The Queen vs. The Defendant

Cases for Property Related Offences

Cases in 2020

  • 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 The matter was withdrawn upon completion of the program.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. 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 I worked tirelessly to finally convince the crown prosecutor that the charges should be withdrawn outright.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. 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 The client completed the program, and the charge was dropped (withdrawn) by the crown.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.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. 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 The matter was then withdrawn on the next court date.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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

Cases in 2018

  • 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.

Cases in 2017

  • 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.

Cases in 2016

  • 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

  • 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.

Cases in 2015

  • 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

Cases in 2014

  • 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. 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. 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.

Cases in 2013

  • 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. 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. 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. 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.