Cases for Impaired Driving & Other Driving Offences

• R. v. K.K.2024

  The client received a ticket one count of failure to remain at scene of an accident pursuant to the Traffic Safety Act. I worked with the client to obtain information and documentation to help me help the client. The prosecutor dropped the ticket entirely.

  Dangerous Driving

• R. v. C.L.2023

  The client was charged with failure to remain at the scene of an accident pursuant to the Traffic Safety Act. This offence carries more demit points than any other traffic offence. After we requested additional disclosure and set a trial date, the prosecutor withdrew the charge. This client was left without a conviction for the offence. That meant no conviction or demerits on their driving record.

• R. v. K.M.2022

  The client was charged with careless use of firearm and pointing a firearm contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, as well as a Traffic Safety Act offence for failing to stop at a stop sign at an intersection. This was a serious allegation and the client could have faced jail time if convicted. I worked closely with the client to have them enroll in courses and complete tasks that helped me to negotiate with the prosecutor. I was able to convince the prosecutor to agree to have the client enroll into the Alternative Measures Program. The client completed the requirements of the program and all charges were dropped. This left my client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  Weapons

• R. v. D.K.2022

  The client was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired, and with operating a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol level over 0.08 (also called “over 80”). The client elected to have a trial in Provincial Court. The trial date was rescheduled to a later date because of court closures during the Covid-19 pandemic and scheduling backlogs created by the same. I determined that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction based on deficiencies in the evidence against the client and the unreasonable delay caused by the trial rescheduling. I discussed this with the crown prosecutor, and the crown prosecutor withdrew the charges so the client had no conviction and no driving prohibition.

  Dangerous Driving DUI

• R. v. T.B.2022

  The client was charged with impaired driving and operation of a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level at or over 0.08. A trial date was set after the client plead not guilty. Prior to trial, I comprehensively researched the law relating to violations of the client's rights. I prepared a Notice outlining those violations. The crown prosecutor reviewed the Notice and agreed that the client's rights were violated, and agreed to outright drop both charges. This left the client with no criminal record and no convictions.

  DUI

• R. v. O.S.2022

  The client was charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, flight from peace officer in a motor vehicle, driving an uninsured motor vehicle and driving without proper supervision while having a learner license. There was a very serious accident that happened. I was able to have the prosecutor agree to a plea to the dangerous driving charge and driving without proper supervision while having a learner license. The client was sentenced to a small fine and 6 month driving prohibition with all other charges dropped.

  DUI Dangerous Driving

• R. v. S.T.2021

  The client was charged with impaired driving and impaired operation at or over 0.08. The matter was set for trial. I filed a Notice alleging the client's rights were violated. We proceeded to trial. The crown prosecutor called their first witness. Once that happened I asked to speak to the prosecutor as I believed it was clear that the prosecutor could not prove that the client drove. The prosecutor agreed and asked the Judge to dismiss the charges against the client. This left the client with no criminal record and no conviction.

  DUI

• R. v. K.C.2021

  The client was charged with a traffic ticket for failing to leave notice of accident. This was a unique file the client was not aware of the accident and there was no real evidence to show this allegation occurred. After receiving disclosure and discussing the file and my opinion to the crown, the ticket was withdrawn.

  DUI

• R. v. D.H.2021

  The client was charged with two traffic tickets - one for driving while uninsured and one for speeding. The client did not have insurance at the time of the offence. After discussions with the Crown, they agreed to accept a guilty plea to a lesser offence of not having a license which meant a significantly reduced fine and far less insurance ramifications. The speeding ticket was withdrawn.

  DUI

• R. v. J.M.2021

  The client was charged with impaired driving and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of at or over 0.08. When I reviewed disclosure I saw clear breaches of my client's rights. The client plead not guilty and the matter was set for trial. I filed a Notice alleging my client's rights were breached in that the police did not have the grounds to demand a sample of the client's breath and that his rights to speak to a lawyer were violated. The crown prosecutor reviewed the Notice I prepared and agreed to drop both charges. Both charges were withdrawn, leaving the client with no criminal record and no conviction.

