Toronto Criminal Lawyers - Neuberger Rose LLP, Toronto, Ontario

RECENT SUCCESSES

At Neuberger Rose LLP we are very proud of our success rate. As our recent successes are quite numerous, we have divided them amongst the following sections on this page:

Sexual Assault, Domestic Assault and Violent Crimes - such as assault, aggravated assault, assault with a weapon, homicide, manslaughter and criminal negligence.

Impaired Driving and Over 80, Dangerous Driving and other Driving-related Offences

Drug Offences – such as production and trafficking charges, importation and conspiracy to import or traffic and possession.

Property Crimes - including theft and property damage (mischief)

White Collar Crimes - including fraud, tax evasion and false declarations.

Extradition to Foreign Countries and Transfer of Prisoners from Foreign Countries to Canada

Constitutional Applications to Strike Down Legislation

Search Warrants

Sexual Assault, Domestic Assault and Violent Crime

Regina v. Williams (2008)
Client found not guilty of possession of a loaded handgun and carry concealed weapon after a two week jury trial in the Ontario Superior Court. Defence lawyer Leora Shemesh advanced a duress argument, such that the client held the weapon under threat of death. After careful and detailed cross-examination of crown witnesses, which supported the behaviour of the client at the time of investigation and arrest consistent with someone who might have been frightened by a threat of harm, and a strong jury closing, the client was found not guilty of both charges.

Regina v. Graham (2008)
Charges of domestic assault and fail to comply withdraw at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger argued successfully a Charter violation of the client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time. Aggressive pursuit of full disclosure and setting a trial date established that the defence was seeking the earliest possible trial date. The delay of 11.5 months, and consequently the charges were withdrawn

Regina v. D.J (2008)
Client acquitted of Kidnapping, Forcible Confinement, Aggravated Assault and Conspiracy to Committ Assault in the Ontario Court of Justice pursuant to skillful cross-examination of witnesses and legal argument which revealed that Crown case did not meet required standard for conviction.

Regina v. Thomas (2008)
Client acquitted of domestic assault at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice following cross-examination by Leora Shemesh of the complaint demonstrating numerous instances of inconsistencies in the complainant’s version of the allegations and a complete lack of evidence of an assault.

Regina v. M.S. (2008)
Client found not guilty of domestic assault after three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Detailed and thorough cross-examination of the complainant by defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger focused on instances of past aggressive behaviour by the complainant including previously biting the client and implausible and exaggerated aspects of her evidence.

Regina v. Meek (2008)
Charges of domestic assault x 3 and fail to appear withdrawn prior to trial after defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger established lack of credibility of the complainant's allegations.

Regina v. S.M. (2008)
Charges of Robbery x 2 and Assault x 2 withdrawn prior to trial after Joseph Neuberger negotiated withdrawal of all charges based on inconsistencies in the evidence of Crown witnesses.

Regina v. De Karic (2008)
Client found not guilty of charges of domestic assault and assault bodily harm in the Ontario Court of Justice after aggressive defence by Joseph Neuberger including careful attention to the set date phase of the proceedings and the lack of evidence to substantiate the charge.

Regina v. Goel (2008)
Charge of sexual assault allleged to have occured on a flight to Toronto, withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice on the eve of trial due to Joseph Neuberger’s defence investigation disclosing credible witnesses attacking the evidence of the complainant.

Regina v. Szymanski (2007)
Charges of Sexual Assault and Assault discharged at the Preliminary hearing in the Ontario Court of Justice after extensive and detailed cross-examination of the Crown witnesses including undermining the credibility of the complainant, and establishing that the complainant had motive to fabricate.

Regina v. C.S. (2007)
Charge of Assault withdrawn prior to trial after Joseph Neuberger established that accused was assaulted first and sustained injury caused by the complainant.

Regina v. K.R. (2007)
Charges of Assault with Weapon and Assault withdrawn prior to trial, based upon defence establishing credibility problems with the Crown’s case.

Regina v. Kovachev (2007)
The client was charged with 4 counts of sexual assault and sexual interference. Four day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice before Justice Campling. Client was acquitted of all charges.

Regina v. Johnston (2007)
Charges of dometic assault, threaten death and careless storage of amunition withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice after defence investigation into complainant's attempts to extort a financial settlement in the Family law proceedings. Defence counsel Joseph Neuberger retained the services of a private investigator and obtained statements and a recording of voice message left that seriously undermined the credibility of the complainant. As a result, the domestic assault and threatening allegations were withdrawn prior to trial.

Regina v. A.S. (2007)
Client found not guilty of sexual assault, sexual interference after a three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Detailed and vigorous cross-examination of the complainant undermined the reliability of the evidence of the complainant. The trial judge accepted defence counsel Joseph Neuberger's submissions on the lack of plausibility of the various allegations. Accordingly, the client was acquitted of all charges.

Regina v. Hassen (2007)
Client found not guilty of sexual assault by a jury after counsel's thorough cross-examination of complainant revealed contradicitions and inconsistencies in the Crown's evidence.

Regina v. P.M. (2007)
After trial, client found not guilty of domestic assault charges arising from York Regional Police investigation in Newmarket.

Regina v. W.W. (2007)
Client found not guilty of sexaul assault x 2, sexual interference x 2, arising from historical sexual assault allegations in the Superior Court of Justice after a three day trial. At the preliminary hearing, detailed and comprehensive cross-examination produced transcripts of evidence that provided fruitful support for the defence theory at trial. During the Superior Court trial, defence counsel Joseph Neuberger relentlessly cross-examined both complainants on all apsects of their evidence including inconsistencies generated by the transcripts from the prelimary hearing and video taped statements. Through cross-examination the defence theory was put to each witness. At the end of the cross-examination of both complainants, the Crown conceded that there was no longer any reasonable prospect of conviction and directed the court to dismiss all four charges.

