The Queen vs. The Defendant

Cases

Cases in 2020

  • R. v. M.H.2020

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats. The crown was approached to see if they would be willing to resolve the matter by way of a peace bond. Given that the client had a prior one in 2016, they were not inclined to do so. However, they did agree to an informal resolution. The client was required to attend counseling and provide proof of completion of the sessions. Once she had done so, the charges against her were withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.M.2020

    The client was charged on three different dockets. The charges included assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats on the first. The second was for two counts of mischief, two counts mischief to property under $5000, and failing to comply. The last was for failing to attend. When we received his legal aid certificate, the client was in custody. He pleaded guilty to assault, one count of mischief to property under $5000, failing to comply, and failing to appear. The remaining charges were withdrawn. He had 14 days of pre-trial custody and was released on time served.

  • R. v. N.I.2020

    The client was charged with an offence under the Child Welfare act. I was able to work with the client to obtain relevant documentation in order to negotiate a complete withdrawal of the charge.

  • R. v. S.M.2020

    The client was charged with break and enter and mischief causing damage to property under $5000. The client would have faced very serious consequences to employment if convicted. I worked tirelessly to finally convince the crown prosecutor that the charges should be withdrawn outright. The client was left without a criminal record.

  • R. v. R.S.2020

    The client was charged with two counts of breaching the conditions of a probation order, two counts of breaching a Protection Against Family Violence Act order (EPO) and two counts of failing to appear at court. I reviewed the file and determined that the allegations had really been subsumed within the facts associated with the client's previous sentence. I wrote to the crown to point out the issue, and all of the charges were brought forward into court and withdrawn (dropped) by the crown.

  • R. v. C.W.2020

    The client had a matter that was at warrant status from years prior. It related to a failure to appear at court for an amendment to a conditional sentence order. It took a lot of investigating and phone calls to achieve the result of having the charge dismissed.

  • R. v. D.N.2020

    The client was charged with three separate sets of charges. One charge was for assault, and the remaining two were for failing to appear at court. The client plead guilty to the two counts of failing to appear for court, and the crown agreed to drop the assault charge. The crown prosecutor asked the judge to sentence the client to a fine. I argued that the client should receive a conditional discharge, which would leave the client without a criminal conviction after a certain period of time. The court agreed with my submissions, and the client was granted a conditional discharge.

  • R. v. M.B.2020

    The client was charged with four counts of failing to comply with a protection order under the Protection Against Family Violence Act. I reviewed the disclosure and determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. I spoke with the prosecutor who agreed that there was no chance of success, and agreed to withdraw the charges. The client was left without a criminal conviction.

  • R. v. K.N.2020

    The client was charged with two different traffic violations: failing to proceed safely after stopping through an intersection and careless driving. I worked with the client to present a package of information and documentation to the crown to resolve the tickets in the best possible way so that the client did not receive significant demerits. I was able to convince the prosecutor to reduce the fine amounts for the one ticket, and then to reduce the remaining ticket to a different infraction which resulted in less than half of the demerits.

  • R. v. H.L.2020

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. After having discussions with the crown, they agreed to refer the matter to Alternative Measures Program. The matter was withdrawn upon completion of the program. The client was left with no criminal record.

  • R. v. P.H.2020

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. I worked closely with the client After discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charge.

    DUI
  • R. v. P.S.2020

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm against one complainant, and assault against another. The charges arose during an altercation between the parties who were strangers to each other. One of the complainants alleged that the client assaulted them, and in so doing cause injury (broken ribs). Upon review of disclosure, I was able to find discrepancies in the statements the complainants gave to police. Once I had that information, I met with the crown prosecutor to negotiate resolution of the matter. My goal was to leave my client with no criminal record/no conviction so that the matter would not impact employment. After meeting with the crown, they agreed that although they were not originally going to consider resolution of the matter by way of a referral to Alternative Measures (primarily due to the seriousness of the assault causing bodily harm charge), after hearing my pitch, they would refer the matter. The client was referred to the Alternative Measures program, and after successful completion, the charges were withdrawn, leaving my client with no criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. D.G.2020

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving at or over 0.08mg/% (blood alcohol concentration). I received and reviewed disclosure, determining that there were potential triable issues. Before the matter reached any substantive court appearances, the charges were dropped by the crown.

    DUI
  • R. v. M.R.2020

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. The matter arose out of a lengthy family law dispute. The matter proceeded to a preliminary inquiry. At the preliminary inquiry, I was able to convince the crown prosecutor that they could not proceed on one of the several charges. They agreed, and at the preliminary inquiry, that charge was withdrawn. The remaining charges proceeded from the preliminary inquiry on to trial. At the preliminary I was able to make a lot of headway during my cross-examination of the complainants. There was a lot of valuable evidence that would have been useful at the trial of the matter. The matter was set for trial with a judge sitting alone at the Court of Queen's Bench. After a review of the evidence, the crown agreed to drop the charges. The client was left without a conviction.

  • R. v. B.S.2020

    The client was charged with theft under $5000 and arose in a grocery store (shoplifting). I successfully had the client referred to the Alternative Measures program, despite there having been a related referral in the past. The client completed the program, and the charge was dropped (withdrawn) by the crown. That left the client with no criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. C.D.2020

    The client was charged with an assault. The allegation is that the parties were in a dispute (they were strangers to each other) and that the client had assaulted the complainant. I was able to thoroughly review the disclosure, and determined there were significant issues with the reasonable likelihood of conviction (part of the test the crown must meet to prosecute the matter). I presented my analysis to the crown during an early case resolution meeting. The crown agreed to withdraw the charge outright. This left my client with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. C.M.2020

    The client was charged with two charges of mischief (damage to property) under $5000. The allegation arose when there was a dispute between the parties. After presenting the crown with my assessment of the matter, and a proposed resolution, the crown agreed to outright withdraw the charges against my client. My client was left with a clean record and no conviction.

  • R. v. J.K.2020

    The client was charged with impaired operation, operation at or over 0.08, and assaulting a peace officer. The client initially wanted to plead not guilty, as he was adamant that he did not assault the officer. And it was clear from the disclosure that this was true. Ultimately, the client decided to plead guilty to operation at or over 0.08 to resolve the matter quickly. The remaining two charges against him were withdrawn. He was given a fine in the amount of $1500.00 and a one year driving prohibition.

  • R. v. L.L.2020

    The client was charged with impaired operation. She chose to plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The trial proceeded as scheduled. After the witnesses had been called, the crown announced that she intended to stay the charge, as she felt the trial had not gone well. This was discussed in court and the crown was persuaded to withdraw the charge instead.

  • R. v. G.E.2020

    The client was charged with trafficking in property under $5000 and possession of property under $5000. The matter was set down for ECR discussions and the crown was convinced to refer the matter to the alternative measures program. The client successfully completed the requirements of the program, which included making a charitable donation and composing an essay about what he had learned from this experience. The matter was then withdrawn on the next court date.

  • R. v. M.F.2020

    The client was initially charged with criminal harassment. She was later charged again with three breaches. Extensive ECR discussions were had with the crown surrounding these two files. The charges stemmed from a neighborly dispute and should likely have been civil matters. Eventually the crown agreed to a one year peace bond, with specific conditions, and the charges against the client were withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.R.2020

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual exploitation of a young person when in a position of trust, invitation to sexual touching, and sexual interference. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was down for a preliminary hearing. At the prelim, after discussions with the crown, he agreed there was not much to go on, and that at most it was an assault. The crown offered a 6 month peace bond , which the client accepted. The charges were then stayed.

  • R. v. R.P2020

    The client was charged with trafficking. It was an indictable matter. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set for a preliminary hearing, to be followed by a trial with a Court of Queen's Bench judge sitting alone. On the day of the prelim, counsel had discussions, which resulted in the client re-electing to be tried by a provincial court judge. The crown amended the charge to simple possession and proceeded summarily. The client pleaded guilty to this amended charge and received a 12 month conditional discharge.

  • R. v. B.R.2020

    The client was charged with operation of a motor vehicle while prohibited. He pleaded guilty and, though the crown was seeking an incarceration period of 30 days, he ended up receiving a fine in the amount of $1500.00.

  • R. v. J.G.2020

    The client was charged with unauthorized possession of a firearm, carrying a concealed weapon, and two counts of careless use of a firearm. The client attended counseling and also met with a psychologist to discuss the events that led to the charges. After lengthy discussions with the crown, after everything the client had done to address his issues, she was willing to withdraw the charges on the condition that a five year Order for Prohibition pursuant to s.111 (weapons prohibition) be entered. The client avoided any criminal conviction being entered on his record, which was important given his dual citizenship with the United States.

  • R. v. Y.L.2020

    The client was charged with first degree murder and three counts of accessory after the fact. Because the crown chose to direct indict on the matter, it proceeded directly to Queen's Bench. The client entered a not guilty plea and dates for a judge and jury trial were set. Prior to trial commencing, there were two weeks of pre-trial motions. At the end of these motions, much of the evidence pertaining to the client was excluded, ensuring that it would not be heard by the jury. At the end of the trial, the jury came back with a guilty verdict on all four counts. The matter was adjourned for sentencing. When the judge gave his decision, the client received an automatic life sentence with parole eligibility in 25 years on the first degree murder charge, then a global sentence of 7 years for the three accessory after the fact charges (less 1296 days of pre-trial custody). The crown also sought ancillary orders regarding DNA and weapons prohibitions.

  • R. v. C.S.2020

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon, assaulting a peace officer with a weapon, and resisting arrest. After obtaining some background from the client regarding his mental health history, the crown was persuaded to refer the matter to the mental health diversion program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charges against him were withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.C.2020

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The charge stemmed from a domestic dispute, which both husband and wife were engaged in. The complainant later advised that she wished to recant her statement, as she was quite intoxicated and didn't remember many details about the night. Despite this, the crown was not willing to withdraw the charge outright. However, with attendance at and completion of counseling, they would reconsider. The matter was adjourned for a few months to allow the client time to do this. Once he had completed the counseling sessions and provided proof of such, the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. H.C.2020

    The client was charged with multiple charges in relation to credit and debit card thefts, fraud, unlawful possession of identification documents. The client had a related record for which he had received an 18 month sentence of incarceration. The crown agreed to a significantly reduced sentence for the over thirty criminal charges the client had. The total sentence for this second round of offences was 18 months incarceration.

  • R. v. A.A.2020

    The client was charged with a series of very serious offences stemming from the police stopping the vehicle the client was in, and finding a loaded firearm. The allegation was serious enough that the client was facing a penitentiary term of imprisonment. After receiving disclosure and completing a comprehensive assessment, I approached the prosecutor. After the prosecutor reviewed the file, they agreed that the charges against the client should be dropped entirely. The client walked away with out a conviction. The issues on the file were that the crown would not have been able to establish that the client possessed the firearm.

  • R. v. R.S.2020

    The client was charged with several domestic offences. The offence allegations were that of harassment, threats, and breaches of no contact orders (bail release conditions). The client did not have counsel at first, and then hired me to try to get him out of jail. I was successful in doing so. The client was released the same day we dealt with his pleas and the matter was fully resolved.

  • R. v. D.M.2020

    The client was charged with domestic assault and immediately, the police instituted a no contact provision with the client's spouse. I was able to have that condition amended to allow for contact.

  • R. v. A.A.2020

    This was a matter that had proceeded with a preliminary inquiry and the complainant testified. It was clear from my cross-examination that the complainant had consented to the sexual interaction between herself and the client. Despite that, the crown proceeded with the matter and a trial date was set. I was able to convince the crown that it was clear after the preliminary inquiry that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction given the complainant's testimony on the issue of consent at the preliminary inquiry. Ultimately, the crown agreed with my assessment, and the sexual assault charge against my client was stayed - the matter was dropped. The client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. K.S.2020

    The client was charged with assault stemming from a historical allegation. The complainant made the allegation in the midst of an ongoing family law dispute. The charge was laid outside of the six month window for which a summary conviction matter could be laid, so the crown would have had to elect to proceed by indictment, for this very minor matter. With that, and with the fact that it was not the complainant who reported the allegation, I approached the crown to negotiate for a withdrawal of the matter. After reviewing my reasons why the domestic assault charge should be withdrawn, the crown agreed, and it was withdrawn. This left the client with no criminal record, and no conviction.

  • R. v. M.C.2020

    The client was charged with theft from an employer. The the matter was set for trial. The client had a very strong defence available, and we were prepared to run the trial and to put forward the defence. However, the crown elected to withdraw the charge after restitution was forwarded to the complainant. The charge of theft was therefore withdrawn, and the client was left with no conviction, and no criminal record.

  • R. v. J.K.2020

    The client was charged with impaired operation, operation at or over 0.08, and assaulting a peace officer. The client initially wanted to plead not guilty, as he was adamant that he did not assault the officer. And it was clear from the disclosure that this was true. Ultimately, the client decided to plead guilty to operation at or over 0.08 to resolve the matter quickly. The remaining two charges against him were withdrawn. He was given a fine in the amount of $1500.00 and a one year driving prohibition.

    DUI
  • R. v. L.L.2020

    The client was charged with impaired operation. She chose to plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The trial proceeded as scheduled. After the witnesses had been called, the crown announced that she intended to stay the charge, as she felt the trial had not gone well. This was discussed in court and the crown was persuaded to withdraw the charge instead.

    DUI
  • R. v. G.E.2020

    The client was charged with trafficking in property under $5000 and possession of property under $5000. The matter was set down for ECR discussions and the crown was convinced to refer the matter to the alternative measures program. The client successfully completed the requirements of the program, which included making a charitable donation and composing an essay about what he had learned from this experience.  The matter was then withdrawn on the next court date.

  • R. v. M.H.2020

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats. The crown was approached to see if they would be willing to resolve the matter by way of a peace bond. Given that the client had a prior one in 2016, they were not inclined to do so. However, they did agree to an informal resolution. The client was required to attend counselling and provide proof of completion of the sessions. Once she had done so, the charges against her were withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.M.2020

    The client was charged on three different dockets. The charges included assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats on the first. The second was for two counts of mischief, two counts mischief to property under $5000, and failing to comply. The last was for failing to attend. When we received his legal aid certificate, the client was in custody. He pleaded guilty to assault, one count of mischief to property under $5000, failing to comply, and failing to appear. The remaining charges were withdrawn. He had 14 days of pre-trial custody and was released on time served.

  • R. v. M.F.2020

    The client was initially charged with criminal harassment. She was later charged again with three breaches. Extensive ECR discussions were had with the crown surrounding these two files. The charges stemmed from a neighbourly dispute and should likely have been civil matters. Eventually the crown agreed to a one year peace bond, with specific conditions, and the charges against the client were withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.R.2020

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual exploitation of a young person when in a position of trust, invitation to sexual touching, and sexual interference. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was down for a preliminary hearing. At the prelim, after discussions with the crown, he agreed there was not much to go on, and that at most it was an assault. The crown offered a 6 month peace bond , which the client accepted. The charges were then stayed.

  • R. v. R.P2020

    The client was charged with trafficking. It was an indictable matter. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set for a preliminary hearing, to be followed by a trial with a Court of Queen's Bench judge sitting alone. On the day of the prelim, counsel had discussions, which resulted in the client re-electing to be tried by a provincial court judge. The crown amended the charge to simple possession and proceeded summarily. The client pleaded guilty to this amended charge and received a 12 month conditional discharge.

  • R. v. B.R.2020

    The client was charged with operation of a motor vehicle while prohibited. He pleaded guilty and, though the crown was seeking an incarceration period of 30 days, he ended up receiving a fine in the amount of $1500.00.

  • R. v. J.G.2020

    The client was charged with unauthorized possession of a firearm, carrying a concealed weapon, and two counts of careless use of a firearm. The client attended counselling and also met with a psychologist to discuss the events that led to the charges. After lengthy discussions with the crown, after everything the client had done to address his issues, she was willing to withdraw the charges on the condition that a five year Order for Prohibition pursuant to s.111 (weapons prohibition) be entered. The client avoided any criminal conviction being entered on his record, which was important given his dual citizenship with the United States.

  • R. v. Y.L.2020

    The client was charged with first degree murder and three counts of accessory after the fact. Because the crown chose to direct indict on the matter, it proceeded directly to Queen's Bench. The client entered a not guilty plea and dates for a judge and jury trial were set. Prior to trial commencing, there were two weeks of pre-trial motions. At the end of these motions, much of the evidence pertaining to the client was excluded, ensuring that it would not be heard by the jury. At the end of the trial, the jury came back with a guilty verdict on all four counts. The matter was adjourned for sentencing. When the judge gave his decision, the client received an automatic life sentence with parole eligibility in 25 years on the first degree murder charge, then a global sentence of 7 years for the three accessory after the fact charges (less 1296 days of pre-trial custody). The crown also sought ancillary orders regarding DNA and weapons prohibitions.

  • R. v. C.S.2020

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon, assaulting a peace officer with a weapon, and resisting arrest. After obtaining some background from the client regarding his mental health history, the crown was persuaded to refer the matter to the mental health diversion program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charges against him were withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.C.2020

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The charge stemmed from a domestic dispute, which both husband and wife were engaged in. The complainant later advised that she wished to recant her statement, as she was quite intoxicated and didn't remember many details about the night. Despite this, the crown was not willing to withdraw the charge outright. However, with attendance at and completion of counselling, they would reconsider. The matter was adjourned for a few months to allow the client time to do this. Once he had completed the counselling sessions and provided proof of such, the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. H.C.2020

    The client was charged with multiple charges in relation to credit and debit card thefts, fraud, unlawful possession of identification documents. The client had a related record for which he had received an 18 month sentence of incarceration. The crown agreed to a significantly reduced sentence for the over thirty criminal charges the client had. The total sentence for this second round of offences was 18 months incarceration.

  • R. v. A.A.2020

    The client was charged with a series of very serious offences stemming from the police stopping the vehicle the client was in, and finding a loaded firearm. The allegation was serious enough that the client was facing a penitentiary term of imprisonment. After receiving disclosure and completing a comprehensive assessment, I approached the prosecutor. After the prosecutor reviewed the file, they agreed that the charges against the client should be dropped entirely. The client walked away with out a conviction. The issues on the file were that the crown would not have been able to establish that the client possessed the firearm.

  • R. v. R.S.2020

    The client was charged with several domestic  offences. The offence allegations were that of harassment, threats, and breaches of no contact orders (bail release conditions). The client did not have counsel at first, and then hired me to try to get him out of jail. I was successful in doing so. The client was released the same day we dealt with his pleas and the matter was fully resolved.

  • R. v. D.M.2020

    The client was charged with domestic assault and immediately, the police instituted a no contact provision with the client's spouse. I was able to have that condition amended to allow for contact.

  • R. v. A.A.2020

    This was a matter that had proceeded with a preliminary inquiry and the complainant testified. It was clear from my cross-examination that the complainant had consented to the sexual interaction between herself and the client. Despite that, the crown proceeded with the matter and a trial date was set. I was able to convince the crown that it was clear after the preliminary inquiry that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction given the complainant's testimony on the issue of consent at the preliminary inquiry. Ultimately, the crown agreed with my assessment, and the sexual assault charge against my client was stayed - the matter was dropped. The client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. K.S.2020

    The client was charged with assault stemming from a historical allegation. The complainant made the allegation in the midst of an ongoing family law dispute. The charge was laid outside of the six month window for which a summary conviction matter could be laid, so the crown would have had to elect to proceed by indictment, for this very minor matter. With that, and with the fact that it was not the complainant who reported the allegation, I approached the crown to negotiate for a withdrawal of the matter. After reviewing my reasons why the domestic assault charge should be withdrawn, the crown agreed, and it was withdrawn. This left the client with no criminal record, and no conviction.