  DUI

• R. v. B.K.2021

  The client was charged with impaired driving and failure to comply with a demand for a breath sample. I prepared a Notice alleging that my client's rights were breached when he was arrested and when the police asked for samples of his breath. The Notice was provided to the crown who then reviewed my arguments and agreed to drop the charges. This left my client After filing a charter notice and outlining the clear issues and errors that were made in arresting the client, the Crown entered a stay of proceedings.

  DUI

• R. v. G.M.2021

  The client was charged with impaired driving that resulted in a serious accident. There were a number of civilian witnesses as well as police witnesses who dealt with the client after the accident. The client plead not guilty and a trial date was set. At trial, the crown prosecutor called their first witness. It was apparent with that that the crown could not establish identification. I spoke with the crown prosecutor after the witness had testified for them and asked the crown to invite the judge to dismiss the impaired driving charge as they could not prove it. They agreed, and the crown prosecutor asked the judge to dismiss the charge. This left the client without a criminal record and without a conviction.

  DUI

• R. v. G.P.2021

  The client was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle (impaired driving) and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of at or over 0.08. I approached the prosecutor after reviewing the disclosure and stating that I thought there were issues with their ability to prove the charges. The prosecutor agreed and the charges were both dropped, leaving the client  with no criminal record and no conviction.

  DUI

• R. v. S.T.2021

  The client was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle (impaired driving) and failure to comply with a demand for a breath sample (commonly called a "refusal to blow"). I was able to convince the prosecutor that the charges should not be proceeded with. The crown agreed, and dropped both charges. This left the client without a criminal record and without a conviction that would have compromised employment.

  Dangerous Driving

• R. v. A.T.2021

  The client was charged with impaired operation and refusal to comply with a demand. The client pled not guilty and the matter was set for trial. After a period of time, but before the trial of the matter, the crown dropped the charges against the client, which resulted in the client having no conviction or criminal record for the charges.

  DUI

• R. v. N.K.2021

  The client was a young professional originally charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit. The client was then later also charged with assaulting a peace officer and resisting. These charges would have greatly impacted her career. Upon resolution discussions with the Crown, I was able to have all charges dropped with a plea to just the impaired driving with the minimum fine and driving prohibition. This left the client in the best position considering the other charges she otherwise could have been convicted of and allowed her to remain in her professional career.

  Assaults DUI Dangerous Driving

• R. v. V.K.2020

  The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit and one traffic ticket was issued. The client gave me instructions to proceed with negotiating with the crown for the best possible plea deal. The crown sought a $2000 fine and a driving prohibition. While a fine and the prohibition were mandatory with minimums established, the crown sought a higher than minimum fine. I fought for the minimum fine, and the court agreed with me. The charge of refusal to provide a sample of breath was withdrawn.

  DUI Dangerous Driving

• R. v. K.H.2020

  The client was charged with impaired operation and failing or refusing to comply with a demand. The matter was set for trial as there were significant issues with the crown's ability to prove the allegations. Eventually, the crown stayed (dropped) the charges. This resulted in the client having no conviction or record.

  DUI

• R. v. A.S.2020

  The client was charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit. The matter was set for trial. On the day of trial, the crown dropped the charges leaving the client with no conviction and no criminal record.

  DUI Dangerous Driving

• R. v. J.C.2020

  The client was charged with impaired driving and failing or refusing to comply with a demand. The matter was set for trial and I was able to determine the client's Charter rights were infringed and submitted a Charter notice to the Crown. As a result, the Crown decided to only proceed at trial on the impaired charged, not the failure to comply. At trial, there was a lack of evidence in the Crown's case to prove the elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. The client was acquitted.

  DUI

• 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.

  Dangerous Driving

• 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. 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. 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.

  Assaults DUI Dangerous Driving

• 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 Dangerous Driving