skip to Main Content

Please Note: Past results not predictive of future results.

CASE STUDY: Roadside Breath Refusal

In the Court’s judgment, the court agreed with Mr. Marchand’s argument that the observations by police did not reach a threshold suspicion to authorize a demand for a breath sample into an Approved Screening Device.

CASE STUDY: Drunk Driving with Drugs

Mr. V was in a restaurant and unhappy with his food order. After some argument with staff, staff called the police against Mr. V. The staff complained to police that Mr. V was impaired and driving.

CASE STUDY: Guns, Drugs, and Bail

Mr. M had no criminal record and a legitimate home business. The goal for bail was to permit Mr. M to continue working without undue hardship. Nonetheless, the combination of drugs and guns charges, together, did require a restrictive bail plan. The bar to release was high.

CASE STUDY: Charges Withdrawn – Over 80

This client's trial dates were cancelled and she was free of the burden of fighting criminal charges far earlier than she thought she’d be.

CASE STUDY: Charges Withdrawn – Domestic Assault

The Crown agreed that it was a small incident and that it would be best to avoid criminal sanctions. Community service was discussed, and in the end, the Crown agreed to a peace bond.

CASE STUDY: Charges Withdrawn for Peace Bond – Uttering Threats

The Crown agreed to a common law peace bond. While it was not Mr. B’s ideal goal, it did result in a withdrawal of the charges in exchange for an agreement to be of good behaviour.

CASE STUDY: Charge Withdrawn – Refusal to Provide a Breath Sample

Mr. M, a US military veteran and long-time law enforcement officer, was crossing the border into Canada to visit a casino in Niagara.

CASE STUDY: Charges Withdrawn – Shoplifting (Theft Under $5,000)

While shopping at a Sephora, Ms. N purchased some product, but concealed others and left the store without paying. She had never done anything criminal before; her record was completely clean.

CASE STUDY: Acquitted – Refusal to Provide Breath Sample

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is very clear in its protection of a person’s right to contact a lawyer upon arrest.

CASE STUDY: Pled Down to Careless Driving from Over 80

The case went to trial, during which the Crown decided to offer a deal: if Mr. Z would plead guilty to careless driving, the charges of Over 80 would be dropped.

CASE STUDY: Charges Dismissed – Impaired Driving and Over 80 [Possession of a Schedule I Substance Dropped Pre-Trial]

Mr. S was free, unhindered by a criminal record, and the state was once again shown that rights cannot be violated based on assumption and suspicion alone.

CASE STUDY: Charge Withdrawn – Impaired Operation of a Conveyance

While the two approached their vehicle the plan was not to drive, but to retrieve Stag tickets to sell to their friends, and then to wait for a friend to pick them up. In fact, Mr. R still had an active tab in the bar at the time and had planned to return to the bar before leaving to pay it, and could not leave until he did so. Unaware of this, security called the police.

CASE STUDY: Charges Dismissed – Indecent Assault on a Male and Administering Noxious Thing

The story the complainant gave was filled with contradictions; both internal contradictions, and contradictions with the stories of the rest of the family. That said, the majority of the defence relied upon the uncorroborated evidence of the accused and other members of the family, making the case more complex.

CASE STUDY: Acquittal – Refusing to Provide a Breath Sample in Oshawa

His Honour agreed that, following the precedent of R. v. White [1992] and R. v. Roberts [2018] the statement given by Mr. S. implicating himself as the driver would be excluded as evidence.

CASE STUDY: Acquittal – Failure to Provide a Breath Sample into an Approved Screening Device in Oshawa

Mr. K was acquitted on the grounds that the Crown failed to prove that Mr. K.’s refusal to provide a breath sample was intentional and not a misunderstanding.

CASE STUDY: Over 80 Acquittal in North Bay

During the cross examination we focused on the violation of s.10(b), and revealed that there were actually major gaps in the officers recollection of the events at the station.

CASE STUDY: Dismissal of Charges – BAC Over 80, Impaired Driving & Possession of Open Alcohol While Driving in Brantford

The judge noted that while both the Crown and defence had presented a substantial amount of evidence he was concerned with the lack of certainty the Breath Tech had in the accuracy of the Intoxilyzer 8000c reading at the time.

CASE STUDY: Acquittal – Over 80 mg, Failing to Have Insurance Card, & Passing by Driving off Roadway

We were successful in our arguments that there had been infringements of Mr. B's s. 8 and s. 9 Charter rights by the police, and further, that these breaches of Mr. B’s Charter rights were serious enough to justify the exclusion of the breath machine readings.

CASE STUDY: Acquittal – Care or Control of Motor Vehicle with More than 80mg of Alcohol in 100ml of Blood

It was a slow night for Barrie police and Constable W. was doing what he sometimes did in those circumstances. He was parked outside a local night spot in the hope of catching impaired drivers as they were leaving. On that late September night he spotted a black Mercedes exiting the parking lot adjacent to the bar. He decided to follow. He followed the Mercedes onto the highway where he reported observing it twice touch the white shoulder line.

CASE STUDY: Acquittal – Refuse or Fail to Provide Breath Sample

The officer made the demand that Mr. H provide a breath sample into the roadside breath alcohol screening device. Mr. H felt that he was being treated like a criminal. He asked if a friend could witness him blowing into the device, but the officer replied that they did not need an audience. He was also, at that time, not permitted to call a lawyer.


We're here for all criminal offences including sexual offences, driving offences, violent offences, white collar crime and drug offences.