Regina v. D.V. (2007)
Charges of Sexual Assault and Gang Sexual Assault stayed at the preliminary hearing in the Ontario Court of Justice. Relentless defence requests by Joseph Neuberger for detailed disclosure, and comprehensive examination of the Crown evidence resulted in the Crown being delayed in providing the case to the defence. By the time of the preliminary hearing, with the significant delay, inconsistencies in the Crown's evidence and the use of forensic evidence supporting the client's denial of the allegations resulted in the charges being stayed.

Regina v. R.M. (2007)
Client found not guilty of Sexual Assault and Forcible Confinement after three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Cross- examination of the complainant developed the defence theory that all actions alleged were consensual. Further, cross-examination established numerous inconsistencies in the evidence of the complainant as compared to her DVD statement. Consequently, the Justice found the client not guilty of both charges.

Regina v. J.T. (2007)
Charge of sexual assault withdrawn after successful mistrial application sought by Joseph Neuberger in the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. Sibte (2007)
Client acquitted of sexual assault charge after two day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Detailed cross examination by Joseph Neuberger undermined the reliability of the complainant's allegations resulting in a finding of not guilty.

Regina v. I.D. (2007)
Charges of utter deat threats x 2, and assault (Domestic) withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice as a result of defence analysis of the statements of witnesses and the complainants establishing that the allegations could not have occurred. Thus, all charges were withdrawn.

Regina v. M(L) (2006)
Charges of Robbery withdrawn by Crown Attorney after counsel successfully argues that there is no reasonable prospect of conviction due to identity issues.

Regina v. Young (2006)
Client acquitted of criminal harassment after thorough cross-examination of Complainant. Judge agrees pursuant to counsel's submissions that offence of criminal harassment not made out.

Regina v. Ahmad (2006)
Five charges of sexual assault dismissed after defence cross-examination of the Complainant pinpointing numerous inconsistencies in the evidence.

Regina v. Tuitt (2006)
Charges of Threatening and Fail to Comply with Recognizance withdrawn by Crown Attorney after Defence points out difficulties with the anticipated evidence and problems with the charging documents.

Regina v. D.S. (2006)
Client found not guilty of sexual assault and assault after 3-day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, after detailed and vigorous cross-examination of all Crown witnesses, including the complainant and her witnesses. Extensive preparation of the client also assisted in the client being believed by the Judge and based upon the credibility issues of the complainant and her witnesses, the charges were dismissed.

Regina v. Simpson (2006)
Charges of Assault x 4 (Domestic), Threaten Death and Fail to Comply all withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice as a result of defence investigation disclosing numerous inconsistencies in complainant's evidence and fabrication of other allegations.

Regina v. Zamkovoj (2006)
Two counts of assault, one count of threatening death and one count of breached probation withdrawn after Complainant does not attend court and Crown asks for adjournment to secure her attendance. Counsel presented recanting statement taken from Complainant by private investigator, forming basis for Judge not granting adjournment and reason why charges ultimately withdrawn.

Regina v. Abrego (2006)
Client found not guilty of sexual assault after five day jury trial in the Superior Court of Justice. Pre-trial applications through a violation of the client's right to a lawyer resulted in the confession being excluded. Detailed and effective cross-examination of the complainant with a powerful closing address to the jury resulted in verdict of not guilty.

Regina v. J.Y. (2006)
Two charges of assault, one charge of forcible confinement and one charge of sexual assault withdrawn in Superior Court, subsequent to Crown assessing evidence of the complainant at the preliminary hearing. Detailed and comprehensive cross-examination of the complainant at the preliminary hearing established numerous inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, established extensive areas of misrepresentations made by the complainant and uncovered severe defects in the reliability and credibility of the complainant. As a result, all charges were stayed.

Regina v. R.G. (2006)
Client discharged at preliminary hearing of charge of sexual assault in the Ontario Court of Justice. Detailed and vigorous cross-examination elicited no credible evidence of an offence resulting in the client being discharged of the offence.

Regina v. Fox (2006)
Client acquitted of assault (domestic) after two day trial before the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. Simpson (2006)
Charges of assault (domestic) and mischief withdrawn at trial after detailed discussions with Crown counsel about the veracity of the complainant's evidence and the legal basis of the charges.

Regina v. C.M. (2006)
Charge of sexual assault withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice after defence cross examination of complainant and crown witness, establishing that the allegations were false.

Regina v. Van Cao (2006)
Client acquitted of sexual assault, forcible confinement and choaking after three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Extensive and detailed cross-examination of the complainant raised serious inconsistencies in the evidence of the main Crown witness. Comprehensive preparation of the client assisted the client in his testimony and ultimately in convincing the Judge that the allegations could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Regina v. B.K. (2006)
Client acquitted after three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of charges of sexual assault, sexual interfernce x 5, and assault. Detailed and probing cross-examination of the three Crown witnesses resulted in numerous contradictions in the evidence. Consequently, the client was found not guilty on all counts.

Regina v. J.S.C. (2006)
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn after presentation to Crown of defence evidence undermining the evidence of the complainant.

Regina v. Navarro Leon (2006)
Client found not guilty after trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of Assault (Domestic), Weapons Dangerous and Threaten Death.

Regina v. Tuitt (2006)
Client acquitted after one day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of Assault and Threaten Death (Domestic) charges. Not Guilty on all Counts.

Regina v. Booth (2005)
Charges of historical Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, and Rape withdrawn in the Superior Court of Justice following a preliminary inquiry where the complianant's evidence was severely undermined in cross-examination.

Regina v. Zavzel (2005)
Charge of Assault causing bodily harm withdrawn at trial after defence challenge on issue of medical records reflecting injuries of the complainant and defence witnesses establishing self-defence.

