SAMPLES OF OUR WORK

At Neuberger Rose LLP, we are engaged in challenging and often complex novel applications before the Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice. Depending upon the issues in a case, we may approach a defence by seeking to stay proceedings based on Constitutional violations, deficiencies in search warrants, or attempt to limit the liability of a client.

The following cases are examples of the breadth of experience we have and can bring to any case we are defending.

Application to Declare Law Unconstitutional

Hitzig, Myrden et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen (2003)

Applicants successful in striking down the Medicinal Marijuana Access Regulations in Superior Court as being unconstitutional by not providing a safe, legal supply of marijuana. Judgement varied on appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal (2004). See more information in our In the News section.

Transfer to Youth Court

R. v. N.P. (2003)
Charges of first degree murder, attempted murder x 2, conspiracy to commit murder. Transfer hearing application, for young offender to be tried in youth court. Application successful.

Court of Appeal

R. v. M.C. (2002) O.J. No. 434 (C.A.)
Charges of Sexual Assault. Conviction overturned by Court of Appeal due to error in charge by jury.

R.v. Stalas and Calderon (2004)
Charges of possession and the possession for the purpose of trafficking successfully appealed for violations of the client’s rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, the right to consult with counsel prior to a search, and not to be arbitrarily detained.

This decision has introduced new parameters within which the police must operate, enhancing an individual’s right to privacy.

DNA Profiling Procedures

From DNA Databank to DNA Warrant: The declining weight if a Cold Hit. Article published in Criminal Reports. 47 C.R. (5th) 106 by David Rose & Lisa Goos. Discussion on DNA Profiling Procedures.

Talk about a Match...Ascribing weight to the presentation of a DNA match when extreme probabilities are involved. Article published June 2002 Journal of Canadian Society of Forensic Science by Lisa Goos, Irwin Silverman, David Rose, and Jonathan Newman. Discussion on how prospective jurors understand DNA evidence.

In February 2005, Mr. Rose testified before House of Commons Committee on Justice regarding proposed changes to DNA law. (Read the Session notes and Mr. Rose's evidence now.)

The following is a more general listing of samples of our work:

R v. Sigiannis (2000) O.J. 5412
Client acquitted of Over 80 Charge on Motion to exclude breathalyzer evidence.

R. v. Simon (2000) O.J. No. 2644
Defence application to contest issuance of a DNA Warrant upheld on appeal. Read about this case in our In the News section.

R. v. Larosa (2000) O.J. No. 976
Defence application to review Crown stay of proceedings in cross-border drug case.

R. v. Mianskum (2000) O.J. No. 5420
Defence application for stay due to unfair proceedings.

R. v. Trench (1999) O.J. No. 3798
Defence objection to "expert" qualifications in child abuse case allowed.

R. v. Maley (1999) O.J. No. 5154
Accused acquitted in drinking and driving incident.

CIBC v. Shahidi (1999) O.J. No 187
Defendant found not liable in jury trial regarding allegations of arson insurance fraud.

R. v. Barrett (1995) O.J. 920
Defence application to exclude seized semi-automatic pistol granted.

R. v. Robichaud (1996) O.J. 4815
Prosecution attempt to remove defence counsel in Murder case defeated.

R. v. Owen (1995) O.J. 3751
Defence application to stay stolen property charges forces Crown to withdraw charges.

R. v. Aviles (1997) O.J. No. 4942
Defence application to cross-examine police affiant in wiretap case granted at preliminary hearing.

R. v. Andre (1995) O.J. No. 4249
Defence application to exclude evidence of refusal to supply breath sample allowed in drinking and driving case allowed.

R. v. Adair (1994) O.J. No. 3265
Application to exclude wiretap evidence granted. Police investigators conduct found to be shockingly delinquent.