  • R. v. M.C.2020

    The client was charged with theft from an employer. The the matter was set for trial. The client had a very strong defence available, and we were prepared to run the trial and to put forward the defence. However, the crown elected to withdraw the charge after restitution was forwarded to the complainant. The charge of theft was therefore withdrawn, and the client was left with no conviction, and no criminal record.

Cases in 2019

  • R. v. C.B.2019

    The client was charged on three different dockets. On one docket he was charged with assault causing bodily harm, extortion, mischief endangering life, and uttering threats. On the other two he was charged with failing to comply on one and failing to appear on the other. He pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily harm, uttering threats, mischief, and failing to appear. The other charges were withdrawn. He received a sentence of 12 months incarceration, followed by 18 months of probation. Since he had been in custody, he had some pre-trial credit, which meant he had four months left to serve. There were also some ancillary orders (primary DNA and s. 109 prohibition) imposed.

  • R. v. U.M.2019

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. The client pleaded guilty and the matter was set down for sentencing. A pre-sentence report was ordered, which outlined some of the neurological issues the client faced after brain surgery. This was helpful because even though he had two prior convictions for assault, he was able to avoid a jail sentence, as the judge factored this in to her decision. He was given a 12 month conditional sentence order and 12 months of probation.

  • R. v. G.H.2019

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial, the complainant did not show up. The crown also hadn’t subpoenaed all the officers to appear as witnesses. As such, the charge was stayed. The client avoided having another conviction on his record.

  • R. v. D.P.2019

    The client was charged with failing to obey a yield sign before entering a highway. Unfortunately a fatality occurred and he was charged on a long information. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a 60 day driving suspension, along with a $1500.00 fine.

  • R. v. P.C.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. Upon reviewing the disclosure, it was clear there were issues during the police officer’s dealings with the client. A charter notice was filed regarding these breaches. The notice was successful in convincing the crown there were triable issues and she entered a stay of proceedings on the file.

  • R. v. M.L.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving causing bodily harm, having a blood alcohol level over the legal limit causing bodily harm, and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm. He pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing bodily harm and the other two counts were withdrawn. He received a sentence of incarceration for a period of 8 months and a 2 year driving prohibition. As he had already been without his license since the time of the incident, he was left with 12 months and 1 week before it could be reinstated.

  • R. v. R.M.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. At the conclusion of the trial, the judge adjourned to the following morning, at which time she would give her decision. The client was found guilty of operation at or over 0.08 and the impaired charge was withdrawn. He received a fine in the amount of $1500.00 and a driving prohibition for one year.

  • R. v. M.H.2019

    The client was charged with possession of a forged document, fraud under $5000, possession of drugs, breaching a CSO condition, failing to comply with a probation order, and failing to attend court. He pleaded guilty to uttering a forged document and possession of drugs. The remaining charges were withdrawn. The client was in custody at the time of his guilty plea. He was given a 15 day global sentence and 18 months probation on his previous conviction.

  • R. v. C.M.2019

    The client was charged with mischief to property under $5000. After having discussions with the crown, counsel were able to reach a resolution. The client paid restitution to the complainant and the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.B.2019

    The client was charged with uttering threats. Following ECR discussions with the crown, an informal resolution was agreed on. The matter was adjourned for three months and as long as the client did not breach the terms of his release, the charge would be withdrawn. At the end of the three month period, nothing had arisen, and the crown withdrew the charge as expected.

  • R. v. L.M.2019

    The client was charged with uttering threats. After ECR discussions with the crown, they agreed to refer the matter to the mental health diversion program. Once it was established that the client was a fit, the matter was adjourned for her to complete the requirements of the program. Upon doing so, the charge against her was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.R.2019

    The client was charged with possession of cannabis for the purpose of selling. After discussions with the crown, they agreed to refer the matter to alternative measures. Once the client had successfully completed the required community service hours, the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.L.2019

    The client was charged on two different dockets. On one he was charged with possession over $5000. On the second he was charged with possession over $5000, possession under $5000, two counts of failing to comply, failing to provide insurance, driving while unauthorized and operating an unregistered motor vehicle. He pleaded guilty to the possession over charge on the first docket. On the second he pleaded guilty to the possession over charge and the two counts of failing to comply. The remaining charges were withdrawn. He received 90 days incarceration on each docket, for a total of six months. This was to be followed by a period of 12 months of probation.

  • R. v. N.H.2019

    The client was charged with mischief. Initially he was charged with mischief over $5000. As the matter proceeded, the crown laid a new information to reduce the charge to mischief under $5000. After ECR discussions with the crown, a resolution was reached. The client paid restitution to the complainant. Once proof of delivery of the funds was received, the crown withdrew the charge.

  • R. v. M.G.2019

    The client was charged with fraud over $5000. The crown was approached to see if she would be open to resolving the matter, given that the charges were dated and it was debatable whether they would be able to prosecute the matter at trial. Further, the client was out of province and was not aware of the charges, as police never followed up after their interview with him, and instead issued a warrant for his arrest. He was never provided with the opportunity to voluntarily turn himself in. Given this, the crown was agreeable to referring the matter to the alternative measures program. The client was required to write an apology letter and provide restitution to the complainant. The charge was withdrawn upon his doing so.

  • R. v. A.J.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation, failing to provide insurance, failing to provide registration, failing to provide a driver's license, and unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon. He pleaded not guilty and the matters were set down for trial. During a review of the disclosure, it was apparent there were some definite potential charter issues. The crown was approached to discuss resolution. They agreed to accept a guilty plea for possession of a prohibited weapon and all the remaining charges would be withdrawn. The client received a $2500.00 fine, as well as a five year prohibition on possessing any weapons. The prohibited weapon in question was confiscated. The client avoided jail time and any convictions regarding his driver's abstract.

  • R. v. R.C.2019

    The client was charged with assault. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. After the trial date was set, counsel had discussions about possibly resolving the matter. The crown was of the view the client needed to complete more counseling before she would be willing to do so. The client continued with the counseling and eventually the crown agreed to resolve the matter by way of a three month peace bond.

  • R. v. P.M.2019

    The client was charged with two counts of breaching probation and failing to appear with a summons. The charges were from a few years back when the client failed to finish counseling sessions she was required to take. She was a young mom in her 20s and had trouble completing counseling due to transportation issues, affordability, and childcare. She had spoken with her probation officer about this and left numerous messages, but she did not hear back from him and so she assumed it was fine. She was served with a summons, however at the time it was delivered to an old address. She had shown her probation officer her lease of residence but it was not recorded on her file. She was unaware she had court. After discussions with the crown, they were agreeable to allowing her to complete the counseling which was initially required. Upon doing so, and proof being provided, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.P.2019

    The client was charged with assault. A young mother of two, she was overwhelmed after taking on two more young foster children. During an extremely stressful incident, she admitted to biting one of the foster children. She pleaded guilty to assault and a sentencing date was set. The client did extensive counseling over the course of the year (between charge and sentence) and had many positive reference letters. A pre-sentence report was done and it indicated that it was unlikely she would re-offend. She avoided jail time and was given a suspended sentence with probation.

  • R. v. C.B.2019

    The client was charged on three different dockets. On one docket he was charged with assault causing bodily harm, extortion, mischief endangering life, and uttering threats. On the other two he was charged with failing to comply on one and failing to appear on the other. He pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily harm, uttering threats, mischief, and failing to appear. The other charges were withdrawn. He received a sentence of 12 months incarceration, followed by 18 months of probation. Since he had been in custody, he had some pre-trial credit, which meant he had four months left to serve. There were also some ancillary orders (primary DNA and s. 109 prohibition) imposed.

  • R. v. U.M.2019

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. The client pleaded guilty and the matter was set down for sentencing. A pre-sentence report was ordered, which outlined some of the neurological issues the client faced after brain surgery. This was helpful because even though he had two prior convictions for assault, he was able to avoid a jail sentence, as the judge factored this in to her decision. He was given a 12 month conditional sentence order and 12 months of probation.

  • R. v. G.H.2019

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial, the complainant did not show up. The crown also hadn’t subpoenaed all the officers to appear as witnesses. As such, the charge was stayed. The client avoided having another conviction on his record.

  • R. v. D.P.2019

    The client was charged with failing to obey a yield sign before entering a highway. Unfortunately a fatality occurred and he was charged on a long information. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a 60 day driving suspension, along with a $1500.00 fine.

  • R. v. P.C.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. Upon reviewing the disclosure, it was clear there were issues during the police officer’s dealings with the client. A charter notice was filed regarding these breaches. The notice was successful in convincing the crown there were triable issues and she entered a stay of proceedings on the file.

    DUI
  • R. v. M.L.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving causing bodily harm, having a blood alcohol level over the legal limit causing bodily harm, and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm. He pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing bodily harm and the other two counts were withdrawn. He received a sentence of incarceration for a period of 8 months and a 2 year driving prohibition. As he had already been without his license since the time of the incident, he was left with 12 months and 1 week before it could be reinstated.

    DUI
  • R. v. R.M.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. At the conclusion of the trial, the judge adjourned to the following morning, at which time she would give her decision. The client was found guilty of operation at or over 0.08 and the impaired charge was withdrawn. He received a fine in the amount of $1500.00 and a driving prohibition for one year.

    DUI
  • R. v. M.H.2019

    The client was charged with possession of a forged document, fraud under $5000, possession of drugs, breaching a CSO condition, failing to comply with a probation order, and failing to attend court. He pleaded guilty to uttering a forged document and possession of drugs. The remaining charges were withdrawn. The client was in custody at the time of his guilty plea. He was given a 15 day global sentence and 18 months probation on his previous conviction.

  • R. v. C.M.2019

    The client was charged with mischief to property under $5000. After having discussions with the crown, counsel were able to reach a resolution. The client paid restitution to the complainant and the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.B.2019

    The client was charged with uttering threats. Following ECR discussions with the crown, an informal resolution was agreed on. The matter was adjourned for three months and as long as the client did not breach the terms of his release, the charge would be withdrawn. At the end of the three month period, nothing had arisen, and the crown withdrew the charge as expected.

  • R. v. J.R.2019

    The client was charged with possession of cannabis for the purpose of selling. After discussions with the crown, they agreed to refer the matter to alternative measures. Once the client had successfully completed the required community service hours, the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.L.2019

    The client was charged on two different dockets. On one he was charged with possession over $5000. On the second he was charged with possession over $5000, possession under $5000, two counts of failing to comply, failing to provide insurance, driving while unauthorized and operating an unregistered motor vehicle. He pleaded guilty to the possession over charge on the first docket. On the second he pleaded guilty to the possession over charge and the two counts of failing to comply. The remaining charges were withdrawn. He received 90 days incarceration on each docket, for a total of six months. This was to be followed by a period of 12 months of probation.

  • R. v. N.H.2019

    The client was charged with mischief. Initially he was charged with mischief over $5000. As the matter proceeded, the crown laid a new information to reduce the charge to mischief under $5000. After ECR discussions with the crown, a resolution was reached. The client paid restitution to the complainant. Once proof of delivery of the funds was received, the crown withdrew the charge.

  • R. v. M.G.2019

    The client was charged with fraud over $5000. The crown was approached to see if she would be open to resolving the matter, given that the charges were dated and it was debatable whether they would be able to prosecute the matter at trial. Further, the client was out of province and was not aware of the charges, as police never followed up after their interview with him, and instead issued a warrant for his arrest. He was never provided with the opportunity to voluntarily turn himself in. Given this, the crown was agreeable to referring the matter to the alternative measures program. The client was required to write an apology letter and provide restitution to the complainant. The charge was withdrawn upon his doing so.

  • R. v. A.J.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation, failing to provide insurance, failing to provide registration, failing to provide a driver's license, and unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon. He pleaded not guilty and the matters were set down for trial. During a review of the disclosure, it was apparent there were some definite potential charter issues. The crown was approached to discuss resolution. They agreed to accept a guilty plea for possession of a prohibited weapon and all the remaining charges would be withdrawn. The client received a $2500.00 fine, as well as a five year prohibition on possessing any weapons. The prohibited weapon in question was confiscated. The client avoided jail time and any convictions regarding his driver's abstract.

  • R. v. R.C.2019

    The client was charged with assault. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. After the trial date was set, counsel had discussions about possibly resolving the matter. The crown was of the view the client needed to complete more counselling before she would be willing to do so. The client continued with the counselling and eventually the crown agreed to resolve the matter by way of a three month peace bond.

  • R. v. P.M.2019

    The client was charged with two counts of breaching probation and failing to appear with a summons. The charges were from a few years back when the client failed to finish counselling sessions she was required to take. She was a young mom in her 20s and had trouble completing counselling due to transportation issues, affordability, and childcare. She had spoken with her probation officer about this and left numerous messages, but she did not hear back from him and so she assumed it was fine. She was served with a summons, however at the time it was delivered to an old address.  She had shown her probation officer her lease of residence but it was not recorded on her file. She was unaware she had court. After discussions with the crown, they were agreeable to allowing her to complete the counselling which was initially required. Upon doing so, and proof being provided, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.P.2019

    The client was charged with assault. A young mother of two, she was overwhelmed after taking on two more young foster children. During an extremely stressful incident, she admitted to biting one of the foster children. She pleaded guilty to assault and a sentencing date was set. The client did extensive counselling over the course of the year (between charge and sentence) and had many positive reference letters. A pre-sentence report was done and it indicated that it was unlikely she would reoffend. She avoided jail time and was given a suspended sentence with probation.

  • R. v. W.W.2019

    The client was charged on multiple files and his offences included two charges of possession of property obtained by crime under $5000.00, two charges of fraud under $5000.00, mischief to property under $5000.00, possessing a weapon for a dangerous purpose, carrying a concealed weapon, and two charges of failing to comply with an undertaking (release/bail). The crown was initially seeking probation for the charges. However, I negotiated a resolution whereby my client was referred for a second time to the Mental Health Diversion program. The client was accepted into the program and upon completion of the requirements, all the charges on all of the files were withdrawn.

  • R. v. H.C.2019

    The client was charged with mischief under $5000.00 (damaging a car). I met with the crown prosecutor to discuss the file, and they agreed to an outright withdrawal of the charge. My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. D.L.2019

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property under $5000.00. The matter was trivial in that the police should not have charged my client. I worked with my client to gather information and documentation that assisted me in negotiating with the crown for a complete withdrawal of the charge. The matter was concluded with the charge dropped, and my client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. F.A.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 and assaulting a peace officer. Initial discussions with the crown yielded a negative response to having the matter differed to the alternative measures program. However, during further discussions and negotiations with the crown, I was able to convince them to refer the matter to a diversion program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charges again her were withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.M.2019

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property over $5000.00, possession of stolen property under $5000.00, and mischief (damage to property). Subsequent to being charged with that set of charges, he was also charged with two counts of failing to appear and another count of failing to comply with conditions of release (bail). I convinced the crown to drop all charges and to only have my client plead to one count of failing to comply with release, for which he received a small fine.

  • R. v. S.A.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. The client had related referrals to diversion in the past. However, I was able to convince the crown to agree to another referral to diversion. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.R.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). I convinced the crown to agree to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. Upon completion of the requirements, the charge was withdrawn (dropped).

  • R. v. D.G.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00, mischief and failing to appear for identification. The failure charge was at warrant status, as the date noted on the promise to appear wasn't clear, and the client showed up for fingerprinting on the date he thought the notice said. The crown agreed to bring the warrant forward and have the charge withdrawn on the first court date, given the circumstances. Originally the file was not approved for the alternative measures program. However, after case resolution discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charges outright, based on the fact that the client had already paid for the damage, and the disclosure package did not give a full picture of what had actually happened.

  • R. v. P.G.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). I met with the crown to discuss the prospect of having the charge dropped outright. The crown agreed, and the charge was dropped in court. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. S.K.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. Initially, the crown prosecutor would not agree to referring the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. I had the client complete tasks and obtain documentation and information for me, that I then went to the crown with. I was able to negotiate a resolution of the matter by way of a referral to the diversion program. Once the client had successfully completed the requirements of the program, the charge was withdrawn (dropped). It was important for my client's employment that he did not have a conviction. I was able to give him that peace of mind.

  • R. v. V.M.2019

    The client was charged with multiple counts of fraud, possession of stolen property, possession of drugs, and several other fraud related charges. The client had a different lawyer representing him at first and was told that his sentence would be three years in custody. When I came on as the client's lawyer, I was able to negotiate with the crown to reduce the sentence to eighteen months upon his pleas to several charges. I saved the client a significant amount of time in custody.

  • R. v. R.T.2019

    The client was charged with mischief to property under $5000.00. Though the crown was initially unwilling to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program, once I provided the crown with further information and had further discussions with them, they agreed to refer my client. Once my client completed the requirements of the program for the mischief charge, it was dropped and the matter was concluded, leaving my client with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. K.W.2019

    The client was charged with mischief and being unlawfully in a dwelling house. The charges were treated very seriously by the crown, as the complainant alleged that the client broke into the residence and damaged property in doing so. There was a lot of negotiating with the crown that I had to do to have the crown agree to resolve the matter by way of a peace bond versus proceeding with the charges. It was important my client did not have a record due to employment requirements. The charges of mischief and being unlawfully in a dwelling house were dropped (withdrawn).

  • R. v. S.U.2019

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property and possession of a stolen credit card. The allegations would have had serious ramifications for the client's employment. I was able to convince the prosecutor to refer the matter to a diversion program. Upon completion of the requirements of the program, the charges were withdrawn (dropped). The client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. P.P.2019

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. The allegation was that of a trust theft (theft from employer). Usually a trust theft would attract jail time. I was able to work with the client to obtain information and documentation that assisted me in negotiating with the prosecutor who agreed to refer the matter to Mental Health Diversion. Once my client completed the requirements of the program, the crown withdrew the charge and my client was left with no conviction and no criminal record for the theft over $5000.00 charge.

  • R. v. M.L.2019

    The client was charged with mischief after breaking a window with a rock. I was able to have the charge referred to the Alternative Measures Program on the very first court date. Once my client completed the program, the charge was dropped, and my client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. J.S.2019

    The client was charged with domestic assault. The allegation was clearly false, and it was made in order to further the complainant's family law matter. Originally, the client had another lawyer representing her. With that other lawyer, the client plead not guilty and set the matter down for trial. When I came on as the client's lawyer, I had the matter brought forward and vacated the trial date. I then negotiated a resolution with the crown. The crown agreed to withdraw (drop) the charge.

  • R. v. M.W.2019

    The client was charged with assault and assault with a weapon. She pleaded guilty to assault and the assault with a weapon charge was dropped. I made arguments in relation to sentence, and the court granted the client a conditional discharge versus probation that the crown was seeking. My client was left without a criminal conviction.

  • R. v. A.R.2019

    The client was charged with assaulting a peace officer, two counts of assault, causing a disturbance, and public intoxication. It was clear to me after having reviewed the file that the client hadn't committed a criminal offence when the assaults originally started. It was clear that what happened after was a result of my client being attacked. I was able to negotiate with the crown so that the two assault charges were dropped, and the assaulting a peace officer charge was reduced to a resisting arrest. With that, the matters were referred to the Alternative Measures Program. My client was successful in completing the requirements of the program and the remaining charges were dropped.

  • R. v. E.M.2019

    The client was charged with assault after being involved in a road rage incident. Normally the crown would not agree to a referral to diversion, or any sort of informal resolution when it comes to road rage assault allegations. However, I worked hard with the client to gather as much information and possible. When I approached the crown prosecutor with my resolution proposal, the crown agreed, and the charges against my client were dropped all together.

  • R. v. C.R.2019

    The client was charged with assault and mischief. The client was concerned about a conviction and how it would impact travel and employment. I was successful in having the matter referred to the Alternative Measures Program. The client completed the requirements of the program, and the charges were both dropped.