Regina v. Williams (2005)
Client acquitted after jury trial on charges of sexual assault (gang-related), forcible confinement, assault, and sexual interference. Seven-day jury trial with extensive and detailed cross-examination of the complainant, Crown witnesses (including biologists from the Centre for Forensic Sciences), and the medical staff who conducted the examination of the complainant after the allegations. Serious inconsistencies were raised with respect to the complainant's evidence resulted in acquittal on all charges.

Regina v. Batistakis (2005)
Client acquitted after trial of assault police officer. Thorough examination of police witnesses combined with well-prepared defence witnesses resulted in a finding of not guilty.

Regina v. MM (2005)
Charges of 3 counts sexual assault and 3 counts sexual interference. Acquitted on all charges after a 5 day judge-only trial. Vigorous and detailed cross-examination elicited numerous inconsistencies in the evidence, resulting in a not guilty verdict.

Regina v. Sheikh (2005)
Client acquitted after trial on sexual assault charge. Detailed and vigorous cross-examination of the complainant resulted in numerous inconsistencies in her evidence, yielding a verdict of not guilty.

Regina v. Whitlock (2005)
Client discharged on charge of sexual assault after successful Application to Superior Court Judge to quash committal. Preliminary Inquiry gave rise to no evidence of a sexual assault, however client was committed to trial. This was appealed to the Superior Court of Justice, alleging an error of law by the Preliminary Inquiry Judge. Application successful; client discharged of the offence.

Regina v. Shaikh (2005)
Two counts of domestic assault withdrawn at trial, arising from defence evidence establishing no reasonable prospect of conviction.

Regina v. Rosa (2005)
Client acquitted after trial of three charges of domestic assault and one charge of threatening, as a result of detailed and vigorous cross-examination of complainant.

Regina v. Robinson (2005)
Client acquitted after trial of charge of assault, assault and threaten death. Crown not permitted to enter into evidence the 911 call, for the truth of its contents. Complainant's evidence found unreliable after cross-examinations.

Regina v. Daryanani & Barin (2005)
Charges of possession of prohibited weapon x 1715 and traffic prohibited weapons. All withdrawn at preliminary inquiry after successful Charter challenge to the Constitutional validity of the search warrant, as well as the credibility of one of the main crown witnesses. As a result the Crown had no reasonable prospect of conviction and withdrew all charges against both clients.

Regina v. H.N. (2005)
Charges of sexual assault and Internet luring withdrawn in Superior Court, prior to commencement of jury trial, as a result of cross-examination by the defence of the complainant at the preliminary hearing. The complainant's credibility was severely damaged during cross-examination, and as a result the Crown determined there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.

Regina v. Mander. (2005)
Charges of public mischief, obstruct peace officer, and weapons dangerous withdrawn at trial after Crown unsuccessful in seeking to admit videotaped statement of critical Crown witness.

Regina v. Bulmer. (2004)
Charges of sexual assault, gross indecency, and indecent assault. Acquitted after jury trial.

Regina v. Samuels. (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of sexual assault and assault.

Regina v. Thorpe (2004)
Acquitted after trial of charge of assault bodily harm.

Regina v. A.K. (2004)
Charges of sexual assault, sexual interference. Withdrawn in Superior Court just prior to commencement of a jury trial. Crown assessed reasonable prospect of conviction after the preliminary inquiry and detailed defence cross-examination of the complainant, together with defence investigation, yielded evidence establishing that the complainant was not truthful. As a result, Crown had determined there was no reasonable prospect of conviction and charges were withdrawn.

Regina v. Bowen (2004)
Charges of assault with weapon and assault. Withdrawn at trial after defence attack on complainant.

Regina v. J.S. (2004)
Charges of sexual assault, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching. Withdrawn in Superior Court after Crown review of cross-examination of complainant at preliminary inquiry. As a result of inconsistencies and an attack on the credibility of the witnesses the Crown conceded no reasonable prospect for conviction.

Regina v. Cooper (2004)
Client discharged of charge of attempted murder at end of preliminary inquiry.

Regina v. J.B.M. (2004)
Acquitted after 3-day trial before judge alone, in the Ontario Court of Justice, on the charge of assault causing bodily harm. Crown called 7 witnesses, all of which were discredited on cross-examination, giving rise to the acquittal.

Regina v. Abouchaka, Naghiyev, Ahamadov (2004)
Charges of assault and forcible entry. Withdrawn at trial.

Regina v. Randhawa (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of pointing a firearm, weapons dangerous, criminal harassment, threaten death, and assault with a weapon.

Regina v. Chilova (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of assault.

Regina v. S.M. (2003)
Charges of criminal harassment, utter threats, and failure to comply x2. Charges withdrawn.

Regina v. A.L. (2003)
Charges of aggravated assault and assault with a weapon. Discharged at preliminary inquiry.

Regina v. Sousa (2003)
Charges of assault with a weapon and weapons dangerous. Acquitted after trial.

Regina v. J.B. (2003)
Charges of Assault Peace Officer and Drunkeness in Public Place under Liquor Licence Act stayed during course of trial after cross-examination of London Police Officer on allegations of arbitrary detention, and breach of rights to counsel.

Regina v. H.S. (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charges of sexual assault.

Regina v. V.L. (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charges of domestic assault x 2.

Regina v. Goncalves (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charge of assault causing bodily harm.

Regina v. Comrie (2003)
Charges of assault police officer and obstruct justice. Charges stayed after successful Charter challenge to the actions and authority of the police officers investigating the case.

Regina v. A.N. (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charge of carrying concealed weapon.

Regina v. H.D. (2003)
Found not guilty after trial on charges of assault with a weapon and weapons dangerous.

