Beating Criminal Charges - Miscellaneous Experiences
R. v A (Newmarket OCJ 2025)
The client was charged with theft from a golf store and causing a disturbance by being intoxicated and verbally aggressive. The client had been drinking and had gone to the store with the expectation that they had a certain item he was interested in in stock. When he arrived at the store he got into a huge argument with staff because they did not have the item he was interested in. He then walked out of the store without paying for other items and was arrested.
I was able to convince the Crown Attorney that this was out-of-character behavior by the client and was able to show that the client had embarked on alcohol counselling on his own following the incident. I was also able to convince them that he should not be charged with impaired driving for having driven to the store while clearly intoxicated. The Crown Attorney ultimately agreed to allow the client to participate in a diversion program and the charges were withdrawn.
R. v R (Brampton OCJ 2026)
The client was charged with mischief for allegedly damaging another tenant’s balcony by pouring a liquid substance that stained the balcony’s platform. The complainant was someone who the building management had previously tried to evict for various actions that were unwanted. I was able to meet with the Crown Attorney and convince them that there was absolutely no evidence to link my client to the offence, other than she lived above the other tenant and had previously herself made complaints against the other tenant. Similarly, I was able to convince the Crown Attorney that there was simply no evidence of a mischief having taken place and that the staining on the platform of the balcony may have been caused by birds or squirrels and/or melting snow. The Crown Attorney withdrew the charge.
R. v R (Simcoe OCJ 2026)
The client was charged with assault with a weapon, following an argument with a vendor. During the argument the complainant is alleged to have made racial remarks regarding the client and her employees. It is then alleged that the client threw an item at the complainant which supposedly struck him in the eye and caused injury. The client denied the allegations but when asked by police for video footage from the surveillance camera at the business, the footage was not available.
I was able to convince the Crown Attorney that in all of the circumstances it was the complainant who was the real problem; he was approximately twice the size of my client who had never been in any trouble before and I was able to convince the Crown Attorney that the complainant had very real credibility issues. The Crown Attorney agreed to withdraw the charge after my client made a charitable donation.
R. v H (Brampton OCJ 2026)
The client was charged with criminal harassment involving a woman whom he had met at his workplace. He was accused of unwanted contact and stalking of the complainant. He had previously been represented by other lawyers who had not provided proper service to him and when I took on the file, it was scheduled for a meeting with a judge, with the client representing himself.
I was able to get the disclosure prior to the meeting with the judge and was then able to point out that the complainant had very real credibility and reliability issues and that some of her complained-of observations were in fact pure coincidence and nothing more. I encouraged the Crown Attorney to reach out to the complainant because I was convinced that she would not want to testify in court and my client was not prepared to admit to the allegations. The Crown Attorney’s position had initially been 60 days in jail but after my meeting with the Crown Attorney and the judge the Crown Attorney ultimately agreed to withdraw the charge with the client signing a peace bond.
R v. S (2024, OCJ Bradford)
Client was charged with causing a disturbance because he had been drunk and was yelling at people passing by and would not stop when confronted by police. It was further complicated by the fact that the client had just previously been charged by the same police force for uttering threats against the police for which he had received a conditional discharge after completing alcohol counselling.
None the less I was still able to convince the Crown Attorney that he should be allowed to do some additional counselling and once completed, the charges were withdrawn.
The charges were withdrawn.
R v. N. (2022, OCJ Sudbury)
The client was charged with criminal harassment in relation to her ex-partner and father of their child. She had sent text messages in regards to their son and he went to the police and claimed criminal harassment because his new girlfriend was extremely jealous of the client.
I was able to not only show to the crown attorney that the charge of criminal harassment was improper but also that the police should be investigating the complainant for making a false statement to police and for tax evasion. Charges were withdrawn against my client and the complainant was ultimately charged by police.
R v. P and R v. L (2022, OCJ Milton)
Both clients were charged with breaking into a golf course pro shop, stealing golf equipment and later putting it up for sale.
Both clients cooperated with the investigation and returned the stolen items and paid restitution for the items that could not be returned. Both clients did volunteer hours and wrote letters of apology and the charges were withdrawn.
R v. S (2022, Bradford OCJ)
Client was charged with public mischief and 3 counts of uttering threats. The client had been intoxicated and called the police to say that his ex-wife had shown up at the house with her new partner and had brandished a knife, which was not true. Police attended and tried to calm the client down but he threatened the police officers.
I had the client attend for counselling including alcohol counselling and ultimately he was allowed to plead guilty to 1 count of uttering threats and the crown attorney agreed to a conditional discharge. He is a truck driver who drives to the United States and could not afford to have a criminal record or would have lost his job. The crown attorney had originally been seeking 3 to 4 months in jail.
R v. P (2022, OCJ Brampton)
Client was charged with mischief to property. He was driving with his daughter and was trying to enter his parking lot when he was partially blocked by anti-abortion protestors. He lost his cool and jumped out of the car, yelled at the protestors and smashed their signs, all of which was captured on video.
I arranged for the client to attend some counselling on how to deal with such issues more appropriately in the future, provided that report to the crown attorney and the charge was withdrawn.
R v. C (2021, OCJ Guelph)
The client was charged with obstructing police during an investigation. The client was pulled over by the police and was quite argumentative about why he had been pulled over and was refusing to provide any documentation to police. He then rolled up his window in the presence of the police officer at which time the police officer smashed the driver’s side window with his baton and reached in and turned off the car ignition.