  • R. v. J.B.2019

    The client was charged with assault and uttering threats. The crown was not willing to agree to resolve the matter without a guilty plea. The allegations were false. It was important that the client avoid a criminal record. The matter was set for trial after a not guilty plea was entered. On the day of trial, was able to negotiate a resolution for a referral to the Alternative Measures Program. Once my client completed the requirements of the program, the charges against him were withdrawn (dropped). My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. D.P2019

    The client was charged with domestic assault. The complainant made a false allegation against the client. Due to immigration consequences, it was important that the client be left without a conviction and without a criminal record. I successfully negotiated with the crown to informally resolve the matter. My client completed some counselling, and then the charge of assault against my client was dropped.

  • R. v. N.G.2019

    The client was charged with assault. The crown was initially seeking a plea for probation. I obtained information and documentation from the client and approached the crown for resolution discussions. I was able to convince the crown to agree to a peace bond. The original charge of assault was withdrawn (dropped). The client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. E.B.2019

    The client was charged with domestic assault. The allegation was serious as it related to a spouse. The crown took the position that they would seek a suspended sentence and probation. With my legal advice, the client undertook treatment and counselling. With that, when we proceeded with a plea, the court agreed with the sentence that I argued for, a conditional discharge. Originally before I was retained as counsel the crown's position had been jail. I was able to secure a conditional discharge for the client for the assault charge, leaving my client without a conviction.

  • R. v. N.P.2019

    The client was charged with assault, uttering threats and resisting or obstructing a peace officer. There were a number of legal arguments I made to secure a sentence of a conditional discharge for the client, thus leaving the client without a conviction.

  • R. v. J.S.2019

    The client was initially charged with theft under $5000.00 and pointing a firearm. The crown proceeded with filing a new information with additional charges including assault, theft under $5000.00, using an imitation firearm and possessing a weapon. The client pleaded guilty to assault, theft under $5000.00, and possessing a weapon. Originally the crown was seeking a term of incarceration, but after resolution discussions with the crown, they agreed to a term of probation instead. The remaining charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.L.2019

    The client was charged with domestic assault. The client had a related record for serious allegations of assault where he received jail time. The crown was initially seeking jail time. However, I worked with the client to have him attend at counselling and treatment which assisted me in securing a non-custodial sentence for him when he pleaded guilty. The client was sentenced to probation.

  • R. v. R.P.2019

    The client was charged with assault as it related to a domestic partner. The crown was initially seeking a term of probation upon a guilty plea. Instead, I was able to secure a complete withdrawal of the charge for my client. The charge of assault was dropped, and my client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. M.S.2019

    The client was charged with assault and uttering threats The allegation was that the client had assaulted his domestic spouse. I negotiated a resolution with the crown for a peace bond, and the charges against my client were dropped. No conviction and no criminal record.

  • R. v. H.G.2019

    The client was charged with assault. The circumstance that gave rise to the allegation was that the client had assaulted his domestic spouse. After reviewing the disclosure, It was in court a few times, but after discussions with the crown, they eventually were convinced to withdraw the charge because the available evidence did not support it.

  • R. v. T.S.2019

    The client was charged with two counts of careless storage of a firearm. This was a serious allegation and a serious breach of my client's rights by police. After reviewing the disclosure, it was clear that the police had no authority to enter my client's home, and no authority to subsequently search his home. I reviewed the file in detail and researched the law. I then met with the crown and they agreed to drop the charge as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. S.S.2019

    The client was charged with obtaining sexual services for consideration from a person under the age of 18. This turned out to be a situation where the client met an individual online, and then when they met in person it ended up being an undercover police officer. The issue with the file became apparent from the outside: the police had entrapped my client, and several other people in this sting operation. What they police did was against the law, as the client did not intend on meeting with a person under the age of 18 as that is not what the false advertisement the police posted said. In discussions with the crown, I was able to have the charge withdrawn altogether, leaving my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. S.G.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for a judge and jury trial, with a preliminary hearing. At the preliminary inquiry, I cross-examined the complainant. It was clear this was a false allegation against my client. The matter was set for trial at the Court of Queen's Bench. The crown then decided to drop the charge. My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. E.S.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference with a minor, and unlawful confinement. The client decided to plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The week prior to the commencement of trial, I discussed the matter with the crown, and they agreed to drop the charges and allow my client to enter into a peace bond. My client was left with no criminal record and no convictions.

  • R. v. R.C.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault. Upon reviewing the disclosure, it was clear that no sexual assault occurred. This was clearly a file that involved the police charging without doing their job. It was an allegation that was unsupported by any of the evidence. I convinced the crown to withdraw (drop) the charge altogether. My client had no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. M.K.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault involving a very minor allegation. The I reviewed the disclosure in detail and determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. On that basis, I approached the crown prosecutor to try to resolve the matter. We agreed to a peace bond, with the sexual assault charge dropped. However, when we arrived at court, the crown agreed to drop the charge altogether, leaving my client with no peace bond, no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. A.L.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. The client elected to plead guilty to the sexual assault charge. The crown was initially seeking extensive jail time. However, in negotiations with the crown, I was able to convince them to proceed with a significantly reduced sentence, six months incarceration, followed by 18 months of probation. The sexual interference charge was dropped (withdrawn).

  • R. v. A.O.2019

    The client was charged with voyeurism. The crown was at first seeking a sentence of jail, but after I spoke with them, they agreed to reduce their sentence submissions to that of a suspended sentence and probation. I conducted extensive research and made submissions to the judge that a conditional discharge would be appropriate. The judge agreed, and my client received a conditional discharge. No conviction was entered.

  • R. v. R.D.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault. After receiving my client's instructions, we entered a plea of not guilty and set the matter for a preliminary inquiry at the Provincial Court. At the preliminary inquiry, I cross-examined the complainant and made significant headway in terms of material that I could use at the trial. The matter proceeded to trial at the Court of Queen's Bench with a judge and jury. I prepared tirelessly for the trial, including conducting a methodical review of all of the disclosure. My preparations paid off, and the jury found my client not guilty.

  • R. v. D.P.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial at the Court of Queen's Bench with a judge alone. I prepared for the trial by conducting legal research, preparing arguments, preparing my client for examination-in-chief and cross-examination, and preparing my cross-examination of the complainant. This was a - he said, she said - fact situation. It was clear that my client's version of events was credible, and the complainant's version was not. I was successful in securing a not guilty finding from the judge.

  • R. v. B.N.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault against a co-worker. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial, the client crown agreed to a plea to a charge of simple assault, and the client received probation.

  • R. v. K.S.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The client elected to plead guilty. The crown was seeking a lengthy jail sentence. I made arguments for a conditional sentence order, and the court agreed. The client received no jail time.

  • R. v. A.T.2019

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. After pre-trial discussions with the crown, the client decided to accept the resolution offer presented. He pleaded guilty to an amended charge of simple assault for probation, and the charges of sexual assault, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching were dropped.

  • R. v. B.S.2019

    The client was charged with driving while unauthorized pursuant to the Traffic Safety Act. Normally the charge would attract another driving prohibition and potentially jail. However, I negotiated with the crown and my client plead guilty to a lesser included offence of driving without a valid license and received a small fine.dr

  • R. v. B.L.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and driving with a blood alcohol concentration at or over 0.08 pursuant to the new provisions of the Criminal Code (operating a conveyance). I took instructions from the client and entered a plea of not guilty and set a trial date. Prior to the trial date, I filed a notice alleging my client's rights were violated by police. The crown prosecutor assigned to the file reviewed that notice and agreed to drop both of the charges. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. J.R.2019

    The client was charged under the Traffic Safety Act with exceeding the maximum speed limit. The ramifications of the penalty for the ticket as it stood would have meant the client would have lost his job. However, I negotiated with the crown prosecutor and was able to reduce the ticket significantly, so that the client was left with half of the demerits he would have received without me negotiating the deal for him. The client was able to maintain his employment.

  • R. v. A.C.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving and refusing to provide a breath sample. He also received a traffic ticket for failing to provide a driver's license. The client pleaded not guilty and the matters were set down for trial. I prepared for the trial, including preparing legal arguments, conducting legal research, preparing cross-examinations of the officers, and filing a notice alleging my client's rights had been violated. On the day of trial, after discussions with the crown, the crown agreed to drop all charges as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction given the work I had done on the file. This left my client with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. T.H.2019

    The client was charged with possession of drugs, trafficking drugs (cocaine), possession of property obtained by crime over $5000.00, and unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for a preliminary hearing. After the hearing, the judge decided there was enough evidence to proceed to trial, though only on the trafficking drugs and possession of property charges. The matter was set down for a three-day trial in Queen's Bench. On the day of trial, I secured my client a resolution that would leave him with very little jail time considering the nature of the allegations.

  • R. v. C.R.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving with a blood alcohol concentration of over 0.08. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. I prepared for the trial, and on the trial date, we conducted a voir dire regarding my argument that the officer had no reasonable grounds to request a sample of my client's breath. The trial judge agreed with my arguments and excluded the evidence of the breath samples. The breath samples were not in evidence, and the client was acquitted on both the impaired driving (DUI) and the over 0.08. The client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. B.S.2019

    The client was charged with three counts of possession of drugs (morphine and cocaine) and two counts of failing to comply with conditions of release (bail). He pleaded guilty to two of the possession of drugs charges. The third possession of drugs charge was dropped, as were both of the failures to comply with release. The client received a suspended sentence and a probation for a period of one year.

  • R. v. J.T.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and operation at or over 0.08. He decided to plead guilty to operation at or over 0.08. He received a fine in the amount of $1500.00 and a one-year driving prohibition. The impaired charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. T.T.2019

    The client was charged with two counts of trafficking cocaine and possession of property obtained by crime over $5000.00. The file involved a lengthy investigation that resulted in more than one person being charged. After I conducted a thorough review of the evidence, I approached the crown to try to resolve the charges by way of having them dropped against my client. The crown agreed with my assessment, and all of the drug charges including the trafficking cocaine and possession of property obtained by crime were dropped. My client was left with no criminal record and no convictions.

  • R. v. A.L.2019

    The client was charged with impaired operation and failing or refusing to comply with a demand. He pleaded guilty to failing to comply. He received a fine along with a driving prohibition for a period of one year. The impaired driving charge was withdrawn.

    DUI
  • R. v. K.J.2019

    The client was charged with possession of a controlled substance, thought to be cocaine. Upon my review of disclosure, including the returned drug analysis certificate, it was clear that no offence had been committed as the substance was not cocaine. The charge was therefore dropped, and my client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. K.G.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. The client's readings were high. The client elected to enter a plea of guilty to the over 0.08. I successful applied for a curative discharge for the client, leaving her with no conviction. The impaired driving charge was dropped.

    DUI
  • R. v. P.T.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. She pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. When I prepared for the trial, I carefully combed through all of the disclosure, including reviewing the video evidence. In doing so, I determined that the officer had read the client the incorrect demand for a breath sample. I brought the matter to the crown'’s attention, and she agreed that it was fatal to the crown'’s case, so she withdrew (dropped) both the impaired driving and the over 0.08, leaving my client with no criminal record and no conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.R.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving, driving over 0.08, and failing to comply with a probation order. On behalf of my client, we entered a not guilty plea to both charges and set the matter down for trial. The first trial date was set, and the matter could not proceed. Another trial date was set. At that second trial date, the primary investigator advised they would be away on holidays for a period of time and would not be attending court. The crown applied for an adjournment of the trial. A third trial date was set. On that third date, the officer again said they were going to be away and would not attend. Given that, the crown decided to enter a stay of proceedings as it was clear that the officer was not taking the file seriously. This left my client with both charges dropped, no criminal record, and no conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. C.J.2019

    The client was charged with driving while disqualified and failing to appear for court. The client had an extensive related record. I worked with the client to gather as much information and documentation as I could so that I could approach the crown to resolve the matter by way of pleas to traffic tickets versus criminal charges. The crown agreed with my arguments, and in the end, the client received traffic ticket convictions only, no criminal convictions and no criminal record entries. He received a small fine.

  • R. v. J.S.2019

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. From my review of the disclosure (evidence) against my client, I determined that there was a serious breach of my client'’s rights in relation to speaking to counsel at the police station. At trial, the prosecutor agreed with my argument and agreed to drop both charges. The client was able to get his license back and was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. S.J.2019

    The client was charged with multiple driving offences including theft of a motor vehicle, failing to stop at the scene of an accident and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. He was also charged with possession of property obtained by crime under $5000.00, three counts of breaching probation, six counts of failing to comply and one count of failing to appear. He pleaded guilty to the driving offences, possession of stolen property and breaching probation, along with failures to comply and failing to appear. The remaining charges were withdrawn. The client had an extensive related criminal record. The crown was initially seeking substantial jail time, but I was able to have the jail time reduced significantly for the client. The remainder of his charges were withdrawn.

Cases in 2018

  • R. v. L.M.2018

    The client was charged with second degree murder. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The crown agreed to a plea to the lesser included office of manslaughter. The client was sentenced to 11 years in custody. A DNA order and weapons prohibition order were put in place, and a victim fine surcharge was imposed.

  • R. v. N.T.2018

    The client was charged with four counts of trafficking and a further count of possessing body armor. The crown initially sought the client's detention. However, I was able to negotiate the client'’s consent release on conditions.

  • R. v. D.A.2018

    The client was charged with communications harassment and failing to comply with a protection order. Initially the crown was not agreeable to resolving the matter in a manner that would leave my client without a criminal record. However, upon further discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charge and allow the client to enter into a one-year peace bond.

  • R. v. B.C.2018

    The client was charged with assaulting a peace officer and two counts of failing to comply. I worked hard to ensure that this client was not left with a conviction as where were definite extenuating circumstances that led to the allegations. After reviewing the disclosure, I set up a meeting with the crown and advised them of the concerns I had regarding the extenuating circumstances. In the end, the crown agreed, and all charges were withdrawn on the first court appearance.

  • R. v. K.E.2018

    The client was charged with assault against their domestic partner. The client completed counselling under my direction, and upon that completion the crown agreed to withdraw the charge.

  • R. v. A.M.2018

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats. At the first court date, I spoke with the crown regarding how this had been a mutual altercation and it was not in the public interest to prosecute the file. The crown agreed and withdrew the charges against the client. No criminal record or further court appearances were required.

  • R. v. R.M.2018

    The client was charged with domestic assault. I worked with the client to ensure that when I met with the crown to discuss resolution, I had enough to work with to ensure that the crown would consider withdrawing the charges. The crown did agree to withdraw the charges once counseling was completed.

  • R. v. C.K.2018

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon, assault, mischief to property, failing to comply with an undertaking, two counts of failing to comply, and failing to comply with a provision of a protection order. The client pleaded guilty to assault with a weapon, failing to comply with an undertaking and failing to comply with a provision of a protection order. The crown was initially seeking a term of incarceration, however, upon negotiating with the crown, I was able to convince them to agree to a term of probation. This took into account a prior related record.

  • R. v. M.O.2018

    The client was charged with assault. I worked closely with the client to address underlying issues surrounding the allegation. With that, I was able to have the client'’s charge dropped/withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.S.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of assault. The allegations were against the client'’s domestic partner. With my direction and advice, the client began counselling and treatment. I was able to have the crown agree to an informal resolution so that the charges were dropped.

  • R. v. M.J.2018

    The client was charged with assault and mischief. After discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charge and allow the client to enter into a one-year peace bond.

  • R. v. M.P.2018

    The client was charged with assault against their domestic partner. Both parties were alleged to have been intoxicated. It was clear that the crown would have had issues with establishing a conviction against the client. I approached the crown, and, in the end, the charge was dropped outright. This left my client without a conviction or criminal record.

  • R. v. T.S.2018

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm in relation to a serious allegation of domestic abuse. It was clear from my review of the disclosure that the allegations were unfounded. I always make a point of ensuring I review the disclosure thoroughly, so that I can give my client'’s the best advice possible. I worked diligently to ensure that the best possible outcome was achieved for my client. In the end, the charges were withdrawn outright. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. T.G.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.R2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.2018

    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.

  • R. v. D.D.2018

    The client was charged with assault. Upon my review of the file, it was clear to me that the crown had serious problems with the case against my client. On that basis, I was able to have the charges against my client dropped outright. This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. C.H.2018

    The client was charged with assault, uttering threats and forcible confinement. I worked with the client to have him enrolled in counselling. The allegations of assault were serious. Despite that, I was able to resolve the matter so that the charges were all withdrawn (dropped) and my client was bound by a peace bond for a period of one year.

  • R. v. M.M.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of sexual assault and two counts of sexual interference. There was significant evidence against my client, and he instructed me to proceed with a guilty plea. The crown prosecutor was originally seeking a penitentiary jail sentence. I convinced the crown prosecutor that the sentence they were originally seeking was outside of the applicable range. I convinced the crown to agree to a guilty plea to one charge of sexual interference with a minor for a 90-day jail sentence (versus the original 3-4 years the crown was seeking). The remaining three charges of sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor were withdrawn (dropped).

  • R. v. J.S.2018

    The client was charged with assault pursuant to section 266 of the Criminal Code. There were a number of issues that I found with the crown'’s case against my client. I was able to have the charge against my client dropped outright, leaving him without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. D.U.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. The client decided to proceed with a guilty plea to the one charge of sexual assault. The crown prosecutor sought a sentence of custody (jail) for the client. However, I made legal arguments to the judge and the judge agreed with my arguments and sentenced the client to a conditional discharge, leaving my client without a conviction being entered. The remaining charge was withdrawn (dropped).

  • R. v. B.S.2018

    The client was charged with assault. The allegation was serious, and the ramifications for my client in relation to immigration consequences would have been grave. I worked to have everything in order for my client on his first court date, and with that, I had the charge dropped outright on that first court date. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. J.W.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual exploitation of a person with a disability, and invitation to sexual touching of a minor. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for a preliminary hearing. At the preliminary inquiry, the judge decided there was enough evidence to proceed to trial, and the matter was sent to Queen's Bench for that purpose. It was set for a judge and jury trial. The crown was originally seeking a lengthy term of incarceration if the client had been convicted. However, I worked tirelessly for the client and managed to convince the prosecutor that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The crown agreed to a short peace bond, and the charges were all dropped. The client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. J.C.2018

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats. The matter was set down for trial after a not guilty plea was entered. There would have been serious immigration consequences if he had been found guilty of the assault with a weapon and uttering threats charges. At the trial date, I was able to negotiate a resolution with the crown which allowed for a guilty plea to a lesser included offence of simple assault. The uttering threats charge was withdrawn. The client received probation instead of jail time, which the crown was originally looking for given the client's related record. The client avoided jail and avoided deportation with the resolution I achieved for him.

  • R. v. T.B.2018

    The client was charged with indecent act. The consequence of a conviction for the matter would have left the client without the ability to maintain employment. However, I met with the crown prosecutor and proposed resolution whereby the charges would be dropped after my client attended some counselling. The charge was withdrawn (dropped) and my client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. Y.Z2018

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. The allegation was very serious and there would have been immigration consequences for the client if a conviction was entered. I was able to have the charge of assault with a weapon dropped (withdrawn) outright. The client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. M.A.2018

    The client was charged with obtaining sexual services for consideration. I met with the crown prosecutor and convinced them to refer my client to the Alternative Measures Program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charge was withdrawn. My client was left without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. M.M.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of assault. There were issues with the crown'’s case and their ability to prove the allegations of assault against my client. I discussed the matter with the crown, and although the allegations were serious, the crown agreed to refer the matter to a diversion program. Once my client completed the program, the charges were both withdraw and as a result, there was no conviction and no criminal record.

