SUCCESSFUL CASE DECISIONS

• R. v. S.H.

  The client was charged with possession of stolen property (section 355(B) of the Criminal Code). After reviewing the matter, Ms. Karpa determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The charge was withdrawn. No conviction entered. No criminal record.

• R. v. R.M.

  The client as charged with shoplifting and failing to appear in court. All matters were withdrawn as part of the Alternative Measures program.

• R. v. P.V.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa had the charge dropped outright. No conviction. No criminal record.

• R. v. D.A.

  The client was charged with mischief to property over $5000.00 (damaging the property). The client received a fine.

• R. v. K.M.

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 Karpa had the charge withdrawn outright.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

• R. v. T.K.

  The client was charged with break and enter and mischief to property. Ms. Karpa had all charges withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

• R. v. D.P.

  The client was charged with two counts of breaking and entering into a dwelling house (B & E). Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa was able to secure the withdrawal of one count for a plea to a lesser included offence of unlawfully in a dwelling house (as a summary conviction matter) instead. Client received probation versus jail.

• R. v. D.Z.

  The client was charged with multiple counts of theft, fraud, possession of stolen property and other property related offences. The client had an extensive criminal record for similar offences. With an extensive review of the disclosure, and effective submissions to the Judge, Ms. Karpa secured a sentence of time served for the matters where the Crown was seeking significantly more time in custody.

• R. v. J.D.

  The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting) pursuant to section 334(B) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Ms. Karpa had the charge against her client withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

• R. v. J.B.

  The client was charged with shoplifting in relation to a matter that occurred at a local retail store. With Ms. Karpa'’s hard work, the charge was dropped (withdrawn). No conviction/no criminal record.

• R. v. W.P.

  The client was charged with serious fraud related offences and was arrested on a warrant. Ms. Karpa managed to negotiate a plea to a Provincial offence instead of Criminal Code offences, so the client avoided a criminal record No conviction/no record.

• R. v. W.M.

  The client was charged with breaching a court order. Ms. Karpa secured the client an absolute discharge. No conviction entered. No criminal record.

• R. v. M.M.

  The client was charged with shoplifting (theft under $5000.00). Ms. Karpa was able to have the charges withdrawn outright. No conviction/no criminal record. As is standard for Ms. Karpa, she also sent a letter to the police to ensure that they would destroy the client'’s identification evidence/fingerprints.

• R. v. R.M.

  The client was charged with a serious robbery and an assault and theft. The client had a related record. The Crown sought an extensive amount of time in jail. Ms. Karpa was able to argue for a significantly reduced sentence.

• R. v. J.W.

  The client was charged with robbery and weapons offences in relation to an allegation at a restaurant. Ms. Karpa had the charges dropped outright. No criminal record/no conviction entered.

• R. v. C.W.

  The client was charged with two counts of robbery, one count of break and enter, and one count of uttering threats. Ms. Karpa had the charges reduced to two counts of theft under $5000.00 and uttering threats for 1 year probation.

• R. v. N.M.

  The client faced a charge of robbery regarding an allegation of using a knife to threaten a stranger on the street. The client had a related record for robbery for which they had received a sentence of one year in jail. Despite the prior related record, Ms. Karpa secured a plea to a two month sentence for the lesser included offence of assault with a weapon, and with time served, the client was released from custody the same day as the sentence.

• R. v. D.G.

  The client was charged with the robbery of a financial institution. With the changes to the Criminal Code in 2012, the client faced a penitentiary term of imprisonment. Ms. Karpa worked tirelessly to negotiation a resolution that took into account the client'’s uniquely mitigating circumstances, and a conditional sentence was imposed.

• R. v. C.M.

  The client was charged with possession of drugs (marijuana). The Crown sought to have the client convicted with a criminal record. The client would have had issues with a conviction and employment. Ms. Karpa vigorously argued for a conditional discharge. The client received the discharge so there would be no issues with the client'’s employment. 

• R. v. S.I.

  The client was charged with trafficking a narcotic (fentanyl). The client faced serious jail time. Ms. Karpa convinced the prosecution to agree to a plea to a simple possession of drugs for a fine. 

• R. v. J.G.

  The client was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking meth. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to agree to a plea to a reduced charge of simple possession for a fine. 

• R. v. C.B.

  The client was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking drugs (marihuana). Ms. Karpa had the charger reduced to simple possession of marihuana for a conditional discharge.

• R. v. D.P.

  The client was charged with possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking (marihuana), proceeds of crime, and obstructing a police officer. Ms. Karpa secured a reduction in the charge to simple possession of marihuana (contrary to section 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act) for an absolute discharge. No conviction entered. All other charges were withdrawn.

• R. v. J.M.

  The client was charged with possession of crack cocaine. After a review of the file, Ms. Karpa determined that the client's rights had been violated and an illegal search and seizure was conducted by the police. On that basis, Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to drop the charge. No conviction. No criminal record.

• R. v. J.H.

  After a lengthy drug investigation involving co-accused, the client was charged with possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking (cocaine) (section 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act), and being in possession of proceeds of crime. Ms. Karpa thoroughly reviewed the file, and determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction against the client. Ms. Karpa convicted the Crown to drop all of the charges against the client. No conviction. No criminal record.