Regina v. Micaleff (2003)
Acquitted at trial on charges of sexual assault and indecent act.

Regina v. E.O. (2003)
Found not guilty after trial on charges of assault with weapon, weapons dangerous, and assault.

Regina v. Stuckless (2003)
Charges of assault, assault bodily harm withdrawn.

Regina v. T.N.P. (2003)
Charges of 1st degree murder and attempted murder x 2. Not guilty.

Regina v. Meek (2003)
Client found not guilty after trial on charges of assault bodily harm and assault.

Regina v. M(R.)(2003)
Client found not guilty after trial on charges of Assault, Threaten Death.

Regina v. N.P. (2003)
Charged with first degree murder, attempted murder x 2, conspiracy to commit murder. Defense application to have accused tried as young offender successful.

Regina v. Giwa (2003)
Charges of assault, assault with a weapon. Not guilty.

Regina v. Wiafe (2003)
Charges of sexual assault, assault causing bodily harm. Not guilty after trial.

Regina v. C.E. (2002)
Charges of sexual assault and criminal harassment withdrawn after defense investigation reveals false allegations.

Regina v. Sheikh (2002)
Charges of sexual assault withdrawn after attack on crown evidence.

Regina v. Hunte (2002)
Charges of Aggravated Assault, client found not guilty.

Regina v. Elford (2002)
Charges of robbery, possession under x2 - discharged at trial at preliminary hearing.

Regina v. Sousa (2002)
Charges of Assault causing Bodily harm, not guilty.

Regina v. Ranger (2002)
Charges of robbery, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Fisher (2002)
Charges of Assault, Assault with Weapon, Dangerous Driving, Assault, Breach of Probation of an Undertaking - charges withdrawn after successful argument.

Regina v. Fatala (2002)
Charges of Criminal Harassment and threatening, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Skulte (2002)
Charges of Harassment, Assault, Sexual Assault Causing Bodily Harm, client acquitted by jury at trial.

Regina v. Freitas (2002)
Charges of Threatening, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Ternowetsky (2002)
Charges of Robbery, Assault with Weapon, Mischief, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Martin (2002)
Charges Of Carry Concealed weapon, possession of a controlled substance, dismissed, acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Campbell (2002)
Charges Of assault Charges withdrawn.

Regina v. R.D. (2002)
Charges of theft under, assault, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Netoff (2002)
Charges of uttering threats, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Cohen (2002)
Charges of assautt x2, take auto without consent charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Edwards (2002)
Charges of attempt murder x2, client acquitted as charged.

Regina v. Rice (2002)
Charges of assault charged dismissed, August 8, 2002.

Regina v. All (2002)
Charges of uttering threats, assault, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Seth (2001) O.J. No. 2322
Manslaughter conviction overturned on Appeal.

Regina v. L.Z. (2001) O.J. No. 1882
Murder conviction overturned on Appeal. Crown abuse of process cited as major factor.

Regina v. Keyes (2001)
Client acquitted at trial of charges of Robbery, Forcible Confinement.

Regina v. Dhillon (2001)
Client acquitted of assault with weapon, assault causing bodily harm, and extortion charges.

Regina v. Leggatt (2001)
Client acquitted of assault with weapon, and threaten death.

Regina v. Hoch (2001)
Client acquitted of threatening death and failing to comply charges.

Regina v. Simon (2001)
Client acquitted by Jury of charges of Aggravated Assault and Assault with Weapon.

Regina v. DeSilva (2001)
Client acquitted of Assault charge after trial.

Regina v. Higgins (2001)
Charges of Assault x2, Assault With Weapon, theft Under - charges withdrawn.

Regina v. M.H. (2001)
Charges of theft under, assault - withdrawn.

Regina v. Ferreirra (2001)
Charges of uttering threats x2, criminal harassment x2 - withdrawn.

Regina v. Obeng (2001)
Charges of fail to comply with bail, uttering threats x2, attempt obstruct justice, sexual assault - charged dismissed.

R. v. Gary W. (2000)
Client acquitted of charge of sexual assault.

Regina v. Amos Trench (2000)
Client acquitted of sexual assault.

Regina v. Grenier (2000)
Client acquitted of Robbery charges.

Impaired Driving and Over 80, Dangerous Driving and other Driving-related Offences

Regina v. Zavzel (2008)
Client found not guilty of Over 80 after two day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger advanced an “evidence to the contrary” defence based upon the evidence of the client and an independent witness. Thorough preparation of the client and his witness resulted in the court accepting both witnesses as credible and trustworthy. The evidence of the defence expert toxicologist was accepted. As such, the charge was dismissed.

Regina v. F.C. (2008)
Charges of Dangerous Driving and Racing withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice after detailed attack on the Crown theory.

Regina v. Olenykov (2008)
Charges of Impaired Driving, Over 80, and G2 Licence infraction withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence Charter Application to exclude evidence conceded by the Crown resulting in the withdrawal of all charges.

Regina v. Turek (2007)
Client acquitted at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of charge of Over 80 after trial based upon finding of credible “evidence to the contrary” rebutting the readings of the intoxilyzer breath machine.

Regina v. Pabla (2007)
Client found not guilty of impaired driving and Over 80 in the Ontario Court of Justice. Skillful cross-examination of the officers elicited inconsistencies in their observations of the driving of the accused. Further, evidence disclosed bolus drinking which could not be disproved by the Crown. As a result the client was acquitted of both charges.

Regina v. Moore (2007)
Charge of Over 80 stayed as Application in the Ontario Court of Justice to stay the charge due to unreasonable delay of 13.5 months successful.

Regina v. Traicheff (2007)
Client acquitted of charge of Over 80 in the Ontario Court of Justice following successful Application to exclude the intoxilyzer readings due to violation of client's right to counsel of choice.