  • R. v. E.C.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The collateral consequences of a finding of guilt would have been grave for the client. The client elected to enter a plea of not guilty, and to set the matter for trial. On the day of trial, the prosecutor agreed with my suggestion that the client should receive a peace bond. The charge was withdrawn, leaving my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. N.P.2018

    The client was charged with assault. The client came to me after trying to deal with the matter on her own as a self-represented litigant. The crown was seeking a guilty plea and probation. I worked with the client and had her complete a number of tasks for me that would assist me with negotiating the best possible resolution for my client. I met with the crown and convinced them that to resile from their original position (probation), and to agree to referring my client to a diversion program. My client finished the requirements of the program, and at the end, the charge was withdrawn altogether. This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. C.S.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault. This was another case of a false allegation. After multiple discussions with the crown, I was able to negotiate with the crown to agree to a peace bond. The charge of sexual assault against my client was withdrawn. This left my client with no conviction and no criminal record.

  • R. v. A.H.2018

    The client was charged with domestic assault. In completing extensive background work and research before the first court appearance, I was able to convince the crown to agree to an informal resolution. My client completed the requirements of that resolution, and then the charge was dropped, leaving my client with no conviction and no criminal record.

  • R. v. R.R.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The allegation was that of touching. This was a false allegation, and my client instructed me to enter a plea of not guilty and to set the matter for trial. I prepared for the trial including conducting legal research, drafting cross-examination of the complainant and witnesses, and preparing legal arguments. On the day of trial, the charge was dropped (withdrawn).

  • R. v. A.N.2018

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon. The crown originally declined to refer the matter to a diversion program. I was able to work with the client to have her gather the necessary information and documentation that I then used to negotiate with the crown for a resolution that would leave the client without a criminal record. I met with the crown, and they agreed that on the basis of the information and documentation that I had gathered in support of my client's case, they would refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. Once my client had completed the necessary requirements of the program, my client'’s assault with a weapon charge was dropped.

  • R. v. J.F.2018

    The client was charged with making, possessing, and accessing child pornography, invitation to sexual touching, transmitting sexually explicit material to a minor, and communicating with a minor to facilitate the making of child pornography and to facilitate an invitation to sexual touching. After lengthy discussions with the crown, they were convinced to withdraw the charge and to allow the client to enter into a one-year common law peace bond.

  • R. v. E.M.2018

    The client was charged with assault and sexual assault. The matter was a long and drawn out situation of false allegations. My client gave me instructions to enter a not guilty plea and to set the matter for trial. On the day of trial, I spoke with the prosecutor and convinced them that there was absolutely no evidence relating to a sexual assault allegation. The crown agreed and on the day of trial, they dropped the charge of sexual assault. In relation to the assault charge, the crown agreed to drop the charge and have my client enter into a peace bond. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. M.B.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault. After discussions with the crown, they agreed to withdraw the charge and to allow the client to enter into a one-year peace bond.

  • R. v. K.M.2018

    The client was charged with assault. When I reviewed the file, it was clear that this was not a criminal offence of assault, but a consensual fight, which is not against the law. I approached the crown with my position, and the crown agreed and withdrew the charge. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. L.H.2018

    The client was charged with exposing himself to a person under the age of 16 years. After discussions with the crown, and admittance requirements discussions with the program coordinators, it was agreed that the client was a fit and the matter could be referred to the mental health diversion program. Upon completion of the requirements, the crown withdrew the charge.

  • R. v. M.S.2018

    The client was charged with assault in the context of a domestic situation. I reviewed the file, then set up a meeting with the crown to discuss the matter. I determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and I thought the charge should be dropped. The crown agreed with my conclusion, and the charge was dropped, leaving my client without a conviction and without a criminal record.

  • R. v. K.O.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The client entered a not guilty plea and the matter was set down for trial. Upon conclusion, the judge found that the client was not guilty of sexual assault, but guilty of a simple assault. The client received a conditional discharge with 9 months probation and a victim fine surcharge. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. E.C.2018

    The client was charged with assault, assault with a weapon causing bodily harm, and uttering threats. The allegations were serious, involving an assault with a knife and a significant injury to the complainant. Initially, the crown was initially seeking a jail sentence if the matter proceeded to a guilty plea. I worked with the client over the course of several months and was able to convince the crown to agree to an informal resolution of the matter. At the end of that resolution, the charges were all dropped, and the client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. P.D.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of sexual assault and two counts of sexual interference with a minor. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. At trial, after the first witness testified, I approached the crown and convinced them that the matter should be resolved by way of a peace bond. The charges were withdrawn, and jail time was avoided.

  • R. v. R.M.2018

    The client was charged with domestic assault. If the client had received a criminal record, there would have been consequences for him in relation to his employment. I worked with the client and approached the prosecutor and was able to negotiate an informal resolution for the client. The charge against my client was withdrawn upon completion of the requirements of the resolution, leaving my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. G.H.2018

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The client clearly had good defences to the allegations. After discussion with the crown, they agreed to withdraw all charges and have the client enter into a peace bond for 9 months. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. A.N.2018

    The client was charged with assault and two counts of mischief. The client had a related criminal record. The client plead guilty to the assault, and the two mischief charges were dropped. The crown sought a sentence of probation, but agreed with my submissions instead, and granted my client a conditional discharge, leaving my client without a conviction.

  • R. v. A.R.2018

    The client was charged with making sexually explicit material available to a child, accessing, possessing, and making child pornography, invitation to sexual touching, and child luring under 18 and under 16. I engaged in lengthy discussions with the crown with a view to resolving the matter by way of a peace bond. The crown agreed, and the charges were withdrawn, the client thus avoiding a penitentiary jail sentence.

  • R. v. A.M.2018

    The client was charged with assault and failing to comply with conditions of release (bail). Initially the crown was seeking a sentence of probation. Instead, I worked with my client to have her enter into residential treatment, thus addressing any addictions issues. Once the treatment was concluded, I was able to negotiate with the crown to have the client enter into a peace bond, with the substantive charges of assault and failing to comply with conditions of release dropped. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. R.J.2018

    The client was charged with distributing, possessing and accessing child pornography. A guilty plea was entered to the possession charge, and the other charges were withdrawn. I negotiated a significantly reduced sentence with the crown, on the basis of my client's early guilty plea, and on the basis of extensive counselling the client had undertaken. Wherein the client would have incurred a much lengthier sentence, the client was instead sentenced to six months in jail, followed by two years probation with conditions.

  • R. v. N.S.2018

    The client was charged with assault. Initially the crown was not agreeable to referring the client's matter to a diversion program due to the seriousness of the assault charge. However, once I had obtained documentation and information from my client, I met with the crown and they agreed with my resolution proposal that the matter be referred to the Alternative Measures Program. Once my client completed the requirements of the program, the charge was dropped (withdrawn).

  • R. v. J.K.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of uttering threats. I negotiated with the crown prosecutor to have my client referred to the Alternative Measures Program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charges were both dropped. My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. J.E.2018

    The client was charged with four charges of possession of stolen property, four charges of uttering a forged document and four charges of fraud under $5000.00. I was able to negotiation a joint submission for a conditional discharge for my client, leaving her without a conviction.

  • R. v. R.F.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of possession of stolen property under $5000.00, resisting a peace officer, possession of drugs, failing to comply with conditions of release (bail) and failing to attend court. The client elected to plead guilty to possession of stolen property, failing to comply with conditions of release, and failing to attend court. Because the client had a lengthy prior record, the crown was seeking jail. I argued that the client should not receive any jail time. The judge agreed, and the client was released from custody that day. The remaining charges were dropped.

  • R. v. D.M.2018

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property under $5000.00 and theft over $5000.00. I met with the client and obtained information and documentation from him that assisted me with negotiating with the crown for the matter to proceed to a diversion program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charges against the client were withdrawn. The client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. M.H.2018

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00. This was a shoplifting matter. The client was referred to the Alternative Measures Program. Upon completion of the requirements of the program for this theft charge, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. W.W.2018

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property under $5000.00. Although the client had a record for related matters, I negotiated with the crown to have the matter referred to the Mental Health Diversion Program. Once he was determined to be a fit for the program, he then completed the requirements of the program and the possession of stolen property under $5000.00 charge against him was dropped. My client was left with no conviction for this matter.

  • R. v. M.H.2018

    The client was charged with theft over $5000.00 and theft under $5000.00 (two separate incidents). One of the allegations was a theft from employer. I convinced the prosecutor to agree to no actual jail and to reduce the one charge to a theft under $5000.00 versus over $5000.00. The client was sentenced to a conditional sentence order so did not have to spend time in jail.

  • R. v. S.W.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of possession of property obtained by crime under $5000.00, theft under $5000.00 and failing to appear at court. The client had a related record. The crown was initially seeking a sentence of probation or jail. I met with the crown and they agreed to a plea for a fine instead, to one charge of possession of property under $5000.00 and one theft under $5000.00 charge. The remaining charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. H.C.2018

    The client was charged with multiple counts of fraud, possession of stolen property, identity theft, and other similar property and fraud related charges. The client was facing significant jail time, but I convicted the prosecutor to reduce the amount of jail time to time served, with probation to follow for some of the charges. The remaining charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.B. et al.2018

    The clients were charged under the Wildlife Act with possessing wildlife, hunting wildlife without a license, using another person's license, and allowing another person to use their license. The clients were charged years after the offence. Once I received disclosure, I determined that two of the clients weren'’t even in Canada at the time of the allegation. After lengthy discussions with the crown, I had all of the charges against all clients withdrawn given the significant delays in time and given there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction.

  • R. v. N.B.2018

    The client was charged with robbery and possession of drugs (marihuana). I had an uphill battle with negotiations for resolution of the matter, as the robbery charge was of course very serious. On the basis of reviewing the file, obtaining documentation and information from the client, and with my negotiation skills, I was able to convince the crown to refer the matter to the Mental Health Diversion Program. Once my client completed the requirements of the program, the robbery and drug possession charges were withdrawn (dropped). The client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. M.F.2018

    The client was charged with mischief (damage to property) and public intoxication. I had the public intoxication ticket dropped outright. I then had resolution discussions with the crown on the remaining mischief charge. The crown agreed to drop the mischief charge outright. My client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  • R. v. N.K.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of theft under $5000 in relation to an allegation by their employer (trust theft). I had the client complete some tasks for me, which would assist me in my negotiations with the crown. I met with the crown, discussed the matter, and they agreed that with the information I provided to them, the charges could be withdrawn. The client thus avoided a criminal record and a conviction.

  • R. v. Z.M.2018

    The client was charged with six counts of using a forged document and four counts of possession of stolen property. The client pleaded guilty to three counts of using a forged document and three counts of possessing stolen property. The remaining four charges were withdrawn. As a result of the guilty plea, the client was sentenced to a nine-month conditional sentence order, followed by nine months of probation. A victim fine surcharge was also imposed. This is a matter where the client was facing lengthy jail time. However, I was able to negotiate with the crown so that the client avoided jail time and could serve his sentence in the community while maintaining their employment.

  • R. v. T.B.2018

    The client was charged with mischief and a breach of his undertaking. After discussions with the crown, both charges were withdrawn on the first court date.

  • R. v. J.C.2018

    The client was charged with theft of a motor vehicle, possession of stolen property under $5000 and failing to appear for ID. This was a historical matter. I met with the crown to resolve the matter. The crown agreed to withdraw the charges.

  • R. v. A.W.2018

    The client was charged with theft over $5000, theft under $5000, breaking and entering, possession (drugs), failing to comply, failing to appear and failing to attend for ID. After meeting with the crown to negotiate a resolution of the matter, the client pleaded guilty to theft under, failing to appear and theft of a motor vehicle (instead of theft over). The remaining charges against the client were withdrawn. The client had a lengthy criminal record. The client was sentenced to time served so there was no further incarceration.

  • R. v. R. v. J.F.2018

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. I successful negotiation withdrawal of the charge upon the return of the items to the complainant through the police. The client avoided a criminal record/conviction.

  • R. v. R. v. S.V.2018

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property over $5000 (motor vehicle), using a forged document and having no insurance. The client pleaded guilty to the possession charge and the other two counts were withdrawn. The crown initially requested the judge sentence the client to a term of probation which would have left the client with a criminal conviction. I urged the crown to agree to a conditional discharge, which they eventually did. The judge agreed to the conditional discharge, and the client was spared a conviction on their record.

  • R. v. C.M.2018

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The file was referred to Alternative Measures and was withdrawn after successful completion of the requirements.

  • R. v. D.B.2018

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property under $5000 (license plate). I met with the crown to resolve the matter, and the crown agreed to do so by withdrawing the charge against the client.

  • R. v. S.L.2018

    The client was charged with possession of stolen property, dangerous driving, failing to stop vehicle and failing to comply. The client was further charged in a different jurisdiction for theft of a motor vehicle, failing to appear and failing to comply. The client pleaded not guilty to the possession of stolen property et al charges and they were set down for trial. At trial her matters from both jurisdictions were before the court. The client pleaded guilty to an amended charge of possession of stolen property under $5000 and all the rest were withdrawn. As the client was in custody at the time of trial, the client received time served.

  • R. v. N.G.2018

    The client was charged with mischief for damaging a colleague'’s property. I was successful in having the matter referred to the Alternative Measures Program. Once the client completed the requirements, the charge was withdrawn, and I sent a letter to the police requesting the destruction of the client'’s fingerprints and identification information.

  • R. v. L.M.2018

    The client was charged with three counts of breaching a probation order that the client was sentenced to in relation to fraud charges. The pleaded guilty to two of the counts and the third was withdrawn. The client received a sentence of 14 days in jail given his prior related record for which the client had received a lengthier sentence than the one I was able to secure for the client.

  • R. v. M.H.2018

    The client was charged with multiple offences including robbery, assault with a weapon, assault, theft under $5000, failing to appear for ID and failing to appear. The matter involved a serious allegation as the complainant to the robbery suffered injuries. Despite that, the matter was resolved by way of a guilty plea to a lesser included offence to robbery, being assault with a weapon. All other charges were withdrawn, and the client received time served.

  • R. v. L.W.2018

    The client was charged with possession of drugs (methamphetamine), two counts of possession of stolen property under $5000.00, and four counts of failing to comply with release conditions (bail). The client elected to plead guilty to the possession of drugs and possession of stolen property under $5000.00. The client was sentenced to time served. The remaining charges against the client were dropped.

  • R. v. D.L.2018

    The client was charged with two counts of trafficking cocaine, and possession of property obtained by crime. This was a dial-a-dope drug investigation file. The police initiated the investigation due to informant information, and then started conducting surveillance. After a lengthy investigation, the police charged my client. I reviewed the disclosure and determined that there were a number of triable issues. The client elected to have a trial at the Court of Queen'’s Bench sitting with a judge alone, and to have a preliminary inquiry at the Provincial Court. A trial I argued that the police violated my client'’s rights pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the evidence should be excluded on that basis. In the alternative, I argued that the crown was unable to prove possession beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge agreed with my arguments and the client was found not guilty of all charges, trafficking cocaine and possession of property obtained by crime. My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. D.M.2018

    The client was charged with three counts of trafficking drugs (cocaine) and possession of property obtained by crime under $5000.00. The police had conducted a lengthy investigation and were looking to prosecute both my client and the co-accused. On the basis of my review of the disclosure, I approached the crown prosecutor to discuss having the charges against my client withdrawn entirely. I was of the view that the crown would not be in a position to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutor agreed, and all charges were dropped. My client was left with no criminal record and no conviction.

  • R. v. J.H.2018

    The client was charged with possession of drugs (marihuana). The crown agreed to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. Once the client completed the requirements of the program, the charge of possession of drugs was withdrawn.

  • R. v. K.K.2018

    The client was charged with three counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking and possession of body armor. The charges were laid after a complex drug investigation. Upon receiving disclosure, I determined that there was likely no basis for the crown to continue with the prosecution against the client. On that basis, I approached the crown to ask them to consider dropping all of the charges. The crown agreed, and all charges were dropped. The matter was concluded successfully so that the client did not have to face potential immigration issues.

  • R. v. E.K.2018

    The client was charged with possession of drugs in an amount that normally would exceed the qualifications for the Alternative Measures Program. Despite that, after meeting with the crown to encourage resolution by way of diversion, the crown finally agreed. The client was tasked with completing community service hours, and upon doing so, the charge was dropped. If the client had received a conviction, the client would have lost their employment.

  • R. v. K.W.2018

    The client was charged with failing to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk. After extensive discussions with the traffic crown, the crown was persuaded to accept the client'’s plea to the lesser and included offence of failing to obey a traffic device. Subsequently, the client only lost two demerits and received a $400.00 fine.

  • R. v. J.E.2018

    The client was charged with possession of drugs after a lengthy police investigation regarding a co-accused. Upon reviewing disclosure, it was apparent that there was no evidence to support the prosecution. After approaching the crown to resolve the matter, they agreed to do so, and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. C.K.2018

    This was a youth matter. The client was charged with criminal negligence in operating a motor vehicle causing bodily harm and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. Upon conclusion of the trial, the judge adjourned for decision, and later acquitted the client of both charges.

  • R. v. D.T2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. At trial, the crown had not subpoenaed the breath technician, however still planned to run the trial for the impaired. After discussions with the crown, they were convinced to withdraw both charges. The client avoided a criminal record and was able to get his licence back forthwith.

    DUI
  • R. v. T.L.2018

    The client was charged with driving while unauthorized. After ECR discussions with the traffic crown, they agreed to accept a guilty plea to driving without a licence. The client was given a fine and time to pay.

  • R. v. S.W.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. The client pleaded guilty to driving over 0.08 and the impaired charge was withdrawn. A curative discharge application was made and was successful. The client walked away with no conviction on his record.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.A.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving, driving over 0.08 and transporting liquor in a vehicle within easy access of an occupant. He pleaded guilty to driving over 0.08 and the other two charges against him were withdrawn. He received a fine plus a victim fine surcharge and a one year driving prohibition, with eligibility for the interlock after three months.

    DUI
  • R. v. J.C.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. The client was also charged with a traffic offence of operating a motor vehicle with an expired license. The client pleaded guilty to driving over 0.08 and the other charge, plus the traffic matter, were withdrawn. The client received a fine plus a victim fine surcharge and a one year driving prohibition with eligibility for the interlock after three months.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.C.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving, driving over 0.08 and failing to stop at a stop sign. The client pleaded not guilty and the matter was set for trial. Prior to trial, I filed a notice alleging my client's rights were violated. The week before the trial, the crown agreed to drop the criminal charges. The client was free to go and get his driver'’s license back the next date. The client thus had no conviction and no criminal record.

  • R. v. P.A.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and refusing to comply with a demand. He pleaded guilty to the impaired charge and the refusal charge was withdrawn. The client was sentenced to a fine plus a victim fine surcharge and a one year driving prohibition, with eligibility for the interlock after three months.

  • R. v. J.C.2018

    The client was charged with driving while disqualified and failing to appear. I met with the crown to negotiate a resolution of the matter by way of a withdrawal of the charges. The crown agreed that it was not in the public interest to prosecute the client, and the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.T.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving, driving over 0.08 and speeding. The client pleaded guilty to driving over 0.08 and the other two charges were withdrawn. The client received a fine plus a victim fine surcharge and a one year driving prohibition, with eligibility for the interlock after three months.

  • R. v. H.W.2018

    The client was charged with failing or refusing to comply with a demand. The client entered a pleaded guilty and received a fine plus a one year driving prohibition, with eligibility for the interlock after three months.

  • R. v. A.N.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. He pleaded not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. I filed a notice to challenge the charges on the basis that my client'’s rights were violated by the officers. The day before the trial, the crown stayed the charges on the basis of violations of my client'’s rights, along with issues relating to one of the officers involved.

