R. v. Burkhard
Sentencing hearing on charge of second degree murder. Starting point for sentencing of this charge is to determine if the parole ineligibility period should be increased from the minimum period of 10 years.
R. v. Bell
Application to exclude evidence based on racial profiling. Case involved “driving while black” police stop. Racial profiling can be proven where the circumstances relating to the arrest correspond to the phenomenon of racial profiling.
R. v. Vincent
Client charged with second degree murder resolved to manslaughter. This was one of the first cases detailing and exposing the Maplehurst 2023 ICIT incident.
College of Early Childhood Educators v. Jina Kim
Disciplinary hearing. Client was acquitted of all allegations after a hearing which lasted 10 days. Highly contentious hearing involving cross-examination of witnesses and an expert. This is rare case where an ECE was acquitted of all allegations made against them.
R. v. Morrison
Client found not guilty after trial on charges of possession of a firearm. Trial judge found that there were no reasonable grounds for detention and arrest. And that these Charter violations were serious enough to warrant exclusion of evidence.
R. v. Cochrane
Client acquitted after trial on charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking heroin. “Possession” was the main issue at trial. Trial judge found that there were other reasonable inferences of possession.
R. v. Nunes
Client acquitted after trial on charges involving two firearms, fentanyl, and ecstasy. Successful application to challenge the warrant (a.k.a. Garofoli application) finding that the warrant was invalid and excluding all the evidence.
R. v. Chizanga
Client charged with second degree murder. Trial involved several applications including: prior disreputable conduct; mistrial application; proceeding in person or remotely during Covid-19 shutdown; application to re-open evidentiary ruling; application for a directed verdict; and sentencing hearing.
R. v. Nelson
Bail review during Covid-19 pandemic considering factors relating to the heightened health risks at the jails.
R. v. Hemmings
Application to stay the charges for excessive use of force by Durham Regional Police. Police can use force to effect a lawful arrest but not greater force than is objectively necessary in the circumstances.
R. v. Campana
Client found not guilty of attempted murder after trial. The main witness was found to be unsavoury and unreliable. The trial judge agreed that the evidence was highly problematic.
R. v. Pham
Application to strike a guilty plea because it was not informed. For a plea to be informed there must be awareness of the nature of the allegations, the effect of the plea, and the consequences of the plea.
The United States of America v. Nuez
Extradition hearing to the U.S. for fraud related charges. The legal test is whether there is sufficient evidence that would support committal on the Canadian version of the offence.
R. v. Theriault
Application to replace undertaking with a recognizance because the terms of the undertaking were not reasonable and unnecessary. Case involved highly publicized incident. The application was granted.
R. v. Rage
Application for state funding of counsel. There is a probability of imprisonment and the case is sufficiently complex to require counsel.
R. v. Olufeko et. al
Preliminary hearing on charges of importing heroin. There must be sufficient evidence for committal to trial. The legal test for sufficiency is whether there is any evidence upon which a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could return a guilty verdict.
R. v. Dang
One of the major cases relied on at bail hearings across Ontario. Client facing charges of attempted murder was released on bail. The decision stands for the principle that the strength of the release plan is relevant in considering release. Bail is not a stark choice between unconditional release on one hand, and detention on the other.
R. v. Gobire
Charter motion challenging the validity of a search warrant a.k.a. Garofoli Application. Where a warrant relies on a tip from an informant the tip must be compelling, credible , and corroborated.
R. v. Jaffary
Client pleaded guilty to break and enter into a dwelling. Sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence were considered along with rehabilitation and the principle of parity which holds that similar offences with similar circumstances should receive similar sentences.
R. v. Lemoyre
Client was acquitted after trial on a charge of attempted robbery. After a search for evidence of an intent to rob the drug store, the trial judge was left with a reasonable doubt that the acts done by the accused supplied the necessary intent for this inchoate offence.
R. v. Brefo
Client was acquitted after trial on charges of possession of a firearm. The expert at the Centre of Forensic Sciences could not fire the gun without fixing the firing pin and repairing the mainspring located in the handle of the gun. The gun was not sufficiently adaptable to meet the definition of a firearm because the parts were not readily available outside of the Centre’s Reference Collection.
Re W
Hearing before the consent and capacity board to determine capacity to consent to treatment of anti-psychotic drugs and side-effects. The issue was whether the person can appreciate the reasonably foreseeable consequences of a decision to refuse treatment.
R. v. Weavers
Client was charged with Criminal Harassment in case involving witnesses from California over the course of a 5-day trial. The main issue at trial the reasonableness of the complainant’s fear which is an essential element for the offence of Criminal Harassment.