SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. G.B.

  The client was charged with luring, possession of child pornography, and sexual interference with a minor and sexual assault. All of the charges against the client were withdrawn by the crown based upon the work Ms. Karpa did for the client.

• R. v. C.T.

  The client was charged with sexual assault in a gang type of circumstance. After a thorough review of the file, Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn.

• R. v. K.I.

  The client was charged with a historical sexual assault. Ms. Karpa secured a withdrawn of the charge against her client. No record. No conviction.

• R. v. D.L.

  The client was charged with sexual assault. Ms. Karpa argued the client shouldn'’t be committed to stand trial after prelim. The court agreed with Ms. Karpa and the client was discharged after the preliminary inquiry.

• R. v. G.R.

  The client was charged with breaching a probation order in relation to a previous robbery matter. Ms. Karpa had the breach dropped/withdrawn altogether.

• R. v. G.H.

  The client was charged with the robbery of a convenience store employee. The matter would have garnered a jail sentence of three years'’. Ms. Karpa was able to secure a reduced plea to assault with a weapon and theft under $5000.00 for a conditional discharge. The client did not have to spent any time in jail.

• R. v. B.L.

  The client was charged with a robbery (roll job/mugging). The crown stayed the charge. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

• R. v. G.B.

  The client was charged with possession of drugs (marijuana) and failing to comply with conditions. The client plead guilty to failing to comply and the drug charge was withdrawn. The crown initially sought a fine with a conviction entered. Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to agree to a conditional discharge, despite the client having a related record.

• R. v. A.K.

  The client was initially charged with one count of trafficking and one count of importing and exporting drugs. Following that they subsequently sustained a failure to comply and a failure to appear charge. The crown eventually proceeded with a new indictment for trafficking only. The client plead guilty to this charge and received a jail sentence well below the appropriate range, as well as a fine. The other charges against her were withdrawn.

• R. v. D.R.

  The client was charged with possession of drugs (marijuana). Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

• R. v. K.J.

  The client was charged with trafficking drugs (cocaine and marijuana), possession of a weapon (knife), and assault with a weapon (knife). Initially the crown wanted a jail sentence for guilty pleas to all counts. Instead, Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a term of probation. No jail.

• R. v. D.D.

  The client was charged with trafficking drugs and possession of proceeds of crime. The crown stayed the charge due do their being no reasonable likelihood of conviction.

• R. v. M.T.

  The client was charged with possession of drugs (marijuana). Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

• R. v. A.M.

  The client was charged with possession of marijuana. Based upon her negotiations with the Crown, Ms. Karpa was successful in having the charge against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

• R. v. O.R.

  The client was charged with breaching a conditional sentence order in relation to possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking (marijuana). Ms. Karpa argued the client should not face any jail time, and was successful in her argument. Client avoided jail.

• R. v. C.P.

  The client was charged with possession of cocaine and possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file and determined that there were serious issues with the crown'’s case I including multiple breaches of the client'’s rights. Based upon that, Ms. Karpa was successful in having all of the charges against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

• R. v. K.C.

  The client was charged with impaired driving. Despite a recent related record, Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to agree to a fine and not jail.

• R. v. I.L.

  The client was charged with fraud in relation to depositing fraudulent checks. Ms. Karpa painstakingly reviewed the disclosure/evidence, and approached the Crown in relation to resolution of the matter. The Crown agreed with Ms. Karpa that the charges should be withdrawn outright. The charges were withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

• R. v. H.S.

  The client was charged with fraud against an organization that the client volunteered for. The crown initially sought a term of incarceration. Through her review of the file and working with the client, Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown that although this was a 'trust theft'” allegation, that a conditional discharge was appropriate. No conviction entered.

• R. v. D.S.

  The client was charged with careless driving in relation to a serious accident. The complainant was brain injured as a result of the accident. Ms. Karpa negotiated with the Crown for a plea to a lesser included offence for a fine and two demerits only.

• R. v. J.H.

  The client was charged with shoplifting (theft under $5000.00). Ms. Karpa was successful in having the charge against the client withdrawn so that the client would not have a criminal record.

• R. v. D.J.

  The client was charged with impaired driving and driving with a blood alcohol level over .08. Based upon extenuating circumstances, which Ms. Karpa worked to verify, the charges against the client were withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

• R. v. W.A.

  The client was charged with fraud related offence. The client had a record for similar offences. Despite that, Ms. Karpa was successful in having the charge reduced to a lesser included offence (non-criminal) and the client received a fine.

• R. v. M.B.

  The client was charged with possession of a stolen vehicle and dangerous driving. Ms. Karpa had all of the charges against the client withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

• R. v. P.B.

  The client was charged with fraud in relation to a trust situation. The client had an extensive record for similar offences. Ms. Karpa worked hard to ensure that her client did not receive a jail sentence. Client did not spend any time in jail.