    DUI
  • R. v. L.S.2018

    The client was charged with dangerous driving and failing to remain at the scene of an accident, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. The crown prosecutor assigned to the file took the view that the allegation was serious, as it involved a '“road rage'” type of incident. I had the client complete a number of tasks for me, and then met with the prosecutor to try to negotiate a resolution that would leave my client without a criminal record and without a conviction. I was successful in doing so, and my client plead guilty to a lesser included offence under the Traffic Safety Act of leaving the scene as a registered owner. This left my client without any demerits, and without a criminal charge or conviction.

  • R. v. R.C.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. I extensively reviewed the file with a view to determining what the triable issues were for the impaired driving and over 0.08 charges. I determined that there were a number of issues that could result in my client being found not guilty. I took instructions from the client to plead not guilty and to set the matter for trial. I prepared for the trial including legal research, arguments, and preparations for cross-examination of the police officers. On the trial date, the crown withdrew both charges against my client as they realized they did not have a reasonable likelihood of conviction. The charges were both dropped against my client, leaving him without a criminal record and without a conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. S.F.2018

    The client was charged with refusing to comply with a demand for a roadside breath sample in relation to an impaired driving investigation. After reviewing the file, I determined that there were a number of issues that could be raised at trial. The client elected to plead not guilty, and the matter was set down for trial. Prior to the trial date, I filed a notice with the court alleging my client'’s rights were violated. The crown received a copy of the notice and advised me ahead of the trial date that they agreed with my arguments and would be dropping the charge. My client was left with a clean record and no conviction.

  • R. v. S.C.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving (DUI) and refusing or failing to comply with a breath demand. I reviewed the evidence (disclosure) against the client. I determined that there were a number of issues that could result in a not guilty finding. The client decided to plead not guilty, and we set the matter for trial. Prior to the trial date, I filed a notice with the court alleging my client'’s rights were violated. The crown prosecutor received a copy of the notice and on the trial date, agreed to resolve the matter by way of a plea to a traffic ticket instead, leaving my client without a criminal charge and without a criminal conviction. The impaired driving charge and the refusal charges were withdrawn.

    DUI
  • R. v. A.K.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. I reviewed the file and took instructions from the client to enter a not guilty plea and to set the matter for trial. I prepared for the trial, including legal research and arguments, and preparations for cross-examination of the police officers. On the date of trial, the crown dropped both the impaired driving charge (DUI) and the over 0.08 charge. The client was left without a criminal record and without a conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. R.B.2018

    The client was charged with refusing to comply with a demand for a breath sample as a result of an impaired driving (DUI)/over 0.08 investigation. After reviewing the file, I received instructions from the client on the basis of my legal advice to plead not guilty and set the matter for trial. I prepared for the trial, including conducting legal research and filing a Charter notice relating to my client'’s rights being violated. On the day of trial, the crown agreed that there were issues with their case, and that my client'’s rights were violated. The crown agreed to drop the charge, leaving my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. K.F.2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving (DUI), driving over 0.08 and traffic tickets. The client provided me with instructions to proceed with a guilty plea to the driver over 0.08. The client received a fine and a driving prohibition. The impaired driving charge was dropped, as were the traffic tickets.

    DUI
  • R. v. S.S2018

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. After reviewing the file and providing the client with legal advice, I took instructions from the client to enter a plea of not guilty and to set the matter for trial. I prepared for the trial, including conducting legal research, and preparations for cross-examination of the police witnesses. On the day of trial, I was able to negotiate with the crown prosecutor to have the charges of impaired driving and over 0.08 withdrawn (dropped). My client was left without a criminal record and without convictions.

    DUI

Cases in 2017

  • R. v. N.E.2017

    The client was charged with two counts of failing to comply and one of carrying a concealed weapon. The matter was set for trial. On the day of trial, he plead guilty to carrying a concealed weapon and one of the failure to comply charges. The remaining failure to comply was withdrawn. He received a conditional discharge and 20 hours of community service for a matter where the prospect of a conviction was great.

  • R. v. J.M.2017

    The client was charged with possessing a firearm contrary to a prohibition order and the careless use/storage of a firearm. The crown initially sought a significant jail sentence because the client had been bound by a prohibition order relating to firearms, and this was a matter where the firearm was discharged. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to agree to refer the client to the mental health diversion program, and upon successful completion of the program, the charges against him were withdrawn.

  • R. v. M.L.2017

    The client was charged with mischief and possessing a weapon. Initially the crown declined to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures program. Ms. Karpa had the client complete some tasks and presented the crown with the information. On the basis of that, the crown agreed to refer the matter to Alternative Measures and the crown withdrew the charges upon successful completion of the program.

  • R. v. S.N.2017

    The client was served with notice of a prohibition and forfeiture of firearms hearing. Ms. Karpa was able to have the matter withdrawn and the firearms returned to the client.

  • R. v. J.A.2017

    The client was charged with two counts of sexual assault and two counts of sexual interference with a minor. This was a very complex matter involving voluntariness of statements. Ms. Karpa painstakingly researched the law, and was able to discuss the matter with the crown and convinced the crown to resolve the matter by way of a peace bond and the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. R.R.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference. The client plead guilty to the lesser and included offence of simple assault. The sexual interference charge was withdrawn. The client received a three-year conditional discharge with conditions to not contact the complainant, complete 40 hours of community service, and to attend counselling. No conviction.

  • R. v. S.G.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and assault with a weapon. The matter proceeded to a preliminary inquiry, and then to trial. At trial, the client plead not guilty. I worked tirelessly to ensure that the client received the best possible defence. Upon completion of the trial, the client was found NOT GUILTY. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. F.J.2017

    Client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. The matter proceeded to a preliminary inquiry. Thereafter, the client plead not guilty and the matter proceeded to trial. I worked diligently in preparation of both the preliminary. I completed throughout research and preparation for trial. After my cross-examination of the complainant, and after the direct evidence from my client, the judge was left with a reasonable doubt and the client was found NOT GUILTY.

  • R. v. B.M.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching. The client gave instructions to Ms. Karpa plead guilty to sexual interference and the remaining two counts were withdrawn. The crown sought a sentence of 3 years, while Ms. Karpa sought a sentence of 2 years’ incarceration.

  • R. v. M.K.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching and touching for a sexual purpose. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file entirely, and determined that there was, in her opinion, no reasonable likelihood of conviction on one set of counts. In addition, Ms. Karpa determined that there was lost evidence, thus opening up the possibility of a stay of proceedings. Ms. Karpa discussed the matter with the crown, and the charges were all stayed. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. G.F.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and failing to comply. The client plead not guilty and the matter was set for a preliminary inquiry. At the prelim, the crown withdrew the failure to comply charge. The matter was eventually set down for trial. Upon conclusion of the trial, the judge found the client not guilty on all of the sexual offences.

  • R. v. J.L.2017

    The client was charged with three counts of sexual assault. He plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. The crown was open to discussions about resolving the matter, and the client ended up with a peace bond for one year. All the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.P.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference. He plead guilty to sexual interference and received a jail term of 2 years, plus 18 months’ probation with conditions. The crown had sought a 3-year jail sentence, but the judge agreed with Ms. Karpa's position.

  • R. v. M.S.2017

    The client was charged with sexual assault. He plead not guilty and the matter was set down for a preliminary inquiry. Ms. Karpa determined that there were significant issues with the crown'’s disclosure, and ultimately convinced the crown to withdraw the charge outright. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. S.M.2017

    The client was charged with three counts of assault. The client was unaware of the charges until 2017 when she found out there were arrest warrants on the system. Ms. Karpa met with the crown and made an argument that the charges should be dropped. The crown agreed and withdrew the charges. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. G.E.2017

    The client was charged with criminal harassment. Prior to being hired, he had already set the matter for trial, as he said he was not guilty. The client provided documentation for an alibi notice and with that Ms. Karpa was able to secure a peace bond for the client.

  • R. v. D.B.2017

    The client was charged with two counts of assault. Although not agreeable at first, once Ms. Karpa was able to show that her client was making efforts to get counselling for anger management, the crown agreed to refer the matter to the alternative measures program. Upon completion of the program, the charges against the client were withdrawn. Given the nature of his employment, it was an important outcome, as his career could have been affected by a criminal record.

  • R. v. P.M.2017

    The client was charged with mischief under the Criminal Code and unruly or dangerous behaviour under the Aeronautics Act. Ms. Karpa had both sets of charges dropped.

  • R. v. R.C.2017

    The client was charged with assault. Originally the matter was not referable to Alternative Measures, but Ms. Karpa met with the crown who ultimately agreed to the referral. Once the requirements of Alternative Measures were met, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. C.S.2017

    The client was charged with assault. Originally the crown had not screened the file for Alternative Measures, but then agreed to do so once Ms. Karpa reviewed the matter with the crown. The matter was referred to Alternative Measures and once the requirements were met, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.B.2017

    The client was charged with assault. Upon attending counselling and paying restitution to the complainant, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. T.Y.2017

    The client was charged with assault. After discussions with the crown, they decided not to proceed with the charge as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. As a result, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. I.W.2017

    The client was charged with criminal harassment. After discussions with the crown, the crown agreed that it was not in the public interest to prosecute this file. The charge was therefore withdrawn.

  • R. v. T.W.2017

    The client was charged with communications harassment. After successful completion of counselling and providing proof of same, the crown agreed to withdraw the charge.

  • R. v. B.T.2017

    The client was charged with two counts of assault. He was required to attend counselling and upon completion of the sessions and providing proof of it, the crown agreed to withdraw the charges.

  • R. v. M.A.2017

    The client was arrested and remanded on multiple charges including assault with a weapon, assault, uttering threats, failing to comply with a protection order and failing to appear. A bail hearing was set, at which time he plead guilty, and was released with time served.

  • R. v. N.M.2017

    The client was charged with assault, uttering threats and mischief. The file was referred to Alternative Measures and upon completing the requirements of the program, the charges against him were withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.T.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The crown agreed to an informal peace bond, wherein he was required to attend counselling. Upon completion of the sessions and providing proof of it, the crown agreed to withdraw the charge.

  • R. v. J.E.2017

    The client was charged with assault, forcible confinement and uttering threats. The client plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial, the crown offered a peace bond. The charges were dropped. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. T.S.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The client was directed to attend counselling and upon completion of the Sheriff King program, the charge against him was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.J.2017

    The client was charged with assaulting a police officer with a weapon and also ticketed for making a noise that disturbs another. The file was referred to Alternative Measures and upon completion of the requirements, the charges were withdrawn. Originally the crown was not in agreement with the referral, but Ms. Karpa made compelling arguments which convinced the crown to agree. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. T.A.2017

    The client was charged with assault. Ms. Karpa received and reviewed extensive disclosure. The disclosure clearly outlined issues with the credibility of the complainant. Ms. Karpa brought that to the crown'’s attention, and asked the crown to withdraw the charge. The crown agreed, and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. R.M.2017

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The crown agreed to withdraw the charge upon reviewing supporting documentation that Ms. Karpa had the client produce. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. C.B.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The file was referred to Alternative Measures and was withdrawn after successful completion of the requirements.

  • R. v. B.M.2017

    The client was charged with assault, unlawful confinement and resisting a PO. After requesting the crown review the matter regarding whether or not there was a reasonable likelihood of conviction, the crown agreed with Ms. Karpa'’s assessment and withdrew the charge outright.

  • R. v. A.M.2017

    The client was charged with robberies. Ms. Karpa successfully negotiated a plea deal wherein the client plead to reduced charges and received a conditional sentence order, thus avoiding a penitentiary jail term.

  • R. v. B.C.2017

    The client was charged with a domestic assault. The matter was referred to mental health diversion and upon completion of the program, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. N.E.2017

    The client was charged with robbery. After a lengthy discussion with the crown, and much legal research and preparation for a trial, the crown agreed to a plea to simple assault at the last minute. The client received a short term of probation.

  • R. v. G.E.2017

    The client was charged with criminal harassment. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn on the basis that the client would enter into a peace bond.

  • R. v. K.R.2017

    The client was charged with uttering threats and possessing a weapon. Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to send the matter to diversion. Upon successful completion of the program, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.R.2017

    The client was charged with assault. After the client successfully completed counselling, Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn.

  • R. v. R.E.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The matter was referred to the Alternative Measures Program and the charge was withdrawn once the requirements were completed.

  • R. v. J.T.2017

    I was appointed to assist the client at trial with cross-examination of the complainant on a domestic assault allegation. I assisted the client in resolving the matter by way of a peace bond instead. The client thus avoided a potential conviction.

  • R. v. R.H.2017

    This was a matter involving an assault allegation. The allegation was serious, and a conviction would have had a negative impact on the client's ability to maintain employment. After much negotiation, I was able to have the charge against the client withdrawn.

  • R. v. M.C.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The allegation was that of a domestic assault. A conviction would have had an impact on the client's employment. I negotiated with the crown and upon the client completing counselling, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.P.2017

    The client was charged with assault. After doing a lot of background work, and presenting a resolution to the crown, the crown agreed that as long as the client completed counselling, the charge would be withdrawn. The client completed the counselling, and the charge was withdrawn. No record. No conviction.

  • R. v. M.K.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The matter involved an allegation of domestic assault wherein there were alleged witnesses to the assault. Upon receipt of disclosure, I was able to determine that there was no assault that had occurred. I approached the crown with my review and analysis of the file. With that, on the first court date, the crown decided it was not in the public interest to prosecute the file and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.J.2017

    The client was charged with a breach of probation. In discussions with the crown, I was able to have the charge withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.S.2017

    The client was charged with failing to comply with conditions of his peace bond. The Crown agreed to withdraw the charges after the client successfully attended and completed counselling sessions.

  • R. v. P.D.2017

    The client was charged with uttering threats and assault with a weapon. Initially the crown would not agree to dealing with the matter by way of treatment and counselling. However, thy finally did agree, and upon the client attending and completing counselling, the crown agreed to withdraw the charges.

  • R. v. K.M.2017

    The client was charged on two different matters: one with assaulting a peace officer and the other was assault with a weapon. After many discussions with the crown surrounding the client'’s developmental issues, and with the aid of the client'’s many advocates, the crown finally agreed to stay both charges.

  • R. v. A.J.2017

    The client was charged with assault. It was clear from my review of the matter that there were serious issues with the crown'’s case. It was clear that no assault had taken place. Given that, I met with the crown and they ultimately agreed to drop the charge. Charged withdrawn. No record. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.C.2017

    The client was charged with possession of a firearm, uttering threats and possessing a weapon for a dangerous purpose. The client was required to attend counselling and upon completion of the course, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.P.2017

    The client was charged with careless use of a firearm, theft, assault and unlawful confinement. Initially the crown was not agreeable to the matter being dealt with by way of counselling. However, I was able to negotiate with the crown to have the client take counselling, and a firearms safety course, and thereafter have the charges dropped. The client completed the counselling and the course, and the charges were all withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.C.2017

    The client was charged with assault. He plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. Partway through the trial, the crown realized there no offence was made out by the complainant's testimony, and withdrew the charge mid-trial.

  • R. v. T.M.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The matter was referred to the alternative measures program and the crown withdrew the charge upon successful completion of the requirements.

  • R. v. K.A.2017

    The client was charged with uttering threats, assault with a weapon and assault. The matter was adjourned so that the client could attend counselling. The crown withdrew the charges upon successful completion of the sessions.

  • R. v. C.E.2017

    The client was charged with assault and aggravated assault of a police officer. The matter was dealt with by way of counselling, which the client completed, and then the charge was withdrawn outright.

  • R. v. J.A.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The allegation was that of a domestic dispute where alcohol was involved. I had the client attend counselling, and with that, the crown agreed to withdraw the charges against the client.

  • R. v. S.S.2017

    The client was charged with assault and mischief. This was a domestic allegation. I worked with the client to have them enter into counselling. This assisted me in convincing the prosecutor to withdraw the charges against the client.

  • R. v. B.O.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The allegation was that of road rage. In the end, the matter was referred to the alternative measure program. The charge was withdrawn when the client successfully completed the requirements of the program. The consequences if the client had not had me negotiate for the program would have been detrimental to the client'’s ability to work.

  • R. v. K.B.2017

    The client was charged with assault. The allegation was that of a domestic situation. There were injuries to the complainant. Initially the crown was not agreeable to resolving it in a manner that would have left my client without a criminal record. However, I was able to negotiate with the crown and have the charge withdrawn after a peace bond was entered into. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. B.F.2017

    The client was charged with assault, forcible confinement and uttering threats. These were very serious allegations that would have had serious consequences without my assistance. In the end, I was able to convince the crown to agree to a short term conditional discharge for the client. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. M.S.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The file was referred to the alternative measures program, and was withdrawn after successful completion of the requirements. The client avoided a criminal record and the potential consequences that come with it.

  • R. v. R.W.2017

    The client was charged with multiple offences. The charges included possession over $5000, possession under $5000, possession (drugs), failing to comply, and failing to appear for ID. The client was arrested on those outstanding charges. I negotiated a resolution for the client that meant he would not have to spend any more time in jail. He was released from custody upon his pleas being entered.

  • R. v. M.B.2017

    The client was charged with breaking and entering with intent, carrying a concealed weapon and failing to comply with an undertaking. The client plead guilty to the lesser and included offence of mischief under $5000 and the remaining charges were withdrawn. The client received six months'’ probation.

  • R. v. M.S.2017

    The client was charged with breaking and entering. The crown had a weak case. I prepared my defence and prepared for the trial. At trial, the crown elected to stay the charges as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The matter was concluded, and the client was free and clear of the charges that would have attracted a jail sentence had the client been convicted.

  • R. v. J.S.2017

    The client was charged with several offences, including possession over $5000, possession under $5000, possessing a break-in instrument, possessing a weapon, trafficking in property, driving disqualified, taking a motor vehicle without consent, failing to appear and failing to comply. The client plead guilty to several charges and the remaining ones were withdrawn. The client received a sentence of 9 months global, less pre-trial custody. That left the client with only a few months to serve. The client had a lengthy record for similar offences and would have faced a much higher sentence, but I was able to negotiate a reduced sentence.

  • R. v. N.N.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The allegation was that of shoplifting. A conviction would have had a detrimental impact on the client'’s employment. I met with the crown, and the crown agreed to drop the charge. The charge was withdrawn on the first court date, leaving the client without a record, and without a conviction.

  • R. v. C.R.2017

    The client was charged with possession over $5000.00, possession of drugs, possession of a weapon, possessing a break in instrument, breach of probation, FTA, failing to comply. I determined that there was a very weak case against her client. The matter was set for trial after a not guilty plea was entered. At trial, crown withdrew all of the charges.

  • R. v. S.A.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The client's matter was referred to a diversion program, and after successful completion, the charge against the client was withdrawn. No record. No conviction.

  • R. v. L.S.2017

    The client was charged with the indictable offence of theft over $5000. Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to lay a new information with separate theft under $5000 counts, so that they would be summary offences, thereby allowing a conditional sentence outcome. The client had to pay full restitution and received a conditional sentence order of 18 months, followed by 12 months'’ probation. Normally, this kind of offence would garner a lengthy jail sentence as an outcome. Ms. Karpa was able to negotiate a resolution where the client avoided jail.

  • R. v. R.C.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The matter was referred to the alternative measures program, and upon completion of the requirements, the charge was successfully withdrawn.

  • R. v. M.C.2017

    The client was charged with fraud under $5000 in a trust theft situation. Ms. Karpa met with the crown and proposed resolution by way of the alternative measures program. The crown agreed given everything Ms. Karpa had done in relation to the file ahead of time. The charge was withdrawn after the program was completed.