I convinced the crown attorney that the actions of the police were extreme and unwarranted and the crown attorney agreed to withdraw the criminal charge after the client plead guilty to failing to identify himself under the highway traffic act and received a $200 fine.
R v. S (2019, OCJ Brampton)
Client was charged with criminal harassment and a breach of recognizance and subsequently breach of probation because of ongoing unwanted contact with his ex-wife. Client had found it extremely difficult to accept that his wife and mother of his two children had left him for a much younger man who she met at the gym and he just kept calling her and leaving messages despite repeated warnings and charges.
On the first set of charges he received a suspended sentence and probation following some intensive up-front counselling. Unfortunately he was charged with breaching his probation order just 2 months later but with further counselling and following a judicial pre-trial, everyone was in agreement that the ex-wife was being inconsistent with respect to whether or not she wanted contact, especially in relation to the children and so on the breach of probation the client received 30 days house arrest.
R v. G (2019, OCJ Orangeville)
Client was charged with obstructing a police officer because he had gotten into a car accident and fled the scene and then gave false information to the police. He was young and immature and panicked but once I received the disclosure from the crown attorney, including the accident report, it was clearly possible that the accident was not my client’s fault.
I provided a report to the crown attorney outlining some of the personal issues my client was experiencing at the time and the criminal charges were withdrawn and he was found guilty of failing to report an accident under the Highway Traffic Act.
R v. H (2019, OCJ Brampton)
Client was charged with criminal harassment and later breach of his conditions. The complainant alleged that my client was following her and showing up at her workplace and generally making her feel uncomfortable. Through requests I was able to get further clarification on when my client was supposed to be at certain locations and doing the harassing and was then able to pull video surveillance that was time stamped from my client’s workplace to show that he was at work and could not have been in the locations that this woman was complaining he was at.
Once I showed those to the crown attorney, all charges were withdrawn.
R v. Various (2021 to 2023)
There were 8 clients charged with the offence of mischief to property between 2021 and 2023.
In all 8 situations I was able to convince the crown attorney to withdraw the charges with some clients signing peace bonds and some simply being withdrawn.
2014-2015 Other Criminal Offences **6 Cases**
All 6 cases resulted in no criminal record
R. v. A.R. - Breach of Probation
charged by his ex-girlfriend with contacting her by e-mail when his probation order said that he could not contact her. The e-mails came from an anonymous address. She also had photos of him in his car in what she said was her work location parking lot and she was alleging he had come to her workplace.
I subpoenaed the security videos from the client's condo parking garage to show that on the day in question his car entered the parking garage at 8am and did not leave again until 11pm. In addition to that, the ex-girlfriend was complaining that he had visited her workplace at the end of November and yet the photographs showed that all the leaves were still on the trees.
after seeing the camera footage from the parking garage and listening to my comments about the leaves on the trees, the charge was withdrawn.
R. v. V. N. - 2 provincial offences re: animal cruelty
he was charged with animal cruelty for trying to export birds to Trinidad he was attempting to do this on his own because the last time he took the birds and had them in proper carriers when he arrived in Trinidad they said all the birds had died but he was convinced the authorities had simply stolen the birds.
to convince the Crown that the charges laid did not meet the criteria. There was 1 charge that did apply, which was a regulatory offence and did not involve any admission of potentially causing harm to his birds.
he received a $100 fine. All birds were safe and not in any way injured.
R. v. K.M. - Possession of Stolen Property
Charges withdrawn
R. v. H.U. - Uttering Threats
Plea to uttering threats, absolute discharge
R. v. M.B. – Extortion
Plea to mischief - the Crowns initial position was 6 months in jail because the client had threatened to post nude pictures of a girl on the school website.
I was able to show that he was immature and had limited language skills and was trying to adjust to a new country after his mother died. His father found him a job and he was receiving counselling and so the crown agreed to a conditional discharge with probation 1 year.
No criminal record
R. v. D. B. – Mischief
Stay of proceedings on an incident where the client had claimed he had a gun and was threatening his family members.
The client was under the care of a psychiatrist and the crown agreed to divert the case with conditions that he continue under the doctors care.
2013 and older cases
R. v. H. (2013 Brampton) - Mischief Over $5000
Client was accused of scratching a car on both the driver and passenger side doors. The car belonged to the new girl friend of her ex husband.
To convince the Crown that although my client had motive for scratching the car, no one had actually seen her do so and if I could convince my client to pay for the damages without admitting she had done it, that would be better than prosecuting.
Client agreed and withdrew the charge on condition of my client signing a peace bond to have no contact with the complainant.
R. v. H. (Brampton Court, July 2012)
Client was charged with mischief after he allegedly created a Facebook account that was set up making fun of another student.
To prove this was out of character for my client, by providing reference letters and having my client do community service up front. Client also wrote an essay on the dangers of bullying that was presented to the Crown.
Crown was impressed with his efforts, remorse, and apology and the charge was withdrawn.
R. v. A. (Brampton Court, January 2012)
Client had previously been charged with assault against his now ex-wife. When he reached out to her boss to pass along financial information, she called the police regarding the indirect contact (as it had been conditions of his bail that he would abstain from contacting her). Client was charged with breach of undertaking.
To demonstrate how client's ex-wife had been the one who has contacting him, and had been sending him a series of e-mails, and that she was the one attempting to initiate direct contact and had been sending passive-aggressive and threatening emails.
As a result of information I was able to provide to the Crown, the charge was withdrawn.
*Fill out this form for free,
Immediate, Case Evaluation
(Free case evaluation available for potential clients only)Email: