Recent Success

In R. v. J.D., my client was charged with possession of a loaded firearm and possessing the firearm contrary to a prohibition order. He was alleged to have thrown a firearm while running from the police when they sought to investigate him for a robbery that had occurred nearby. The police officers testified that he ran in a manner consistent with an individual armed with a firearm (though later admitted during cross examination that he might have been holding his pants up). One officer testified he saw my client throw an item into an area and heard the noise of metal on concrete. In cross examination he admitted to only seeing an outstretched arm and did not see anything in the air. The noise he heard might have been the sound of another officer's baton hitting the ground. The trial judge found that it was improbable that an officer would not see the firearm in the air if it was thrown. She found that while my client probably threw the item, she had a reasonable doubt and therefore acquitted him of all charges.

In R. v. K.O., my client was charged with trafficking in crack cocaine as well as possession of proceeds of crime. He was alleged to have sold $40 worth of crack cocaine to an undercover officer after the officer was led to him by 2 co-accused. K.O. was discharged at the preliminary inquiry after argument was made that the Crown failed to call the proper evidence to prove my client was in fact the individual who sold crack to the undercover officer. He did not have the marked police buy money on him a mere minutes after the alleged drug transaction took place.

In R. v. T.O., my client, who was a young person, was charged with robbery with a firearm x3 and possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. He was charged with robbing 3 individuals of a pound of marijuana while armed with a firearm. The entire robbery was caught on videotape but the identity of the robber was not clear on any of the cameras to anyone except a guard who patrolled the building where my client lived. Through cross-examination, it was determined that his credibility and ability to identify my client were flawed. Upon arrest of my client, crack cocaine was found on a shelf beside my client's still valid driver's license. The crack cocaine was on top of a shelf, near the ceiling. The trial judge found that even if he were to believe the license was beside the crack cocaine, he still could not find that my client was in possesion of the crack cocaine.  My client was acquitted of all charges.

In R. v. P.P., my client was charged with failing to comply with her bail condition in a case where she is alleged to have stabbed a man with a samurai sword. While at court for her preliminary hearing, the complainant told police that she threatened him. She was subsequently arrested. At trial, after a vigorous cross examination of the complainant, and though my client did not testify, the Judge stated that he could not find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a million years. The Judge stated that I "sliced and diced" the complainant resulting in a total lack of credibility. She was found Not Guilty.

In R. v. P.F. my client was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of marijuana. A video showed the client exiting an elevator and being swarmed by three police officers. At the preliminary hearing, during cross examination by me, one Toronto police officer testified he felt it would be negligent not to search this individual despite the individual doing nothing wrong or suspicious. The charges were eventually withdrawn by the Federal prosecutor in the Superior Court for obvious breaches of my client’s Charter rights.

 

In R. v. K.C. my client was charged with trafficking cocaine to an undercover officer. His charges were dismissed after I successfully argued against a Crown motion to introduce certain evidence against my client at the preliminary hearing. 

 

In R. v. C.W., my client was charged with firearm related offences including possession of a loaded firearm and being in a motor vehicle knowing a firearm was in the vehicle. After spending 7 months in jail awaiting his preliminary hearing, my client stepped out of the prisoner's box a free man after all charges were dismissed on the second day of the preliminary inquiry.

In R. v. W.M., my client was charged with possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. A police officer testified he specifically saw my client place the crack cocaine under a chair he was sitting on. Through careful cross-examination of this officer and other officers on the scene, it was established that this officer must have been lying. My client was found not guilty by a jury.

In R. v. I.A., my client was charged with possession of a loaded firearm. He was detained after a foot pursuit in which a police officer witnessed my client throw an object over a fence. After detaining my client, the officer searched the area and found a firearm. There were a few other individuals running at the same time as my client. One of them was found with cocaine and a firearm and plead guilty. Another was found with cocaine and was found guilty after a trial. My client was found not guilty of possessing the firearm after the trial judge concluded that it was possible that one of the other individuals who were running from the police threw the firearm and that my client may have thrown a different object that was not found by the police.

In R. v. J.W., my client was charged with possession of over 5 ounces of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. The cocaine was found inside the motor vehicle he was driving. I successfully challenged the legality of the motor vehicle being stopped by police. The judge found my client’s Charter rights were violated and excluded all the evidence seized by police. 

In R. v. J.D., my client was charged with possession of a firearm, as well as being an occupant of a motor vehicle knowing there was a firearm inside it. He was found not guilty by a jury.  

In R. v. K.S., my client was charged with possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of property obtained by crime. He was detained by police who alleged they were conducting Trespass to Property Act investigations. After vigorous cross-examination of the police officers, the trial judge disbelieved one of the officers and found that my client’s Charter rights had been breached. The evidence was excluded and the charges were dismissed. 

R. v. O.A. – Client was found Not Guilty by a jury for Trafficking in Cocaine, Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking Cocaine, and Possession of Proceeds of Crime. 

R. v. M.C. – Charged with trafficking in cocaine, the charge was withdrawn after two unsuccessful attempts to prosecute my client. Both jury trials ended with a hung jury.