  • R. v. R.T.2017

    The client was charged with arson: damage to property. The matter was set down for trial after a not guilty plea was entered. Extensive legal research was required, along with preparations for trial. After reviewing the research Ms. Karpa had prepared, and after realizing the frailties with their witnesses, the crown stayed the charges. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. S.O.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The matter was referred to Alternative Measures and once the requirements were met, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. X.C.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The matter was referred to Alternative Measures and once the requirements were met, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.T.2017

    The client was charged with theft over $5000 and fraud over $5000. Ms. Karpa arranged for the client to pay back the money owed and the charges against the client were withdrawn.

  • R. v. A.D.2017

    The client was charged with theft over $5000. Ms. Karpa met with the crown who agreed that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and the crown thus withdrew the charge.

  • R. v. R.P.2017

    The client was charged with fraud under $5000. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in depth, including making charts which showed that the allegations were false. Ms. Karpa spoke to the crown, who agreed with Ms. Karpa's assessment, and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. R.N.2017

    The client was charged with theft over $5000. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in depth and realized that there was significant outstanding disclosure. Ms. Karpa made several requests over the course of several months, but the crown did not produce the disclosure to the crown. The crown therefore agreed to withdraw all charges due to issues surrounding delays and disclosure.

  • R. v. C.R.2017

    The client was charged with theft of a motor vehicle. He plead guilty to the charge and as he had been in custody (but had been released at the time of the plea) he was given time served, thus avoiding additional jail.

  • R. v. B.D.2017

    The client was charged with mischief. The matter was referred to Alternative Measures and the matter was withdrawn upon successful completion of the requirements.

  • R. v. M.M.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The file was referred to Alternative Measures and was withdrawn after successful completion of the requirements.

  • R. v. H.F.2017

    The client was charged with fraud over $5000, a trust theft situation. Originally the client did not qualify for Alternative Measures because of the nature of the charge. However, Ms. Karpa met with the crown and the crown ultimately agreed to refer the matter to Alternative Measures. Upon completion of the requirements, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.D.2017

    The client was charged with a breach of probation. The client plead guilty to the charge and received a fine. The crown agreed not to apply to revoke the client'’s curative discharge.

  • R. v. J.C.2017

    The client was charged with mischief. The file was referred to AMP and the Crown withdrew the charges upon successful completion of the program. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. L.S.2017

    The client was charged with the indictable offence of theft over $5000. Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to lay a new information with separate theft under $5000 counts, so that they would be summary offences, thereby allowing a conditional sentence outcome and no real jail. The client hacond to pay full restitution and received a conditional sentence order of 18 months, followed by 12 months'’ probation. Normally, these types of offences would garner real jail.

  • R. v. R.S.2017

    The client was charged with theft under $5000. The matter was referred to the Alternative Measures Program and upon completion of the requirements, the charge was successfully withdrawn.

  • R. v. K.L.2017

    The client was charged with possession of drugs (marihuana). The client had been in a vehicle with several other people. I reviewed the file and determined that some of the evidence (disclosure) was missing. I made a request for the disclosure. The crown was unable to produce the disclosure, and as such, I convinced the crown to withdraw the charge.

  • R. v. C.N.2017

    The client was charged with drug related offences: possession and production of hash oil. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file and determined that there were issues with the crown'’s case. The crown agreed to refer the matter to alternative measures, and upon successful completion of the program, the charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. C.V.2017

    The client was charged with trafficking and possession of drugs. There were multiple issues with the investigation that Ms. Karpa determined. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to agree to a plea to a reduced charge of simple possession. Ms. Karpa was able to convince the court to grant the client an absolute discharge. No conviction.

  • R. v. A.B.2017

    The client was charged with production of a substance and possession (drugs). Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in depth and realized that there was significant outstanding disclosure. Ms. Karpa made several requests over the course of several months, but the investigators did not produce the disclosure to the crown. The crown therefore agreed to withdraw all charges. This would have been a serious matter with serious consequences for the client. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.J.2017

    The client was charged with possession of drugs, obstructing/resisting arrest and escaping custody while he was still a youth. The following year he was charged with a failure to appear. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to withdraw all charges against the client.

  • R. v. C.T.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. He also received two tickets as a result of this incident. He plead guilty to driving over 0.08. In doing so the impaired charge and the tickets were withdrawn. He received a fine, as well as a victim fine surcharge, and a one-year driving prohibition.

    DUI
  • R. v. V.B.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving, driving over 0.08 and dangerous driving. He plead guilty to driving over 0.08. The other two charges were withdrawn. He received a fine, as well as a victim fine surcharge, and a one-year driving prohibition. Jail time was avoided.

    DUI
  • R. v. J.L.2017

    The client was charged with speeding (50km over the limit). The client would have had a suspended license with a guilty plea to that offence. Instead, I was able to negotiate with the crown to have the charge reduced so that the client walked away with a fine, and their license intact.

  • R. v. J.H.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. I reviewed the file and determined that during the check stop there were breaches of the client's rights. The client entered a not guilty plea and the matter was set for trial. I filed a notice with the court to allege that my client'’s rights were violated. After filing that notice, the crown stayed the charges. The client was able to get their license back within a few days, and avoided a conviction and a driving prohibition. No record. No conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.K.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and failure to provide a breath sample. He plead guilty to the impaired charge and the failure to provide charge was withdrawn. A curative discharge application was made by Ms. Karpa, and with Ms. Karpa'’s written brief, the crown and the judge agreed to the discharge. No conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. S.F.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. I reviewed the file in detail, and determined that there were multiple violations of the client'’s rights. The client entered a not guilty plea, and the matter was set for trial. I filed a notice with the court to allege that the client's rights were violated. After filing that notice, the crown withdrew the charges. The client was able to get their license back within a few days, and avoided a conviction and a driving prohibition. No record. No conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. B.D.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and a failure/refusal to provide a breath sample. The client plead guilty to the impaired charge and the matter was adjourned for a curative discharge application. After Ms. Karpa reviewed the matter with the crown and prepared lengthy written submissions, the crown agreed to the discharge application. The client avoided jail time and ended up with conditions and a finding of guilt but no conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.T.2017

    The client was charged with dangerous driving and flight from police. This was a very serious allegation, for which the crown was originally seeking a hefty penalty due to the need for general deterrence. However, after much negotiations, the crown was agreeable to withdrawing the flight from police charge, and agreed to a plea to the dangerous driving for a fine.

  • R. v. C.B.2017

    The client was charged with dangerous driving and impaired driving. Ms. Karpa met with the crown and the crown agreed to a plea to a reduced charge driving over 0.08 for a conditional discharge. The dangerous driving charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.K.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and failure to provide a breath sample. He plead guilty to the impaired charge and the failure to provide charge was withdrawn. A curative discharge application was made by Ms. Karpa, and with Ms. Karpa's written brief, the crown and the judge agreed to the discharge. No conviction.

    DUI
  • R. v. K.M.2017

    The client was charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. Ms. Karpa negotiated a plea deal where the client would plead guilty to a non-criminal offence: driving without due care and attention. The client received a$500 fine. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. K.M.2017

    The client was issued a ticket for careless driving. Ms. Karpa negotiated with the crown to resolve the matter with a lesser offence. The client received a fine for the lesser offence. Because the careless driving ticket was avoided, the client did not receive the high demerits associated with that ticket.

  • R. v. G.S.2017

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over 0.08. The charge was withdrawn on the basis that Ms. Karpa determined that a breath demand was never read to the accused. Client's license was returned to her on the basis that the charge was withdrawn.

    DUI

Cases in 2016

  • R. v. E.D.2016

    The client was charged with theft under $5000, failing to appear for fingerprinting, failing to attend court and being intoxicated in a public place. The client was adamant that this was a case of mistaken identity, as he never lived in Calgary, and was not in the city at the time of the offences. Ms. Karpa was successful in negotiating with the crown on that basis that the charges should be withdrawn.

  • R. v. M.M.2016

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00, breaking & entering, mischief and trespassing at night. The Crown agreed to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program under the guise of it being a lesser included offence of unlawfully in a dwelling house, and the charge was eventually dropped after successful completion of the same.

  • R. v. B.C.2016

    The client was charged with mischief to property under $5000. He plead guilty to the offence and received probation due to a related record.

  • R. v. J.D.2016

    The client was charged with being in possession of stolen property and failing to appear. He plead not guilty and a trial date was set. Ms. Karpa was successful in having all charges withdrawn on the date of trial. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. G.D.2016

    The client was charged with theft of a motor vehicle. Initially the crown was unwilling to refer the matter to diversion. However, Ms. Karpa provided the crown with information which made them change their mind. The matter was referred to diversion and upon completion of the requirements, the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. I.C.2016

    The client was charged with fraud over $5000 and theft over $5000 from an employer. Ms. Karpa worked diligently with the client to show the crown that the allegations were unfounded, and a matter of a civil case versus a criminal case. Normally, this type of matter would garner a sentence of jail if convicted or if found guilty. The matter was withdrawn by the crown after Ms. Karpa met with them and reviewed the detailed documents prepared in support of the client'’s assertions.

  • R. v. J.S.2016

    The client was charged with serious assault related offences, including harassment and mischief. Ms. Karpa was able to have all of the charges withdrawn/dropped.

  • R. v. J.L.2016

    The client was charged with prostitution related offences. Ms. Karpa had the charges dropped. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.B.2016

    The client was charged with unlawful confinement and assault in a serious domestic related matter. Ms. Karpa determined that a key piece of evidence had been destroyed by the police and thus she was successful in having all charges against the client withdrawn outright.

  • R. v. L.P.2016

    The client was charged with assault, mischief, and uttering threats. Ms. Karpa worked with the client and had all charges against the client withdrawn after negotiations with the Crown.

  • R. v. K.F.2016

    The client was charged with assault, assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, and mischief (damage to property). This was a serious matter with multiple charges involving a domestic allegation. Because of the seriousness of the charges, the crown sought a conviction and a term of probation. Ms. Karpa successful argued before the court that the client should receive an absolute discharge. Ms. Karpa'’s arguments were accepted by the court and the client walked away with no conviction entered.

  • R. v. S.D.2016

    The client was charged with causing a disturbance in relation to a bar fight. Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client dropped. No criminal record. No conviction. This was important as the client had to travel to the USA frequently and a conviction would have caused him significant issues with being able to travel.

  • R. v. S.B.2016

    The client was charged with several counts of indecent act/exposure. The client was facing jail time, but Ms. Karpa negotiated with the Crown based upon issues with the Crown's case, and secured a conditional discharge for the client. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. J.O.2016

    The client was charged with breaching a peace bond in relation to a domestic matter. Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. T.J.2016

    The client was charged with assault against a domestic partner. Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. C.P.2016

    The client was charged with multiple counts of domestic assault and breaches of bail. The crown initially sought jail time, but Ms. Karpa was able to have all of the charges against the client withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. C.B.2016

    The client was charged with assault. A criminal record would have had a detrimental impact on employment. The charge was withdrawn and the client kept their employment without issue.

  • R. v. Y.Z.2016

    The client was charged with break and enter, mischief, uttering threats and assault. Due to immigration issues a conviction would have been detrimental to the client. Ms. Karpa secured the complete withdrawal of all charges against her client.

  • R. v. A.M.2016

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The matter was serious in that the complainant suffered from long term issues. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in detail and determined there were issues with the crown'’s ability to prove identification. Further, there were issues with the voluntariness of the client'’s statement to police. Based on that, Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. C.P.2016

    The client was charged with assault involving a dispute at a store. Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client dropped.

  • R. v. G.F.2016

    Client was charged with criminal harassment in the context of a neighbor dispute. The dispute had been ongoing. The charges were withdrawn. No record/no conviction.

  • R. v. B.C.2016

    The client was charged with common assault. The allegation was that both the complainant and the client were intoxicated and got into a fight. Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to withdraw the charge outright. The client was spared from having a criminal record/conviction.

  • R. v. L.E.2016

    The client was charged with assault, contrary to section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The context was that of a domestic dispute. The matter was resolved by way of a peace bond, and the charge was dropped/withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. S.G.2016

    The client was charged with criminal harassment in relation to a neighbour dispute. The complainant'’s allegation was clearly false. Ms. Karpa secured a peace bond for the client and the charges were dropped. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. R.C.2016

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon (x2) and possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous (bear spray). The incident occurred at a party, and an altercation occurred between two groups of people. The Crown prosecutor sought a term of probation for the discharge of the bear spray. Ms. Karpa presented an argument to the court for a conditional discharge, and succeeded. The court found the client guilty but declined to convict pending his completion of the conditions.

  • R. v. K.C.2016

    The client was charged with assault in a 'road rage'” type dispute. A conviction would have had a serious impact upon the client's employment. Ms. Karpa managed to secure a withdrawal of the matter. No criminal conviction/no criminal record. The client'’s employment was unaffected.

  • R. v. K.B.2016

    The client was charged with assault. The situation involved a dispute at a job site. Ms. Karpa met with the Crown and presented her client'’s position. The Crown agreed to withdraw the charges outright. The client'’s employment was unaffected. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. H.J.2016

    The client was charged with a serious assault arising from a domestic violence allegation. Initially the crown sought jail. Eventually the crown agreed to stay the charge on the basis of the work that Ms. Karpa did. No conviction.

  • R. v. D.S.2016

    The client was charged with assault (domestic violence offence allegation). Ms. Karpa had the charged withdrawn after a peace bond was entered into. No conviction.

  • R. v. A.L.2016

    The client was charged with common assault arising out of a domestic dispute. A conviction would have had an impact upon the client's employment. Ms. Karpa secured the outright withdrawal of the charge. No criminal conviction/no criminal record. The client's employment was thus unaffected.

  • R. v. M.B.2016

    This was a complex matter where the complainant made allegations of assault to further a family law dispute. After much work on Ms. Karpa'’s part, the crown agreed that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction and withdrew the charge. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. M.Q.2016

    The client was charged with assault, assault causing bodily harm, failure to comply with a protection order, and breaches of release. The crown initially sought a jail sentence. However, after Ms. Karpa worked with the client to put forward the suggestion of an outright withdrawal, upon completion of counselling, the crown agreed. All of the charges were withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. T.B.2016

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The matter involved a one-punch assault outside of a nightclub. The client entered a guilty plea. Ms. Karpa put strenuously argued the client should receive a conditional discharge. The crown sought a term of incarceration to be served within the community. The judge agreed with Ms. Karpa and the client received a conditional discharge.

  • R. v. A.S.2016

    The client was charged with assault and uttering threats. Ms. Karpa secured the outright withdrawal of the charge. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. D.B.2016

    The client was charged with assault in relation to a domestic dispute. It was clear upon Ms. Karpa's review of disclosure that this was a matter that was a consensual '“fight'” or argument, and that no criminal liability should have resulted. The crown agreed to withdraw the charge. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.M.2016

    The client was charged with assault in relation to a domestic dispute. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn at the first appearance. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. D.D.2016

    The client was charged with assault. Though the crown initially would not agree to the matter being referred to Alternative Measures due to a previous similar referral, Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to refer the matter. The client completed the program and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. G.S.2016

    The client was charged with assault in relation to a domestic allegation. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn outright. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. J.K.2016

    The client was charged with assaulting a police officer. The crown was initially unwilling to refer to the client to the Alternative Measures Program. With Ms. Karpa's hard work and persuasion, the crown finally agreed to the referral. Upon completion of the program the charge was withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. D.P.2016

    The client was charged with causing an animal to be in distress. Ms. Karpa worked to ensure that the client did not receive a criminal conviction. The charge was withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. J.P.2016

    The client was charged with assault and mischief. Though initially the crown did not agree to the matter being referred to Alternative Measures, Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to do so. The client completed the program and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. F.B.2016

    The client was charged with assault. The client was referred to diversion and the charge was withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. C.T.2016

    The client was charged with assault. Although the crown was initially opposed to the idea and suggested a conditional discharge instead, they eventually agreed to refer the matter to the Alternative Measures Program. This was a serious matter that would have had detrimental consequences for the client if the client were to have had a conviction or finding of guilt. Instead, after Ms. Karpa successfully negotiated for her client'’s acceptance into the program, the client completed the requirements and the charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. H.S.2016

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The matter involved a fight at a bar. The complainant had a bleeding nose after being punched. The client plead guilty to the lesser and included charge of simple assault and Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a conditional discharge. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. K.D.2016

    The client was charged with serious firearms related offences for possessing a restricted, loaded firearm. The crown agreed to a community based disposition on the basis of a plea to the lesser included offence of possession of a firearm without a license.

  • R. v. D.T.2016

    The client was charged with numerous firearms related offences. The circumstances were that the client was stopped by police while driving, and police located several firearms and ammunition in the vehicle. The firearms were not secure. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in depth, and determined that there were several breaches of the client's right to be free from and unlawful search and seizure. Based upon her review of the case law, and her extensive work on the file, Ms. Karpa successfully argued that the charges should be withdrawn. The crown agreed to withdraw the charges. No conviction was entered. No criminal record.

  • R. v. D.W.2016

    The client was charged with firearms offences. The circumstances were that the client was pulled over by the police for a traffic stop and they police found a loaded restricted handgun in the client's vehicle. Despite the seriousness of the allegation, Ms. Karpa was able to secure a conditional discharge for the client. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. R.S.2016

    The client was charged with assault, uttering threats, sexual assault and endangering a child. Ms. Karpa successfully negotiated with the crown to agree to withdraw the sexual assault and endangering a child charges on the basis that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The other matters were also withdrawn after the client received a peace bond.

  • R. v. J.M.2016

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The matter proceeded to a preliminary inquiry. A continuation date was set to finish cross-examination of the complainant. At the continuation date, the charges were stayed by the crown. That ended the matter for the client. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. B.S.2016

    The client was initially charged with sexual assault. Though this was originally an indictable offence, the information was re-laid and Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to re-elect summarily. At that time the client was charged with sexual assault, obtaining for consideration sexual services, and fraud under $5000. He plead guilty to fraud over $5000 and a conditional discharge was granted.

  • R. v. B.V.2016

    The client was charged with sexual assault, mischief and assault. The client plead not guilty and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to withdraw all charges.

  • R. v. M.U.2016

    The client was charged with obtaining sexual services for consideration. Ms. Karpa had the matter referred to the Alternative Measures Program and the charge was withdrawn. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. R.T.2016

    The client was charged with sexual interference with a minor and sexual assault. Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to stay the charge prior to the preliminary inquiry being held. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. S.S.2016

    The client was charged with sexual assault. Days before the trial Ms. Karpa convinced the crown to withdraw the charge outright. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. J.W.2016

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The allegation arose under circumstances involving an ongoing family law dispute. Ms. Karpa worked tirelessly with her client to prepare for trial. Mid-way through Ms. Karpa'’s cross-examination of the complainant, the crown withdrew the charge. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. J.B.2016

    The client was charged with luring (over the internet) of a young person, as well as possession of child pornography. Ms. Karpa worked with the client to ensure that they had done all that was necessary in order for Ms. Karpa to be able to negotiate the matter with the crown to avoid jail for the client. Not only did Ms. Karpa ensure that the client did not go to jail, but she also secured a withdrawal of the charges based on the client entering into a peace bond. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. G.B.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.

    DUI
  • R. v. I.L.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.

    DUI
  • R. v. W.A.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.

  • R. v. A.H.2016

    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.

    DUI
  • R. v. D.S.2016

    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.2016

    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.

    DUI
  • R. v. J.D.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

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

  • R. v. R.K.2016

    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.2016

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

  • R. v. P.P.2016

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

  • R. v. S.T.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

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

  • R. v. M.Q.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.2016

    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.

