SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. A.H.

  The client was charged with 8 counts of impaired driving. He was facing extensive jail time given a prior record. Ms. Karpa worked to negotiate a resolution with the crown where the crown sought jail time, but Ms. Karpa could argue for a conditional sentence so that the client would not have to face time in jail. Ms. Karpa was successful in that argument when she proposed the no jail time to the court.

• R. v. D.S.

  The client was charged with break and enter and mischief (damage to property). This was a serious criminal matter as the potential punishment the client was facing was jail. Despite that, Ms. Karpa was successful in having all of the charges against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

• R. v. I.N.

  The client was charged with refusal to provide a sample of his breath to an officer for the purpose of analyzing alcohol content. Ms. Karpa got the charge withdrawn and the client received his driver'’s license back.

• R. v. J.D.

  The client was charged with a trust fraud against her employer. The client was alleged to have taken money from her employer. The crown initially was seeking jail, but Ms. Karpa was successful in securing a term of probation for the client. No jail.

• R. v. M.G.

  The client was charged with shoplifting (theft under $5000.00). Ms. Karpa was able to have the charge against the client withdrawn, despite the crown initially not agreeing to do so.

• R. v. T.G.

  The client was charged with fraud under $5000.00 in relation to switching price tags on an item in a store. Ms. Karpa was able to successfully argue that the charge should be withdrawn.

• R. v. M.Y.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn.

• R. v. R.K.

  The client was charged with multiple counts of possession of stolen property, break and enter, mischief and drug related offences. The crown sought actual jail time but Ms. Karpa argued before the judge that the client should be allowed to be sentenced to a community based sentence so that the client could seek counselling for a drug addiction. Ms. Karpa was successful in her application.

• R. v. N.K.

  The client was charged with shoplifting (theft under $5000.00). Ms. Karpa had the charge against her client withdrawn.

• R. v. P.P.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. The charge against the client was withdrawn by the crown.

• R. v. S.T.

  The client was charged with theft from a customer. This was a serious matter and the crown initially sought jail. Ms. Karpa was able to persuade the crown to consider Alternative Measures based upon issues with the crown'’s case. Ultimately the client finished the Alternative Measures and the charges against the client were withdrawn.

• R. v. B.M.

  The client was charged with Provincial offences relating to the Fair Trading Act. The crown initially wanted to relay the information to include criminal charges for fraud. Ms. Karpa managed to ensure that criminal charges were not laid, and the client received a small fine for the Fair Trading Act Provincial offence. No criminal conviction.

• R. v. K.D.

  The client was charged with theft of a motor vehicle contrary to section 333.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The matter involved a serious accident after the vehicle was stolen. Ms. Karpa argued for a conditional discharge, and it was granted by the court. No conviction entered.

• R. v. A.G.

  The client as charged with fraud over $5000.00. A conviction would have meant the client would lose their job. Ms. Karpa secured a complete withdrawal of the charge. No conviction. No criminal record.

• R. v. S.N.

  he client was charged with theft under $500.00 and failure to appear in court. The charges were withdrawn. No record. No conviction.

• R. v. M.O.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). The matter was withdrawn for successful completion of Alternative Measures.

• R. v. M.Q.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 and failing to appear at court. The matter involved a domestic dispute wherein the complainant alleged the theft of a telephone. Initially the crown would not agree to the referral to Alternative Measures, but Ms, Karpa convinced them to do so. Ms. Karpa secured the withdrawal of the charges after the matter was referred to Alternative Measures.

• R. v. D.B.

  The client was charged with theft of a motor vehicle. The matter was very serious, as the allegation would have meant that the client would have faced the termination of his employment if convicted. Initially the crown was not willing to refer the matter to Alternative Measures. However, with the work that Ms. Karpa did, the crown agreed to refer the matter. After successfully completing the program, the charge against the client was withdrawn. No criminal conviction/no criminal record. The client maintained his employment.

• R. v. R.G.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 for shoplifting from a local grocery store. The client was referred to the Alternative Measures Program. Upon successful completion, Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

• R. v. J.M.

  The client was charged with multiple possession of stolen property offences, in addition to trafficking in property obtained by crime, possession of a weapon, obstruction of a police officer and multiple failures to appear/breaches of release. The crown sought significant jail time given the client'’s related record. Ms. Karpa successfully argued for time served.

• R. v. K.M.

  The client was charged with arson. The situation involved an allegation that but for the evidence provided by the client, the police would not have discovered the culprit. There were serious issues involving the client's mental health. With a lot of perseverance and hard work, Ms. Karpa was able to have the matter referred to Alternative Measures on the basis of the lesser included offence of mischief/damage to property. Upon successful completion of the program, the charge was withdrawn.

• R. v. J.M.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

• R. v. J.D.

  The client was charged with mischief/damage to property, possession of stolen property, and possession of break and enter instruments. The crown was initially unwilling to agree to refer the matter to Alternative Measures. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to agree to the referral. The client completed the program and all charges were withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

• R. v. A.F.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). The matter was referred to the Alternative Measures Program and the charge was dropped after successful completion of the same.

• R. v. J.B.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (section 334(B) of the Criminal Code of Canada) in relation to a shoplifting allegation. The charge was withdrawn.