 

R. v. J. W-A. – Client was found Not Guilty by Vaillancourt, J. of Obstruct Police, Assault Police, and Possession of Property Obtained by Crime after a successful Charter Application. It was alleged that the client’s Charter rights were violated when he was detained and investigated by members of the T.A.V.I.S. police squad.

 

R. v. S.L., A.L., L.W., K.L., R.E., T.O. (youth) – All were charged in the Project Fusion case with counts ranging from participating in a criminal organization to possession of a firearm and possession of large amounts of cocaine. Despite the Crown opposing bail on some, they were all released on bail.

 

R. v. J.N. – Client charged with possession of cocaine and marijuana. The Charges were Stayed after I brought a Charter motion at trial for unreasonable delay in bringing the matter to trial.

 

R. v. C.T. – Charge of possession of cocaine stayed by Justice Sheppard.

 

R.v. R.L. – Client was acquitted by Justice Moore after a trial for Assaulting a Police Officer with the Intent to Resist Arrest.

 

R. v. S.H. – Charged with a Domestic Assault and Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle, the client was acquitted before Justice Merenda.

 

R. v. A.G. – Client was acquitted of Assaulting a Police Officer with the Intent to Resist Arrest, and Escape Lawful Custody.

 

R. v. S.F. – Client was found not guilty by Justice Ray for Assault with a Weapon, threatening Death, and Possessing a Weapon for a Purpose Dangerous to the Public.

 

R. v. J.F. – Client acquitted of Assault by Justice Kerr.

 

In R. v. T.H., my client was found in possession of over 11 grams of crack cocaine. Though he was found guilty after trial, he was only found guilty of simple possession despite the large amount of drugs found in his pockets along with over $1,100 in cash. As a result, the sentence he received was much lighter than it would have been had he been found guilty of possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.

 

R. v. S.D. – Charged with multiple counts of conspiracy to commit indictable offences and multiple fraud over $5000, ALL her charges were withdrawn prior to a preliminary hearing. She was charged along with many others with organizing and participating in a mail fraud organization.

 

R. v. J.S-V. – Charged with careless storage of ammunition, possession of cocaine and other drugs. All charges were withdrawn after discussing with the Crown the reasonable prospect of conviction.

 

R. v. T.H. – Charges of trafficking cocaine and possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking were withdrawn by the Crown after a pre-trial was done with me due to no reasonable prospect of conviction due to the police actions violating my client’s Charter rights.

 

R. v. B.C. – His charge of threatening death was withdrawn on the date of trial.

 

R. v. K.A-B – Charges of fraudulent use of a credit card and using a credit card that was not his were withdrawn on the date of trial.

 

R. v. R.D. – Charge of breach probation was withdrawn on the date of trial.

 

R. v. M.T. – Charge of Theft Under $5000 was withdrawn after successfully completing diversion.

 

R. v. T.C. (youth) – Charge of Theft Under $5000 was withdrawn after successful completion of diversion.

 

R. v. M.D. – His charge of Mischief Under was withdrawn on the date of trial. The Crown would not agree to withdraw prior to trial.

 

R. v. K.F. (youth) – Charge of Robbery withdrawn on day of trial.

 

R. v. M.C. – Charged with possession of cocaine and marijuana and assault resist arrest, his charges were withdrawn prior to trial after the client completed steps to divert his charges.

In R. v. S.T, my client was charged with several counts of robbery on different dates. At his preliminary inquiry, several charges were withdrawn by the Crown after lengthy discussions with me. Despite the Crown being intent on proceeding on one count, that count  was withdrawn a few months later in the Superior Court.

R. v. D.A.(youth) – The client was charged with Assault x2, Assault with a Weapon, and Possession of a Weapon. ALL charges were withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. L.B. (youth) – His charge of Fail to Comply with an Undertaking was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. E.G. – His charge of Fail to Comply with a Recognizance was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. M.H. – His charge of Assault was withdrawn on the day of trial

 

R. v. L.B. (youth) – His charge of Robbery was withdrawn on the day of trial after I filed a Charter Application for unreasonable delay in bringing the case to trial.

 

R. v. S.A. – Charge of Uttering a Threat and Fail to Comply was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. S.P. (youth) – Charge of Assault and Fail to Comply was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. B.M. – Charge of Weapons Dangerous was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. V.B. – Charge of Robbery x2 was withdrawn by the Crown

 

R. v. L.D. – Charge of Assault was withdrawn on the day of trial

 

R. v. B.D. – Charge of Assault was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. T.M. – Charge of Possession of Cocaine was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. M.M. – Charges of Criminal Harassment, and Fail to Comply x2 were withdrawn on the day of trial in Superior Court of Justice.

 

R. v. R. O-M. – Charge of Fail to Appear was withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. K.S. – Charges of Possession of Property Obtained by Crime with a value Over $5000 and Theft Over $5000 were withdrawn on the day of trial.

 

R. v. T.O. (youth) – Charge of Uttering a Threat to Cause Bodily Harm was withdrawn on the day of trial.