The Queen vs. The Defendant

Cases tagged as Property Offences

Cases in 2020

  • 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 I worked tirelessly to finally convince the crown prosecutor that the charges should be withdrawn outright.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. 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 The matter was then withdrawn on the next court date.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. 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  The matter was then withdrawn on the next court date.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 The charge of theft was therefore withdrawn, and the client was left with no conviction, and no criminal record.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. 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. 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. 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.

Cases in 2017

  • 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. 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.

Cases in 2016

  • 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.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. 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.

Cases in 2015

  • 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. 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. 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. 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.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. 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.

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. 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. 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.

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. 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. 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. 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. C.L.2013

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