  • R. v. L.F.2016

    The client was charged with break and enter, common assault, and mischief. Ms. Karpa prepared for trial. At trial, the charges were withdrawn by the crown. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.C.2016

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 for shoplifting. The charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.W.2016

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 for shoplifting. Ms. Karpa had the matter referred to Alternative Measures and the charge was withdrawn. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. C.F.2016

    The client was charged with fraud over $5000.00 in an employment context. The client was facing jail time. Ms. Karpa prepared the matter for trial. The crown agreed to withdraw the charge just days before the trial. No criminal record/no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. S.H.2016

    The client was charged with theft of mail. Originally an indictable offence, Ms. Karpa was able to convince the crown to re-elect summarily after the client entered a guilty plea to an offence under a different quasi-criminal Act. The client received probation for two years and no criminal conviction.

  • R. v. S.Y.2016

    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. No criminal record/no conviction.

Cases in 2015

  • R. v. J.S.2015

    The client was charged with aggravated assault, attempted murder, and several other Criminal Code offences. Ms. Karpa negotiated to have the matter resolved and the attempted murder charge was withdrawn/dropped.

  • R. v. D.C.2015

    The client was charged with manslaughter. Ms. Karpa secured her client'’s release on bail pending a trial of the matter.

  • R. v. D.C.2015

    The client sought to have bail varied to allow for travel out of the jurisdiction and to allow for the probation officer's discretion relating to amendments to bail. The charges were serious. The Crown was opposed to the amendment. Ms. Karpa convinced the Judge to allow the amendments.

  • R. v. P.S.2015

    The client was charged with sexual assault. Ms. Karpa was able to secure the client'’s release on bail.

  • R. v. A.F.2015

    The client was charged with several breaches of court orders and criminal harassment. The Crown sought the client'’s detention. Ms. Karpa successfully negotiated for the client's release from custody on bail.

  • R. v. E.E.2015

    Client was charged with breaching a court order in relation to robbery matter. Ms. Karpa secured his release.

  • R. v. G.F.2015

    The client was charged with sexual interference with a minor. Despite there being warrants for the client'’s arrest on other matters, Ms. Karpa secured the client'’s release on bail.

  • R. v. L.M.2015

    The client was charged with numerous firearms related offences. Ms. Karpa secured his release with no case deposit.

  • R. v. S.M.2015

    The client was charged with multiple offences including possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, and firearms charges. Ms. Karpa secured the client'’s release with no cash bail and minimal conditions.

  • R. v. T.A.2015

    The client was charged with domestic assault. Ms. Karpa had the client's conditions amended so that they could return to the family home.

  • R. v. M.Y.2015

    The client was charged with assault against a spouse. The conditions prohibited the client from seeing the child of the relationship. Ms. Karpa had the client's conditions amended so that they could resume contact with the child.

  • R. v. J.G.2015

    The client was charged with aggravated assault. Ms. Karpa secured the client'’s release with no cash bail.

  • R. v. L.M.2015

    The client was charged with multiple counts of property related offences stemming from an alleged crime spree. Initially the Crown sought cash bail, but Ms. Karpa was able to put forth a compelling argument for release with no cash bail.

  • R. v. G.H.2015

    The client was charged with multiple counts of property related offences stemming from an alleged crime spree. Initially the Crown sought cash bail, but Ms. Karpa was able to put forth a compelling argument for release with no cash bail.

  • R. v. J.D.2015

    The client was charged with multiple counts of firearms offences, drug offences and robbery. The Crown was seeking 8 years in custody for these serious matters. Despite that, Ms. Karpa secured a sentence of 5 years in custody.

  • R. v. I.T.2015

    The client was charged with possession of an imitation firearm (pellet gun) and possession of a stolen vehicle. After reviewing the file, and realizing that the Crown did not have a reasonable likelihood of conviction, Ms. Karpa had the charges against her client withdrawn outright. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.C.2015

    The client was charged with weapons offences relating to a traffic stop. Ms. Karpa had the charge reduced to a traffic ticket. Criminal code charges were withdrawn. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. D.S.2015

    The client faced a firearms hearing allegation where the Crown sought to have the client prohibited from possessing firearms. Criminal lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued for the return of the client's firearms, and the withdrawal of the matter.

  • R. v. B.C.2015

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon, and firearms related offences. Ms. Karpa got the firearm charge withdrawn.

  • R. v. W.B.2015

    This was a firearms hearing matter. Calgary criminal defence lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued for the withdrawal of the matter. Ms. Karpa negotiated with the prosecution to drop the matter on the basis that there was no requirement for a prohibition.

  • R. v. L.M.2015

    The client was charged with numerous firearms offences including possession of a restricted or prohibited firearm with readily accessible ammunition (which carries a mandatory minimum 3 year jail sentence where the Crown proceeds by indictment). The matter involved a complex investigation including search warrants and crime scenes analysis. Ms. Karpa reviewed the disclosure (evidence) in depth, and made several comprehensive requests of the Crown'’s office for additional disclosure. In the end, the charges were all stayed against the client. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. D.C.2015

    The client was charged with breaching his released conditions. On the day of trial Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn outright. No conviction entered/no criminal record.

  • R. v. E.S.2015

    Client was charged with domestic assault. The matter was up for first appearance in court and Ms. Karpa was able to negotiate an immediate withdrawal of the charge. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. M.P.2015

    Client was charged with breach of probation, and assault. On the day of trial, Ms. Karpa had the charges withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. P.W.2015

    The client was charged with domestic assault contrary to section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Ms. Karpa had the charges dropped at the first appearance in court. No conviction/no criminal record.

  •  R. v. D.G.2015

    The client was charged with domestic assault including an allegation of choking. After lengthy negotiations with the Crown, Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn outright. No criminal record/no conviction. The client could continue to work without issues relating to a criminal record check.

  • R. v. M.C.2015

    The client was charged with a gang allegation of assault. There were several people involved in the matter, all of whom were charged with assault. After lengthy court proceedings, the Crown elected to stay the proceedings. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. J.C.2015

    The client was charged with assault and uttering threats against his ex-girlfriend. Ms. Karpa secured a peace bond for the client and the charges were withdrawn. The client will not have a criminal record or conviction.

  • R. v. A.B.2015

    The client was charged with simple assault involving an allegation of pushing. Ms. Karpa had the client enter into the Alternative Measures Program, even though at first blush the Crown did not agree that he was eligible. With Ms. Karpa's convincing, the matter was referred to the Program and the charge was withdrawn. No record/no conviction.

  • R. v. P.M.2015

    The client was charged with harassment against an ex-girlfriend. After lengthy negotiations with the Crown based on Ms. Karpa's review of the file, the charges were dropped. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. L.S.2015

    The client was charged with domestic assault, pursuant to section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Ms. Karpa had the matter dealt with by way of a peace bond, and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction entered/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.K.2015

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm in relation to a domestic partner. The allegation was serious, and the Crown elected to proceed to trial. Ms. Karpa was able to secure a peace bond for the client. No conviction entered. No criminal record.

  • R. v. A.I.2015

    The client was charged with assault pursuant to section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Criminal defence lawyer Susan Karpa reviewed the file, and determine that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. Charges were withdrawn/dropped. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. T.N.2015

    The client was charged was a very serious assault against a domestic partner. Despite the Crown'’s position that jail was warranted, Ms. Karpa secured a sentence of probation for the client.

  • R. v. B.C.2015

    The client was charged with a very serious assault with a weapon offence, and firearms related offences. Ms. Karpa got the firearm charge withdrawn. The Crown sought a significant jail sentence given the client's related criminal convictions. Despite that, Ms. Karpa successfully argued for ten days in custody.

  • R. v. T.N.2015

    The client was charged with multiple offences including assault, breaching bail conditions and failures to appear in court. Despite the serious nature of the assault, Ms. Karpa secured the sentence of a low fine for the client. No jail.

  • R. v. L.T.2015

    The client was charged with assault against another individual. Initially the client was not eligible for a court diversion program. However, Ms. Karpa successfully argued for the client'’s acceptance into the program. The client was referred to diversion, and after completing the program the charge was withdrawn. No record. No conviction.

  • R. v. K.A.2015

    The client was charged with the criminal offence of uttering threats. The allegation was made by a family member. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa secured a withdrawal of the charge. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. T.H.2015

    The client was charged with a serious allegation of break and enter, assault and uttering threats against a domestic partner. The criminal charges were exceptionally serious, and the client faced the risk of jail given they had a prior related criminal record. With countless hours of work, including file review, criminal law sentencing research, and meetings with the client and the Crown, Ms. Karpa succeeded in having the client plead to less serious offences for a conditional sentence. No jail.

  • R. v. D.B.2015

    The client was charged with a serious assault causing bodily harm, mischief to property, and uttering threats. Ms, Karpa'’s review of the file revealed several issues with the Crown's ability to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. With that, Ms. Karpa had all of the charges against the client withdrawn/dropped. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. P.N.2015

    The client was charged with an allegation of assault (section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada) against a spouse. The allegation was serious in that it was alleged that a child was present at the time of the allegation. Despite that, Ms. Karpa secured a peace bond for the client, and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. C.M.2015

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon -– a knife. The allegation was that the knife was held to the complainant's throat. With significant work to get the client treatment and counselling, the charge against the client was dropped. NO criminal record. No conviction

  • R. v. H.L.2015

    The client was charged with assault (section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada) against a spouse. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa worked painstakingly in defence of her client. In the end, Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to drop the charge against the client. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. T.N.2015

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon (knife) in a domestic incident. The charge was serious in that the client was alleged to have cut the throat of the complainant. Though the charge was serious given the nature of the allegations, Ms. Karpa secured a withdrawal of the charge. No conviction, no criminal record. The client could move on with their life unencumbered by a conviction which would have had a devastating impact on employment and volunteering.

  • R. v. W.M.2015

    The client was charged with criminal harassment. A criminal record would have significantly impacted their ability to continue with their employment. Ms. Karpa carefully reviewed the case, and was able to convince the Crown to withdraw the charge. No conviction/no record.

  • R. v. M.H.2015

    The client was charged with assault (domestic). Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn. No conviction/no record.

  • R. v. T.A.2015

    The client was charged with assault involving a domestic allegation where several witnesses were present. With extensive work done on the file, Ms. Karpa was able to convince the Crown to withdraw/drop the charge against the client. The matter was concluded so that the client did not have a criminal record or conviction and could thus continue on with their employment.

  • R. v. L.S.2015

    The client was charged with a serious gang related attack on a complainant. The Crown sought a term of incarceration to be served in the community (conditional sentence). The co-accused had received a sentence of jail within the community. Ms. Karpa fought for a conditional discharge so that the client would have no conviction entered. The Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa and the client received a conditional discharge. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. B.M.2015

    The client was charged with a gang type assault upon the complainant. The allegation was that the client, along with three others, attacked the complainant and assaulted the complainant. The Crown wanted the client to have a conviction entered. Ms. Karpa wanted to ensure that the client did not have a conviction entered, and sought a conditional discharge. The Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa and the client received a conditional discharge. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. B.L.2015

    The client was charge with property related offences and breaches of release. The client had an extensive related record. The Crown sought an additional 3 months in jail. Ms. Karpa argued for time served so that the client could be released and could go home, and the Court agreed with Ms. Karpa'’s proposal.

  • R. v. J.L.2015

    Client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Although the client had a related record, Ms. Karpa secured a low fine for the client.

  • R. v. W.P.2015

    The client was charged with multiple theft matters including theft of a vehicle. Despite having a related record, Ms. Karpa managed to secure a plea to a small fine for the client.

  • R. v. M.A.2015

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn outright at the first appearance in court. No record/no conviction.

  • R. v. N.G.2015

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 in relation to a shoplifting allegation. Ms. Karpa had the client enter into the Alternative Measures Program, and complete it early so the charge was withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. R.A.2015

    The client was charged with fraud under $5000.00. The client had a related record for which she had received jail time. However, Ms. Karpa was able to have the client avoid jail, and pay a fine instead.

  • R. v. C.M.2015

    The client was charged with numerous counts of fraud and theft offences, as well as failing to appear in court, and breaches of court orders. Ms. Karpa had the breaches of court orders and the failures to appear withdrawn. No conviction and no criminal record for those offences.

  • R. v. D.G.2015

    The client was charged with the criminal of theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa met with the Crown and convinced the Crown to withdraw the charges. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.B.2015

    The client was charged with luring and child pornography related offences. Ms. Karpa worked extensively and convinced the Crown to agree to withdraw the charges. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. D.Z.2015

    The client was charged with multiple charges of possession of stolen property, theft under $5000.00, breaches of recognizance, firearms offences, and failures to appear in court (over 15 charges). The client had a lengthy related record. The Crown argued for a lengthy jail sentence. Ms. Karpa argued for a short jail sentence. The Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa, and the client received a short jail sentence.

  • R. v. T.N.2015

    The client was charged with sexual assault and choking. This was a very serious allegation that had a serious impact on the client'’s life. Ms. Karpa represented the client at trial in front of a Judge. Through Ms. Karpa's cross-examination of the complainant, and through her defence of the client and legal arguments, she successfully argued for an acquittal. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.M.2015

    The client was charged with the criminal of theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting). Because of immigration issues, Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa convinced the Crown to withdraw the charges. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. C.R.2015

    The client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor. Ms. Karpa thoroughly reviewed the evidence and determined that the Crown'’s case was weak. After extensively preparing the file for preliminary inquiry, the charges were stayed against the client. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. L.W.2015

    The client was charged with the criminal offence of shoplifting (theft under $5000.00). The client was referred to the Alternative Measures program. After completion, the charge against the client was dropped. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. B.B.2015

    The client was charged with sexual assault. The Crown elected not proceed with the prosecution.

  • R. v. M.W.2015

    The client faced charges of possession of stolen property under $5000.00 and break and enter. Ms. Karpa argued for a reduction of the charge to unlawfully being in a dwelling house, and argued for Alternative Measures. The client was accepted into the program, and after the program was completed, the charges against the client were all withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. T.N.2015

    The client was charged with sexual interference and sexual assault. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa had the charges against the client dropped on the basis of months of tireless work and commitment to her client's file.

  • R. v. D.D.2015

    The client was charged with offences of fraud and forgery. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa reviewed the disclosure and determined that there were serious issues with the case against the client. Specifically, there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction on the basis of evidence lacking in respect of the essential elements of the offence. Ms. Karpa had all of the charges withdrawn by the Crown. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. M.S.2015

    The client was charged with the offence of theft under $5000.00 (shoplifting) in Calgary. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn within a couple of months. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.Y.2015

    The client was charged with tag switching in Calgary (fraud under $5000.00). Despite a previous related record, Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn. No conviction.

  • R. v. S.H.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

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

  • R. v. K.M.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.2015

    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.

  • R. v. O.R.2015

    The client was charged with possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking. The case involved an allegation of being in possession of almost 20 pounds of the controlled substance. The client was facing potential penitentiary jail time. However, with her client's instructions, Ms. Karpa secured a plea for a 9 month conditional sentence order. The client would not see the inside of a jail.

  • R. v. O.M.2015

    The client was charged with drug related offences. Ms. Karpa had all charges against the client stayed/dropped. No conviction/no record.

  • R. v. K.P.2015

    The client was charged with possession of the purpose of trafficking (cocaine and marihuana), possession of weapons, breaches of release conditions and simple possession of drugs. Ms. Karpa had the charge of possession for the purpose of trafficking reduced to simple possession, and had other charges including impaired driving all dropped. The client received small fines as a sentence.

  • R. v. A.B.2015

    The client as charged with impaired driving causing bodily harm and failure to provide a breath sample. The crown agreed to a plea to the offence of failure to provide a breath sample after Ms. Karpa reviewed the file and found problems with the crown'’s case. Initially the client faced a jail sentence, however, Ms. Karpa secured a plea to the summary conviction offence versus to the indictable offence for a fine and a driving prohibition.

  • R. v. D.T.2015

    The client was charged with driving a motor vehicle while suspended. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn.

  • R. v. T.M.2015

    Client was charged with traffic violations including careless driving which carries significant demerits. Ms. Karpa got the charges reduced so the client would not have any demerits.

  • R. v. R.D.2015

    The client was charged with taking a motor vehicle without consent. Ms. Karpa had the charge withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. L.K.2015

    The client was charged with impaired driving and driving while over the legal limit (DUI). After Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa reviewed the file, she determined that there was a serious breach of the client'’s rights, and that the Crown would not be in a position to move forward with that prosecution because the client'’s rights were violated. Both charges were dropped. No criminal record. Client received his license back.

  • R. v. L.B.2015

    The client faced a charge of driving of disqualified. The Crown sought a jail sentence for the allegation, given the client'’s breach of a court order. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued against a sentence of jail, and instead the client receive a fine.

  • R. v. B.C.2015

    The client was charged with driving while disqualified (contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada) and driving without insurance (contrary to the Traffic Safety Act). With a thorough review of the file, Ms. Karpa determined that there weren'’t sufficient grounds for the prosecution to continue. Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to withdraw both charges. No criminal conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. K.P.2015

    The client was charged with impaired driving. Ms. Karpa thoroughly reviewed the file with her client, and approached the Crown to withdraw the charge. The charge was ultimately dropped/withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

    DUI

Cases in 2014

  • R. v. E.L.2014

    The client was charged with failure to comply with release (bail conditions). All of the charges were dropped. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. P.D.2014

    The client was charged with the criminal offence of failing Charge of failure to comply with release was dropped by the Crown on Ms. Karpa'’s urging.

  • R. v. D.C.2014

    Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa argued for her client's release on charges of a substantial quantity of a controlled substance, despite the client's prior related record. The client was released on low cash bail.

  • R. v. L.R.2014

    Ms. Karpa argued for the release of her client for a home invasion robbery despite a significant prior related record for noncompliance with court orders and assaults. The client was released on low cash bail.

  • R. v. S.S.2014

    This was a firearms hearing matter. Calgary criminal defence lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued for the withdrawal of the matter. Ms. Karpa negotiated with the prosecution to drop the matter on the basis that there was no requirement for a prohibition.

  • R. v. A.I.2014

    This was a firearms hearing where Ms. Karpa argued for the withdrawal of the application. Ms. Karpa succeeded in her arguments and the matter was dropped and the firearms were returned to client.

  • R. v. R.S.2014

    The client was charged with several firearms and assault/threats criminal offences in relation to a serious domestic assault allegation. Ms. Karpa used her experience with firearms related offences and had the Crown agree to withdraw all major firearms related charges and reduced the charge to carless storage and simple assault for probation.

  • R. v. B.B.2014

    The client was charged with multiple allegations of possession of weapons without a license. Calgary criminal lawyer reviewed the file and determined that the police had conducted an illegal search and seizure. Ms. Karpa used her prior experience as a Crown Prosecutor and her extensive background in firearms related offences to convince the Crown to withdraw all of the charges on that basis.

  • R. v. B.M.2014

    The client was charged with serious allegations of sexual assault and sexual interference. After lengthy preparations for court, including multiple client and witness meetings, all of the charges against the client were withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.C.2014

    Allegation of minor sexual assault. Ms. Karpa succeeded in arguing for a plea to simple assault only. Client received probation on a plea to assault only.

  • R. v. R.B2014

    The client was charged with a serious allegation of a home invasion break and enter/robbery and aggravated assault (stabbing). The Crown sought a substantial penitentiary term. Despite that, on a guilty plea Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a three year penitentiary term where the client had a lengthy prior related criminal record.

  • R. v. L.R.2014

    Client charged with home invasion robbery and assault causing bodily harm. Instead of the 8 year sentence the Crown sought, client received a sentence of 3 years jail.

  • R. v. M.Z.2014

    The client plead guilty to a charge of bank robbery (caught on video). The Crown sought a sentence of 3 years jail. Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a 2 year jail sentence.

  • R. v. B.N.2014

    The client plead guilty to 4 separate bank robberies (caught on video) and 1 charge of possession of stolen property over $5000.00. The Crown sought a sentence of 10 years'’ incarceration. Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a sentence of 6 years total. The Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa'’s submissions, and the client was sentenced to 6 years total, less time for pre-trial custody.

