R. v. S.M.
Client was charged with spitting at a correctional officer. This was caught on surveillance allegedly. Client was charged with assault inside the correctional officers wagon of prisoners with another prisoner. There was no surveillance inside the wagon, but there was of the wagon moving up and down as if there was movement inside. The complainant (another prisoner) did not testify at the trial. The correctional officers were cross-examined based on the surveillance. After several days of evidence, client was found not guilty.
R. v. E.E.
Client was charged with child abduction. After cross-examination of the complainant, there were serious doubts raised on the elements of the offence. Crown folded and dropped the charges.
R. v. D.K.
Client was charged with tossing a firearm (possession of firearm related charges) and possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. Based on s. 8 and 9 of the Charter, all charges were dropped.
R. v. T.G.
Client was charged with aggravated assault, attempt murder, and several counts of assault. Surveillance showed T.G. amongst others at a shooting at a bar in Toronto. After a week long trial, Mr. T.G. was acquitted.
R. v. H.B.
Client charged with trafficking cocaine, human trafficking, robbery. Conducted several pre-trial motions. Cross-examined several girls alleged to have been human trafficked. After lengthy trial, client was acquitted of all charges.
R. v. J.D.
Client was charged with several counts of armed bank robberies all over the GTA, Manitoba and B.C. This was a project case involving other co-accused. After several arguments before the Court, all charges were stayed.
R. v. J.R.
Client was charged with an Attempt Murder after a shooting at a bar. There were two other co-accused. We conducted a preliminary inquiry. After cross-examination of the complainant who showed up in crutches, the judge dismissed the case against Mr. J.R. All charges were dropped.
R. v. M.H.
Client was charged with an aggravating armed robbery with several co-accused. Witnesses proved to be incredible. Defence witnesses proved to be credible. The other co-accused were found guilty at trial. M.H. was found not guilty.
R. v. M.B.
Client charged with impaired care and control of a motor vehicle. He was found in the drivers seat with a bottle of liquor and small amounts of cocaine residue. He failed a roadside screening test and was charged. After trial, he was found not guilty after he rebutted the presumption that he was in care and control of the motor vehicle.
R. v. K.M.
Client was alleged to have imported suitcases of cocaine from Jamaica with her friend. Her friend plead guilty and claimed that K.M. made her do it. K.M. gave an inculpatory (incriminating) statement to the police. After arguments that the statement provided to police were coerced, the statement was excluded. The Crown Attorney stayed the charges at the Judge and Jury trial.
R v. B.M.
Client charged with multiple assault police charges, utter threat, assault simpliciter. Client was tasered by police and assaulted by police. It was client’s word against several police officers. After lengthy arguments on Charter breaches for s. 10(b), 8, 9, and s. 7 as well as arguments of police use of Excessive Force, all charges were withdrawn.
R. v. R.A.
Client charged with possession of firearm found in a car. Police stopped him for a traffic violation. They claimed to have smelled burnt marijuana. They proceeded to search client and car and found a firearm in the centre console. After Charter arguments under s. 10(b), 8, and 9, client charges were dismissed.