Regina v. Anderson (2007)
Client acquitted of charge of Over 80 after trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence "evidence to the contrary" was accepted by the trial judge as both credible and reliable thus raising a reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of the readings of 178 and 181.

Regina v. K.(B.) (2007)
Charge of Fail to Comply dismissed by trial judge after counsel's successful cross-examination of arresting officer showing that the elements of offence were not made out.

Regina v. G.(M.) (2007)
Charge of "Over 80" dismissed at request of Crown Attorney after counsel's successful cross-examination of police officer regarding time of Accused's driving. Crown agreeing pursuant to cross-examination that essential elements of the offence not established.

Regina v. J.C. (2007)
Client acquitted of Impaired Driving and Over 80 charges after trial. Client charged with Impaired Driving and Drive Over 80. After cross-examination fo the arresting officer during a trial before Mr. Justice Getliffe, client was acquitted of the Impaired Driving Charges. Client was also acquitted of the Over 80 charge after a successful Charter Application to exclude the breath readings. The Ontario Provincial Police made insufficient efforts to put the accused in touch with the lawyer he asked for, and when he was later put in touch with Duty Counsel, there was insufficient privacy during the conversation. As a result there were two breaches of the accused's rights to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter.

Regina v. M.F.(2007)
charges of impaired operation and over 80 stayed in the Ontario Court of Justice upon a finding by the trial judge that the Applicant's rights as guaranteed by s. 11(b) of the Charter were violated, because of an unreasonable delay in bringing the case to trial.

Regina v. Jurado (2007)
client found not guilty at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of charge of Refuse breath sample, after detailed cross-examination of the arresting officer about the client's ability to understand and comprehend the demand.

Regina v. Nadarajah (2007)
client found not guilty at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice on charges of impaired driving, and Over 80 (readings of 280 and 320) after succesful cross-examination of the arresting officer and the independent witness. Charter Application successful in excluding on scene statements of the client.

Regina v. G(P) (2007)
Charge over "Over 80" dismissed pursuant to counsel successfully arguing that client's section 10(b) rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated as he was not afforded his rights to counsel.

Regina v. Ali (2007)
charges of Over 80 and impaired driving withdrawn after successful arguement that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction as there was no evidence of time of driving.

Regina v. S.C. (2007)
client acquitted in the Ontario Court of Justice of a charge of Over 80 after Charter Application alleging s.10(b) rights to counsel violation was successful and the readings were excluded.

Regina v. Kaufman (2006)
charges of Over 80 and Impaired Driving withdrawn just prior to trial as a result of Charter challenge to the detention and search of the client giving rise to the breath readings.

Regina v. Lyn (2006)
charge of Over 80 withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice after Crown accepts "evidence to the contrary" as a viable defence and thereby reduced the Crown's prospect of conviction. The Crown conceded the issue and the charge was withdrawn.

Regina v. M.S. (2006)
client acquitted at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of a charge of Over 80. Cross examination of police officers established that the client appeared, at the time of the investigation, in a sober condition setting the foundation for the "evidence to the contrary" defence. Testimony of the client, the independent witness and the defence expert was accepted resulting in a finding of not guilty.

Regina v. Braimoh (2006)
charge of Refuse Roadside Breath Test withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. Buxton (2006)
client acquitted at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of the charge of care and control while over 80, after the trial judge accepted the defence "evidence to the contrary".

Regina v. Trieu Nguyen (2006)
client acquitted after trial before the Ontario Court of Justice. Client was pulled over by police for travelling 40 km per hour as stated by police to have been at a rate of speed that was dangerously below the speed limit, thus justifying the police stopping the client and then administering the tests. Defence Application under s. 9 and 8 of the Charter for a violation of the client's right to be free from arbitrary detention and search was successful and the readings were excluded. Client was found not guilty of the offence.

Regina v. Pena (2006)
Client found not guilty of the charge of Over 80 after trial before the Ontario Court of Justice. The officer who conducted the intoxilyzer breath test testifed as to observations of the client's impairment that were not included in his Alcohol Influence Report/notes. Detailed and vigorous cross-examination on this point resulted in the Trial Judge rejecting the evidence of the Breath Technician. In addition evidence provided by the defendant and his independent witness was accepted by the Court giving rise to "evidence to the contrary". Accordingly, the client was found not guilty of the charge.

Regina v. Farwell (2006)
Charge of Refuse Breath Sample Approved Screening Device, s. 254(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada, withdrawn at the pre-trial stage after discussions with Crown Attorney about the frailties of the police evidence and the police refusing to allow the client to contact duty counsel on his personal cell phone.

Regina v. Squire (2006)
Client acquitted after two day trial of Refuse Breath Sample in the Ontario Court of Justice. Client was believed based upon the "last chance" doctrine.

Regina v. Cheung (2005)
Client acquitted after three day trial on a charge of Dangerous Driving causing bodily harm. Extensive cross-examination of Crown witnesses, including the accident reconstructionist, and careful defence use of our own accident specialist and detailed legal analysis resulted in the client being found not guilty of the allegation.

Regina v. Phillips (2005)
Charge of impaired driving withdrawn after Charter Application granted excluding statements of the accused together with evidence of sobriety observations made by the arresting officer.

Regina v. Ceballos (2005)
Acquitted after trial on charges of over 80 and possession of credit card reading device. Defence raised credible, reliable "evidence to the contrary" as well as an innocent explanation as to the possession of the credit card reading device. After extensive cross-examination of the police officer, witnesses, and detailed submissions, the client was found not guilty of both charges.

