting with the prosecutor to negotiate the withdrawal of the charges, the crown agreed to do so, and all matters were dropped.

• R. v. R.K.

  The client was charged with assault and forcible confinement in the context of a domestic situation. I had reviewed the crown'’s disclosure and met with the crown to discuss resolving the matter by way of a withdrawal of the charge on the basis that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The crown agreed, and on the second court date I had the charge withdrawn.

• R. v. M.H.

  The client was charged with failing to comply with release conditions after consuming alcohol in contravention of the order. The order as originally in place relating to firearms offences. Initially the crown was not agreeable to referring the matter to a diversion program. However, with persuasion, I was able to have the matter referred, and upon completion, the charge was dropped, and the matter concluded without my client receiving a criminal record.

• R. v. S.B.

  The client was charged with assaulting a police officer after a cause disturbance call was made to police. Although the crown did not initially agree to withdraw the charge, I convinced them that it was not in the public interest to prosecute. On that basis, the crown withdrew the charge.

• R. v. M.L.

  The client was charged with assault in relation to a road rage allegation. The matter was a serious one, but the crown agreed to refer the client to a diversion program. Once completed, the charge was dropped. It was extremely important to the client's employment that there be no conviction. I was able to achieve that goal for the client.

• R. v. C.K.

  The client was charged with assault against their domestic partner. The allegation was a serious one. A conviction for the client would have meant issues with future employment. After discussions with the crown, the matter was withdrawn, and the client entered into a one-year peace bond.

• R. v. O.O.

  The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm in relation to a sporting event. The allegation was serious in that the complainant received a serious injury that required stitches. I met with the crown to propose a reduction of the charge to a simple assault charge, to be referred to the Alternative Measures Program. The client completed the requirements of the program, and the charge was dropped entirely.

• R. v. T.B.

  The client was charged with assault and uttering threats. After discussions with the crown, the charges were withdrawn entirely as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction.

• R. v. D.L.

  The client was charged with assault with a weapon. Initially, the prosecutor was not agreeable to resolution of the matter without a guilty plea and a conviction. After several negotiations with the crown, I managed to have the crown agree to withdraw the charge, and the client entered into a peace bond with minimal conditions. The charge was dropped. No conviction was entered.

• R. v. C.F.

  The client was charged with assault, assault with a weapon, forcible confinement, uttering threats, careless use of a firearm, unauthorized possession of a firearm, possessing a firearm contrary to a prohibition order, sexual assault and mischief. Initially the matter was set down for trial after a not guilty plea was entered. At the first trial date, I filed a notice alleging a breach of my client'’s rights. On the basis of that, a new trial date was set. Prior to second trial date, I filed yet another notice that related to breaches of my client's rights due to the lack of disclosure. Two days prior to the start of the second trial date, the crown stayed the charges. The matter was concluded. All of the charges were dropped.

• R. v. M.L.

  The client was originally charged with assault causing bodily harm and failing to comply with release conditions. The charges were eventually upgraded to the far more serious charge of aggravated assault due to the extensive injuries the complainant received. In the end, the crown stayed (dropped) both charges. The matter was thus concluded without the client having any conviction or criminal record which would have had a serious impact upon the client'’s immigration status.

• R. v. D.G.

  The client was charged with assault in relation to the client's domestic partner. The crown would not agree to resolving the matter so that the client did not have a criminal record. However, I had the client participate in multiple forms of counselling and treatment, and in the end, the crown agreed to withdraw the charges entirely.

• R. v. V.C.

  The client was charged with breaching the conditions of a peace bond that was originally in place after an allegation of domestic assault. Despite the crown'’s initial position that the client should receive a conviction, I was able to negotiate a resolution for an additional shorter-term peace bond so that the client avoided a criminal conviction.

• R. v. L.W.

  The client was charged with administering a noxious substance and failing to provide the necessaries of life to a child under the age of 16. The matter was set for trial. After we thoroughly prepared for trial, the crown elected to drop all of the charges.

• R. v. G.E.

  The client was charged with criminal harassment involving a former domestic partner. These were false allegations against the client. I prepared for a trial of the matter, and upon seeing the evidence relating to the defence of my client, the crown withdrew the charges.

• R. v. F.R.

  The client was charged with assault, forcible confinement, mischief and uttering threats in a domestic related incident. I worked with the client to have him enrolled in programing to assist with my negotiations with the crown prosecutor. I determined that there were weaknesses in the crown's case. As a result of that, I was able to resolve my client's matter by way of an informal resolution. My client as left without a criminal record, and without a conviction when the charges were withdrawn.