Drug Offences

Successfully defending drug charges takes a unique understanding of the law including knowing what your rights are and knowing when your rights have been violated. Being found guilty of a drug offence can have serious consequences for you. From jail time, to immigration issues, being convicted of a drug offence will have serious consequences for you. It is imperative that you make the right choice as to your legal representation. The choice is clear for Ms. Karpa’s clients – they choose her because they know she gets results.

Susan Karpa has exceptional insight into the types of tactics the police use in drug investigations, including the use of undercover techniques. While she was a prosecutor, Susan Karpa trained and worked as a Designated Wiretap agent in Alberta. Wiretaps are often used in high level drug trafficking investigations. Ms. Karpa knows the complexities of wiretap evidence, and how to successfully challenge it in court.

Drug charges can often be challenged on the basis of an illegal search and seizure. Ms. Karpa’s knowledge and ability to defend you against these violations of your rights is unparalleled. She will tirelessly devote her time and her effort to ensuring that no prosecution is left unchallenged. From simple possession charges, to charges of drugs for the purpose of trafficking, and trafficking, Susan Karpa will vigorously defend you.

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agreed to refer the matter to alternative measures, and upon successful completion of the program, the charges were withdrawn.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. 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. 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. 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. 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.S, 2013

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

R. v. C.P, 2013

Client was charged with possession of marijuana. Charges withdrawn.