Regina v. Grahovac (2005)
Client acquitted after trial on charges of over 80 and impaired driving. Client was seen crossing over the middle white line and was stopped by police. After investigation client was arrested and eventually provided readings of 160 and 170. During the search of the client’s car an open beer can that was cold to the touch and was still containing beer was found. The arresting officer failed to detail in his notes the time of driving and the time of the stop. A Charter Application to exclude all statements of the accused and sobriety test results was successful. Detailed cross examination of the arresting and assisting officer on the issue of time of driving resulted in a finding of not guilty on both charges.

Regina v. Shum (2005)
Acquitted after trial on charges of over 80.

Regina v. Valderve (2005)
Not guilty after trial on charges of impaired driving and over 80.

Regina v. Dinardo (2005)
Acquitted after trial of charge of over 80. Charter Application seeking to exclude all roadside statements successful. Crown unable to prove that the accused was the driver.

Regina v. Saldanha (2005)
Charges of impaired driving and over 80 stayed after successful Charter Application alleging a breach of the client's 11(b) Charter rights, protecting a trial within a reasonable time.

Regina v. Finn. (2005)
Client acquitted after trial of charge over 80. Defence successfully proffered "evidence to the contrary" which undermined accuracy of the intoxalyzer readings.

Regina v. De Karic. (2005)
Charge of over 80 stayed at trial due to violation of client's Section 11(b) right to a trial within a reasonable time. Defence Charter Application successful and charge was stayed accordingly.

Regina v. Schiebel. (2004)
Charges of over 80 and impaired driving. Acquitted after trial.

Regina v. M.S. (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of impaired driving and over 80, subsequent to successful Charter Application for violation of client's Section 10(b) rights.

Regina v. G.S. (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of impaired driving, over 80, speeding, and graduated licence infraction.

Regina v. Samai (2004)
Charges of impaired driving, over 80. Acquitted after trial.

Regina v. Sahota (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charge of over 80. Defence presented "evidence to the contrary" together with expert evidence, resulting in the acquittal.

Regina v. Hannah (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of impaired driving, over 80.

Regina v. Alves (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of impaired driving, over 80.

Regina v. R.A. (2004)
Client acquitted by Judge Purvis in Collingwood on charges of Impaired Driving and Refuse Breath Sample after successful argument that Ontario Provincial Police improperly arrested client resulting in a violation of s. 9 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Regina v. M.C. (2004)
Charges of impaired operation and over 80. Withdrawn after successful Charter Application regarding exclusion of all statements made by the accused at the scene of the accident.

Regina v. Kopicanyova (2004)
Charges of over 80 and impaired driving. Withdrawn after Charter Application.

Regina v. H.P. (2004)
Charges of over 80 and impaired driving. Withdrawn after Charter Application regarding violations of Sections 7, 8 and 10(b) of the Charter.

Regina v. Siddhu (2003)
Charges of over 80 and impaired. Acquitted after trial.

Regina v. M.L. (2003)
Client found not guilty of charges of Over 80 and Possession of Cocaine after successful Charter Argument that Peel Regional Police should not have investigated client in parking lot of Brampton nightclub.

Regina v. J.S. (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charge of refusal to provide roadside breathalyzer sample.

Regina v. Charlton (2003)
Acquitted after trial on charge of over 80.

Regina v. Hazell (2003)
Charge of over 80. Not guilty.

Regina v. M(M.) (2003)
Client found not guilty after trial on charges of Impaired Driving, Drive Over 80.

Regina v. Duric (2003)
Charge of Over 80 withdrawn after attack on breathalyzer evidence.

Regina v. Grewal (2003)
Charge of Over 80 withdrawn after attack on breathalyzer evidence.

Regina v. Formica (2002)
Charge of Over 80 withdrawn after attack on breathalyzer evidence.

Regina v. Falconer (2002)
Charges of impaired operation and Over 80. Acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Sammut (2002)
Charge of Over 80 withdrawn after presenting evidence contrary by defence.

Regina v. Alves (2002)
Charges of Over 80 x2 client found not guilty.

Regina v. Hannah (2002)
Charges of Over 80, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Kershaw (2002)
Charges of Over 80, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. F.H. (2002)
Charges of fall to comply with a disposition, possession under, withdrawn.

Regina v. Sositko (2002)
Charges of dangerous driving. Not guilty after trial.

Regina v. Jones (2001)
Client acquitted of charges of Over 80.

Regina v. A.R. (2001)
Client acquitted of Refuse Screening Device Charge after trial.

Regina v. Jones (2001)
Charge of Failing to Remain at Scene of Accident withdrawn after Defence Application alleging unreasonable delay.

Regina v. Karametch (2000) O.J. No. 3744
Conviction for Over 80 overturned and acquittal entered.

R. v. Sigiannis (2000)
Client acquitted of over 80 charge.

Drug Offences

Regina v. Borushynski (2008)
Charges of Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking in Marijuana, Possession of Hash, Possession of Psilocybin, and Possession of Proceeds of Crime, withdrawn at the commencement of trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, after successful Constitutional Application for violations of s. 8, 7 and 10(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger filed a detailed Application alleging that the grounds for the search warrant, authorizing a search of the client’s residence, were insufficient to properly allow the police to search the home of the client. The tip of the Confidential Informant set out in the Information to Obtain was not established to have been reliable, credible or otherwise anything more than rumour, and the grounds obtained by police while responding to an emergency call were obtained illegally as the initial search was an unlawful perimeter search of the client’s property. Accordingly, the charges were withdrawn and the clients received the return of his funds.

Regina v. Park (2008)
Charges of trafficking in cocaine and possession of proceeds of crime withdrawn at the preliminary hearing after defence lawyer Leora Shemesh aggressively pursued a string of Charter violations by the police, including an unreasonable search of the client’s business premises.
Click here to see the full document

Regina v. C.B. (2008)
Charges of possession and theft withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice after successful Charter Application regarding the unlawful stop of the client’s vehicle and breach of the client’s right to counsel, and to be free from an unreasonable search and seizure.