  • R. v. J.U.2014

    The client was charged with mischief, assault and uttering threats charges pursuant to the Criminal Code of Canada. The charges stemmed from a domestic violence allegation. Significant damage was done to a vehicle and a residence. Despite that, and despite the seriousness of the allegations, all charges against the client were withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. G.L.2014

    The client was charged with a serious assault involving a serious fight (kicking and punching) that was caught on video. The Crown sought a term of probation which would mean the client would have had a conviction and criminal record. After a careful review of the file, and the relevant case law, Ms. Karpa argued before the Judge that the client should instead receive a conditional discharge. The Judge sided with Ms. Karpa, and the client received a conditional discharge. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.C.2014

    The client was charged with criminal harassment involving a dispute. Ms. Karpa secured a peace bond for the client. Charge of criminal harassment withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. D.B.2014

    The client was charged with a serious assault involving a serious fight outside of a bar. The Crown initially sought a term of probation which would mean the client would have had a conviction and criminal record. After negotiations with the Crown, Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa convinced the Crown to join her in her application for a conditional discharge. The Judge accepted the joint recommendation, and the client received a conditional discharge. No conviction.

  • R. v. M.J.2014

    The client was charged with assault causing bodily harm pursuant to section 267(B) of the Criminal Code of Canada (domestic violence allegation). The allegation was serious in that it was that of a punch to the face causing injury to the mouth. With her background as a former prosecutor, Calgary criminal defence lawyer Susan Karpa managed to argue for the complete withdrawal of all charges. Thus the client did not have end up with a conviction or criminal record.

  • R. v. A.C.2014

    The client was charged with the criminal offences of assault (spitting) and uttering threats. Ms. Karpa made an application to the Crown prosecutor to accept the client into a diversion program, despite the seriousness of the allegation (spitting). After the diversion program was completed, the charges against the client were withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. D.S.2014

    The client was charged with uttering threats in a neighbor dispute. The allegation arose after an altercation between the parties. The criminal charge of uttering threats was withdrawn and the client received a peace bond instead. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. K.W.2014

    The allegation was made that the client had committed an assault against their domestic partner. The allegation was serious. Instead of a conviction being entered, and instead of the client receiving a criminal record, Ms. Karpa had the charge against the client withdrawn.

  • R. v. M.D.2014

    This was a serious allegation of assault causing bodily harm. The client was alleged to have assaulted his spouse (domestic assault) while in the presence of their young child. Despite the seriousness of the allegation, Ms. Karpa worked with the client to put their best foot forward in terms of negotiating with the Crown for an acceptable resolution of the matter. Criminal lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued for a peace bond. The charge of domestic assault withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. M.D.2014

    This was a serious allegation of assault causing bodily harm. The client was alleged to have assaulted his spouse (domestic assault) while in the presence of their young child. Despite the seriousness of the allegation, Ms. Karpa worked with the client to put their best foot forward in terms of negotiating with the Crown for an acceptable resolution of the matter. Criminal lawyer Susan Karpa successfully argued for a peace bond. The charge of domestic assault withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. A.R.2014

    The client was charged with a serious allegation of assault with a weapon pursuant to section 267(A) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The altercation was caught on video. After Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa received the file, she began preparing the client'’s case for a plea. Ms. Karpa had the charge reduced to simple assault (section 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada) and Ms. Karpa argued for an absolute discharge. The Judge granted Ms. Karpa's application. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. K.M.2014

    The client was charged with an allegation of assault against their former spouse (domestic assault). The matter had been waived in from another jurisdiction for a guilty plea. Despite the Crown asking for a conviction to be entered, Ms. Karpa convinced the Judge to agree to sentence the client to an absolute discharge. The Judge granted Ms. Karpa's application. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. K.L.2014

    The client was charged with an allegation of assault that arose in a domestic situation. Further, the client was charged with failing to comply with release conditions. Ms. Karpa successfully had both criminal charges withdrawn and instead a peace bond was entered into. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. C.T.2014

    The client was charged with uttering threats pursuant to section 264.1(1)(A) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The allegation arose out of a domestic situation. After speaking to witnesses, reviewing the evidence, and meeting with the Crown to discuss the matter, Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa had the charge against her client dropped. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. A.T.2014

    The client was charged with a serious allegation of domestic assault. A criminal conviction would be detrimental to the client'’s employment. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa reviewed the file to determine potential issues with the Crown's case against the client. There were serious issues with the complainant's credibility. On the basis of her review of the evidence, Ms. Karpa obtained a complete withdrawal of all charges against the client. Ms. Karpa had determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction, and was able to convince the Crown that was the case. Charges dropped. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. L.S.2014

    Client charged with assault against a child. Ms. Karpa got the Crown to agree to drop the charge against her client.

  • R. v. B.L.2014

    Allegations of assault and uttering threats were dropped by the Crown on Ms. Karpa'’s urging. Instead, the client received a peace bond. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. N.B.2014

    Client was charged with assault with a weapon, assault, and uttering threats. The incident involved an allegation that a knife was used. Ms. Karpa successfully argued for a term of probation versus jail for her client.

  • R. v. M.J.2014

    The client was charged with uttering threats, assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous, and multiple counts of simple assault. Ms. Karpa got the Crown to withdraw several counts against her client. For the remaining counts, although the client had a related record, Ms. Karpa secured a short term of probation for her client.

  • R. v. B.S.2014

    Client charged with domestic allegation of assault and uttering threats. The client received a peace bond and the charges were all dropped.

  • R. v. C.P.2014

    The client was charged with assault against his wife and child. Although the allegations were serious, Ms. Karpa negotiated to have the charges against her client withdrawn. The client instead received a peace bond. No conviction.

  • R. v. B.H.2014

    Client charged with assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats against his domestic partner. The client received a peace bond and the charges were all dropped. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. K.M.2014

    The client was charged with assaulting a police officer. After lengthy negotiations, Ms. Karpa was able to have the charge against her client withdrawn.

  • R. v. T.I.2014

    The client was charged with assaulting a police officer and uttering threats to a police officer. Both charges were dropped.

  • R. v. M.G.2014

    The client was charged with mischief (damage to property) in relation to a vehicle. Ms. Karpa successfully had the charge dropped (withdrawn) after the client was accepted into and completed a diversion program. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. Y.B.2014

    The client was charged with shoplifting. Ms. Karpa had the client accepted into a diversion program, and after it was completed, the charge was withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction. The client thus avoided any issues with his employment that a criminal conviction would have caused.

  • R. v. H.T.2014

    The client was charged with shoplifting (theft under $5000.00) pursuant to section 334(B) of the Criminal Code of Canada. After completing Alternative Measures, the charges against the client were withdrawn, and they avoided a conviction/criminal record. This was very important to the client who would have lost employment if convicted.

  • R. v. D.R.2014

    The client was charged with shoplifting at a Calgary mall. After completing a diversion program, the criminal charge was withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. A.L.2014

    The client was charged with a serious criminal offence - arson. The Crown argued that the client should receive a jail sentence. Ms. Karpa fought for her client and argued against real jail. The Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa, and the client received a conditional sentence.

  • R. v. T.D.2014

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 in relation to a shoplifting allegation. The client participated in the Alternative Measures program, and the charge was withdrawn upon completion of the program. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. I.B.2014

    The client was charged with mischief causing damage to property over $5000.00. Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to allow the client into the Alternative Measure program, and the charge against the client was withdrawn. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.S.2014

    The client was charged with theft under $5000.00 in relation to a shoplifting allegation. The client participated in the Alternative Measures program, and the charge was withdrawn upon completion of the program. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.R.2014

    The client was initially charged with break and enter into a dwelling house. Ms. Karpa argued for the reduction of the charge to a less serious criminal charge of unlawfully being in a dwelling house. The client was then eligible to enter into a diversion program. After successfully completing the program, the charge was dropped altogether. No criminal conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. J.K.2014

    The client was charged with breaking and entering into a relative'’s house and stealing items from the home. These allegations were very serious, and the complainant wanted the client prosecuted. Despite that, Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa succeeded in having the client referred to a diversion program, and once completed, the criminal charges against the client were dropped. No criminal record. No conviction.

  • R. v. J.F.2014

    The client faced charges of speeding (50+ km over the limit) and possession large quantity of marihuana (possession pursuant to section 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act). Ms. Karpa had the speeding allegation reduced significantly to avoid excessive demerits, and possession of marihuana withdrawn after completion of diversion. No criminal record. No criminal conviction.

  • R. v. K.H.2014

    The client charged with possession of marihuana (section 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act). There were aggravating circumstances surrounding the allegation. However, Ms. Karpa convinced the prosecution to permit the client to enter into a diversion program. After successful completion of the program the charge was dropped.

  • R. v. R.M.2014

    The client was charged with possession of drugs (marihuana) in relation to a search of a vehicle, and failing to appear. Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa had both sets of charges against the client dropped. No conviction, no criminal record.

  • R. v. B.M.2014

    The client was charged with proceeds of crime in relation to a drug investigation. Ms. Karpa reviewed the file in depth, and concluded that the police had conducted an illegal search and seizure. On that basis, Calgary criminal lawyer Susan Karpa approached the Crown to persuade them to withdraw the charge. Ms. Karpa was successful, and the charge against her client was withdrawn. No conviction. No criminal record.

  • R. v. G.C.2014

    Client was charged with several counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking (cocaine and marihuana). Ms. Karpa was able to have those charges dropped. The client plead guilty to one count of simple possession of marihuana for a small fine.

  • R. v. A.A.2014

    The client was charged with failing to remain at the scene of an accident, obstruction of justice and dangerous driving. Ms. Karpa succeeded in having the allegations reduced from indictable to summary conviction proceedings. Further, pleas were entered to Traffic Safety Act offences (to avoid criminal convictions for those matters) for fines and probation. The client had been facing jail time.

  • R. v. M.A.2014

    The client was initially charged with multiple counts of driving a motor vehicle while disqualified due to previous convictions for impaired driving and driving while disqualified. Ms. Karpa succeeded in arguing that one of the counts should be withdrawn, and a plea was entered to another count of driving while disqualified. Ms. Karpa successfully argued the client should receive a conditional sentence in circumstances where client had multiple related entries on his record and was facing jail. The Judge agreed to grant Ms. Karpa's application for a conditional sentence. No jail.

  • R. v. J.F.2014

    The client faced charges of speeding (50+ km over the limit) and possession large quantity of marihuana (possession pursuant to section 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act). Ms. Karpa had the speeding allegation reduced significantly to avoid excessive demerits, and possession of marihuana withdrawn after completion of diversion. No criminal record. No criminal conviction.

  • R. v. B.S.2014

    Client was charged with impaired driving and driving over .08 (DUI). Ms. Karpa got the charges both dropped against her client. No criminal record/no conviction.

    DUI

Cases in 2013

  • R. v. R.S.2013

    Client was charged with assaulting his common law wife. Ms. Karpa negotiated a peace bond for the client. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. G.C.2013

    Client was charged with uttering threats and obstructing a police officer and causing a disturbance. The client entered into the Alternative Measures program. Upon completion of the program, the charges will be withdrawn by the Crown and the client will not have a criminal record.

  • R. v. B.M.2013

    Client was charged with obstruction of a police officer and causing a disturbance. The client entered into the Alternative Measures program. Upon completion of the program, the charges will be withdrawn by the Crown and the client will not have a criminal record.

  • R. v. S.H.2013

    Client was charged with extortion, uttering threats, criminal harassment, and breaches of bail conditions. Ms. Karpa was hired after the client had already plead guilty to the offences. The Crown wanted a jail sentence because of the seriousness of the offence and because of the client's prior criminal record. With Ms. Karpa'’s successful arguments the client did not receive a jail sentence.

  • R. v. C.P2013

    Client charged with assault causing bodily harm from an allegation of a fight. Although the complainant sustained serious injuries including a fractured nose, Ms. Karpa successfully argued that her client should receive a conditional discharge. No conviction entered.

  • R. v. D.D.2013

    The client was charged with criminal harassment and uttering threats. The allegations arose in the context of social media communications. Ms. Karpa reviewed the case file and determined that there were significant issues with the Crown's case against the client. Ms. Karpa obtained a peace bond for the client, so that the client could walk away without a criminal record. The charges were withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.W.2013

    The client was charged with assault with a weapon (knife), uttering threats and simple assault. Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to agree to resolve the matter by way of a peace bond. The client thus avoided a criminal record.

  • R. v. T.O.2013

    The client faced a charge of assault arising out of a domestic situation. The matter was resolved by way of a peace bond so that the client walked away without a criminal record. The charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. S.N.2013

    Facing a charge of domestic assault, Ms. Karpa secured a peace bond for the client. The charge was withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.S.2013

    Allegations of assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous, and carrying a concealed weapon (baton) were all dropped because of Ms. Karpa's vigorous defence of her client.

  • R. v. C.H.2013

    Client was charged with uttering threats. Ms. Karpa got the charge dropped. No criminal record.

  • R. v. S.P.2013

    The client was charged with obstructing a police officer. Ms. Karpa got the charge against the client withdrawn. No criminal record.

  • R. v. S.R.2013

    Client was charged with possession of stolen property. Although the judge did not want to agree to time served for the client due to his lengthy criminal record, Ms. Karpa secured his immediate release for time served– no jail time.

  • R. v. T.C.2013

    Client plead guilty to theft and fraud related offence. Crown was seeking additional jail time for client with previous related record. Ms. Karpa successfully argued for significantly less jail time

  • R. v. B.K.2013

    Client was charged with mischief to property. Ms. Karpa presented a compelling argument to the Crown as to why the charge should be withdrawn. With Ms. Karpa'’s persuasion, the charge was dropped. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. M.M.2013

    Client was charged with obstructing a police officer, possession of a stolen motor vehicle, robbery, and breaches of bail conditions. Ms. Karpa got the robbery charge withdrawn.

  • R. v. N.L.2013

    Client was charged with break and enter, possession of stolen property, theft of a motor vehicle, breaches of bail conditions, and failures to appear in court. Ms. Karpa successfully negotiated for a plea to less serious offences for the break and enter and possession/theft offences. Client received a term of probation.

  • R. v. M.G.2013

    Client charged with theft. Client was not eligible for the Alternative Measures program. Despite that, Ms. Karpa successfully convinced the Crown to drop the charge against her client.

  • R. v. S.P.2013

    The client was charged with theft for an allegation of shoplifting. After many discussions with the Crown, Ms. Karpa got the charge against her client withdrawn. No criminal record/no conviction.

  • R. v. J.F.2013

    The client was charged with several break and enters, theft over $5000, theft under $5000, and breaches of recognizance. Although the allegation of break and enter was serious, and although the client was already out on bail for other break and enter allegations, upon entering guilty pleas to some of the offences, the remaining offences were withdrawn and the client received a 6 month conditional sentence order. That means the client was released to serve the sentence in the community.

  • R. v. S.P.2013

    Client was charged with theft under $5000.00. Ms. Karpa convinced the Crown to agree to drop the charge against her client.

  • R. v. B.C.2013

    The client was charged with aggravated assault in relation to a stabbing allegation. Although the client had a related record, Ms. Karpa successfully argued for bail. The client was released from custody pending trial.

  • R. v. J.K.2013

    The client faced a serious home invasion break and enter charge. The Crown sought the client'’s detention. Ms. Karpa succeeded in convincing the Judge to release the client on bail.

  • R. v. D.T.2013

    Ms. Karpa secured her client's release for a possession for the purpose of trafficking charge even though he had a prior related conviction on his record.

  • R. v. R.B.2013

    Ms. Karpa secured her client's release from jail for aggravated assault, two charges of assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and possession of stolen property even though the client had an extensive criminal record.

  • R. v. M.W.2013

    Ms. Karpa successfully argued at the Court of Queen's Bench that her client's curfew should be amended.

  • R. v. M.W.2013

    Client wanted bail condition amended and Ms. Karpa was successful in getting it amended for her client.

  • R. v. R.B.2013

    Client was charged with aggravated assault while on parole. Ms. Karpa got the client released on bail with minimal conditions and no cash.

  • R. v. R.B.2013

    Client was charged with assault with a weapon and was released. Police arrested client on an allegation of a breach of his release. Ms. Karpa got the client out on bail for the second time.

  • R. v. N.L.2013

    Client was charged with multiple offences. Police arrested client on an allegation of a breach of his release. Ms. Karpa got the client out on bail for the second time.

  • R. v. S.R.2013

    Client was charged with theft. Although the client had a lengthy criminal record, Ms. Karpa secured his release on his own recognizance with no cash deposit and no conditions.

  • R. v. C.H.2013

    Early morning bail hearing for uttering threats. Client was out on bail at the time he is alleged to have committed the offences. Client was released no cash deposit with minimal conditions.

  • R. v. T.N.2013

    Client was charged with robbery and assault. The case involved multiple alleged culprits and was a serious allegation that could have left the client with a criminal record. However, Ms. Karpa got the charges against her client withdrawn.

  • R. v. D.T.2013

    Ms. Karpa secured her client's release for a possession for the purpose of trafficking charge even though he had a prior related conviction on his record.

  • R. v. A.D.2013

    Client was charged with possession of cocaine. Ms. Karpa got the charge against her client dropped.

  • R. v. A.S2013

    Client was charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. Crown dropped charges down to simple possession/personal use.

  • R. v. C.P2013

    Client was charged with possession of marijuana. Charges withdrawn.

  • R. v. E.L.2013

    Client was charged with dangerous driving. Charge withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. T.S.2013

    Client received a traffic ticket. Ms. Karpa got the ticket withdrawn.

  • R. v. J.S.2013

    Client charged with fleeing from police, possession of a stolen motor vehicle, and his sixth breach of a conditional sentence order. Ms. Karpa managed to have the flight from police and possession of a stolen motor vehicle charges withdrawn.

  • R. v. B.M.2013

    Client was charged with breaches of bail and Traffic Safety Act offences. The serious Traffic Safety Act offences were dropped. The client was sentenced to a minimal fine on the remaining charges.

  • R. v. D.G.2013

    Client was charged with impaired driving. All charges were dismissed. No conviction/no criminal record.

    DUI
  • R. v. A.T.2013

    Client was charged with several Traffic Safety Act offences. Ms. Karpa got all tickets withdrawn. No convictions, no fines.

  • R. v. D.N.2013

    Client was charged with domestic assault. Client received conditional discharge,– no criminal record.

  • R. v. S.H.2013

    Criminal harassment and multiple breach of bail charges. Client had a prior criminal record. Crown sought jail. Judge agreed with Ms. Karpa and the client was sentenced to a conditional sentence and probation , no jail.

  • R. v. L.D.2013

    Client was charged with domestic assault. Ms. Karpa got the charge dropped for her client.

  • R. v. C.H.2013

    Client was charged with two sets of offences: (1) domestic assault causing bodily harm and breaches of bail conditions; and (2) uttering threats. All charges were withdrawn against the client. No convictions/no criminal record.

  • R. v. A.B.2013

    Client was charged with uttering threats and criminal harassment. The client received a peace bond and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. C.L.2013

    Client was charged with break and enter, assault, and uttering threats. Client received a term of probation with minimal conditions.

  • R. v. H.H.2013

    Client was charged with assaulting his wife. Ms. Karpa worked diligently to convince the Crown to drop the charge. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. D.M.2013

    Client was charged with domestic assault. The client received a peace bond and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. B.F.2013

    Client was charged with assaulting a young child. Client plead guilty and was sentenced to a short term of probation with minimal conditions.

  • R. v. G.B.2013

    Client was charged with assaulting his step son. The client received a peace bond and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.

  • R. v. G.P.2013

    Client was charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats. The client received a peace bond and the charge was withdrawn. No conviction/no criminal record.