Regina v. Park and Yi (2007)
Client acquitted in the Superior Court of Justice of possession for the purpose of trafficking in a controlled substance, cocaine and marijuana, possession of drugs, proceeds of crime and possession of a stun gun. The defence alleged a breach of the client's s. 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Police obtained a warrant to enter a dwelling without proper grounds and entered an adjacent dwelling without prior authorization by a judge. The police were originally denied the warrant by one Judge and then proceeded to find another Judge to issue the warrant without changing the Affidavit in support of the warrant. At trial, detailed and vigorous cross-examination of the investigating officers undermined the basis of the search. At trial, the Trial Judge agreed with the defence submissions, found a breach of section 8 of the Charter and excluded $62,000.00, the stun gun, two kilos of cocaine, 1.5 kilos of marijuana and 1400 ecstasy pills. As a result of the exclusion of evidence, there was no basis to find the clients guilty of the charges and they were found not guilty of all charges.

Regina vs. Rahim (2007)
Charges of possession of Cocaine and Fail to Appear dismissed in Ontario Court of Justice after counsel argued successful Charter Application relating to an unreasonable search and detention of client.

Regina v. D.W. (2006)
Charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking withdrawn after Crown concedes defence Charter Application alleging an improper search.

Regina v. Lee (2005)
Client acquitted after five day trial in the Superior Court of Justice before Madame Justice Lowe on charges of Production of Marijuana, Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking in Marijuana . Charter Application to exclude evidence based on a violation of the client's rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure was scuccessful resulting in not guilty verdicts on all counts.

Regina v. Kim (2005)
Client acquitted after one week trial in the Superior Court of Justice before Mr. Justice McDougall of charges of Production of Marijuana, Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking, Proceeds of Crime . All evidence excluded on a successful Charter Application for violations of the client's right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and detention.

Regina v. Izzo and Izzo (2005)
Charges of Production of Marijuana withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice after successful challenge to the authority of the police to search.

R v. Furet (2005)
Charges of Production of Marijuana, Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking, Possession of Proceeds of Crime withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. Bangura (2005)
Charges of trafficking in Cocaine dismissed in court.

Regina v. Kim (2005)
Client acquitted after trial on charges of production of marijuana, possession for the purpose of trafficking marijuana, proceeds of crime. Defence's Charter Application to exclude all evidence as a result of an unlawful search and seizure of Mr. Kim's home and the shooting of Mr. Kim's dogs by the police successful. Judge found actions by police to have been unconstitutional and unlawful.

Regina v. Stalas and Calderon (2004), Ontario Court of Appeal.
Mr. Stalas and Mr. Calderon were charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking, possession, and possession of proceeds of crime. Mr. Stalas and Mr. Calderon were convicted at trial in Superior Court in Thunder Bay. Their application alleging an unlawful and arbitrary detention and arrest, and unlawful search and seizure, in addition to a violation of their Section 10(b) right to counsel were dismissed by the trial judge. On appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal, Mr. Stalas and Mr. Calderon were acquitted by the Court of Appeal on all charges. The Court of Appeal found that there were violations of the accused right to be free from an arbitrary detention and arrest, as well as their Section 8 rights to be free for an unreasonable search and seizure. In addition, the Court of Appeal found that upon a stop without further grounds for a search must provide all persons with their right to counsel. Since the police officers did not provide rights to counsel and an opportunity to contact counsel prior to obtaining consent or proceeding with the search, there was a violation of the their Section 10(b) rights as well. According all charges were acquitted on appeal.
Click here to see the full document

Regina v. Young Burg (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of production and possession for the purposes of trafficking. A Charter Application was advanced at trial alleging breaches of Section 8 of the Charter, namely a violation of the accused rights to be free from an unreasonable search and seizure. The grounds for the warrant were deficient, as such the warrant was quashed by the Superior Court and all evidence was excluded. Accordingly, all charges against Mr. Young Burg were dismissed at trial.

Regina v. Helland (2004)
Charge of importing over $1/2 Million of cocaine stayed, after defence cross-examination of lead investigating RCMP officer, in respect to violations of Ms. Helland's rights under Sections 7, 8 and 10(b) of the Charter.

Regina v. Bouzalas (2004)
Charges of production of marijuana, possession for the purposes of trafficking, and possession of a controlled substance. Withdrawn after Charter Application advance for breaches of Sections 8 and 10(b) of the Charter, arising from an unlawful search and seizure by the police.

Regina v. Vo (2004)
Charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking, possession, and proceeds of crime. Withdrawn after Charter Application advanced for unlawful detention and search. All seized funds returned to the client.

Regina v. DaSilva et al. (2004)
Charges of conspiracy to produce a controlled substance, steroids, possession for the purpose of trafficking, posession of a controlled substance and proceeds of crime. Withdrawn at trial after Charter Application for breaches of Section7, Section 8 and Section 11(b) of the Chapter involving deficient warrant and abuse of conduct by police in the course of the execution of the search. All seized items and funds returned to the clients.

Regina v. Tran and Ngo (2004)
Acquitted after trial on charges of production, possession for the purposes of trafficking, and possession.

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. See more information in our In the News section.

Regina v. D.D. (2003)
Charges of possession of 1kg. Hashish, Cocaine, Stun Gun, and Bookmaking. Aquitted after successful cross-examination of O.P.P. Officer.

Regina v. Sherri Brown (2003)
Charges of importing cocaine. Acquitted after trial before jury.

Regina v. Holland (2003)
Charge of possession over $5000.00. Withdrawn after attack on the substance of Crown's case.

Regina 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.

Regina v. Chaudhary (2002)
Charge of possession withdrawn.

Regina v. Martin (2002)
Charges Of Carry Concealed weapon, possession of a controlled substance, dismissed, acquitted at trial.

Regina v. Francis (2002)
Charges of Trafficking in a controlled substance, possession of proceeds of crime, charges stayed.

Regina v. Carroll (2002)
Charges Of Trafficking in a controlled substance, possession of a controlled substance, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. A.L. (2002)
Charges of theft over, possession over, fail to stop for police - charges withdrawn.

Regina v. J.H. (2002)
Charges of theft over, possession over, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. F.H. (2002)
Charges of fall to comply with a disposition, possession under, withdrawn.

Regina v. Campbell (2002)
Charges of possession of a controlled substance, acquitted at trial, charges of fall to comply with bail order, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Elford (2001)
Charges of robbery, possession under x2 - discharged at trial at preliminary hearing.

Regina v. Powell (2001)
Client acquitted of charges of Possession of cocaine.

Regina v. Powell (2001)
Charge of trafficking in cocaine stayed by Department of Justice, as result of Defence Application.

Regina v. Dolzycki (2001)
Possession of Narcotic charge withdraw by Crown as result of Defence application alleging improper search and violations under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Regina v. Fetterly (2001)
Client acquitted of Conspiracy to Traffic Narcotic.

Property Crimes

Regina v. C.B. (2008)
Charge of possession over $5,000.00 withdraw at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice as Crown conceded Charter Application brought by defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger challenging the search of the vehicle and subequent seizure of evidence and confession. The defence established viloations of the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, right to counsel and to be advised of the reason for detention.

Regina v. S.P. (2008)
Charges of Robbery. x 2 and Assault x 2 withdrawn prior to trial after Joseph Neuberger negotiated withdrawal of all charges based on inconsistencies in the evidence of Crown witnesses.

R v. Randhawa (2007)
charges of fraud, stolen credit card, possession of stolen property, possession of credt card data, theft under withdrawn after defence application for outstanding disclosure and challenge to the technical data produced by the Crown successful.

Regina v. R.S. (2006)
Client found not guilty on charges of fraud over $5,000.00, breach of trust and theft over $5,000.00 after three day trial before the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. H.P. (2006)
Charge of fraud under $5,000.00 withdrawn prior to trial.

Regina v. J.G. (2006)
Charges of fraud and counterfeit money withdrawn prior to trial.

Regina v. Tang (2006)
Client acquitted after a two day trial in the Ontario Court of Jusitce of Possession Stolen Property Over; Possession of Credit Cards and Credit Card Reader, Fraud. Charter Application to exclude evidence based on a violation of the client's rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and detention was successful resulting in not guilty verdicts on all counts.

R. v Zalewski (2005)
Client acquitted after four day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice of 23 counts of possession stolen property over $5,000 and fraud over $5,000.00.

Regina v. T. Cousins and S. Cousins. (2005)
Charges of fraud over x 3, forgery x 3, utter forged documents x 4, possession of a forgery device. Withdrawn at trial after successful Charter Application for violations of Section 7, 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter, regarding violations arising from an unlawful search of their apartment.

Regina v. Zelewski (2005)
172 counts of possession of stolen property. All counts withdrawn at trial.

Regina v. C. Crockatt (2003)
Charges of break and enter x5, possession of stolen property, possession burglary tools, breach of probation x5. Client was acquitted after a three-day Charter Application. Judge determined that the Police violated client's rights under Section 8, and that police conducted a warrantless search of the accused's residence. The judge excluded all of the evidence and the client was acquitted of all charges before the court.

Regina v. Mohammadi (2003)
Charges of fraud under and theft under. Client acquitted after a successful 11(b) Charter Application.

Regina v. J.H. (2003)
Charges of member of criminal organization, participate in activities of criminal organization x 2, conspiracy to obstruct justice. All charges withdrawn after challenge on credibility of the main Crown witness.

Regina v. Ahilan Nagarajah (2003)
Charges of fraud over x2, copyright infringement x2. Charges withdrawn after challenge on search warrant.

Regina v. Fisher (2003)
Client found not guilty after trial on charges of Mischief and Breach of Recognizance.

Regina v. Lopresti (2002)
Charges of bookmaking, gaming and betting, proceeds of crime. All charges withdrawn subsequent to constitutional challenge.

Regina v. Zadov (2002)
Charges of Break & Enter, commit indictable offence, not guilty after attack on forensic evidence.

Regina v. Higgins (2002)
Charges of Assault x2, Assault With Weapon, theft Under - charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Ternowetsky (2002)
Charges of Robbery, Assault with Weapon, Mischief, client acquitted at trial.

Regina v. M.H. (2002)
Charges of theft under, assault - withdrawn.

Regina v. Shier (2002)
Charges of theft under - withdrawn.

Regina v. Wong (2002)
Charges of theft under, withdrawn.

Regina v. R.D. (2002)
Charges of theft under, assault, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. A.L. (2002)
Charges of theft over, possession over, fail to stop for police - charges withdrawn.

Regina v. J.H. (2002)
Charges of theft over, possession over, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Da Silva (2002)
Charges of theft over, acquitted at trial.

Regina v. M.B. (2002)
Charges of Possession of Stolen Property, charges withdrawn.

Regina v. Keyes (2001)
Client acquitted at trial of charges of Robbery, Forcible Confinement.

Regina v. Smilynov (2000)
Theft charges withdrawn.

White Collar Crimes

Regina v. R.S. (2006)
Client found not guilty on charges of fraud over $5,000.00, breach of trust and theft over $5,000.00 after three day trial before the Ontario Court of Justice.

Regina v. H.P. (2006)
Charge of fraud under $5,000.00 withdrawn prior to trial.

Regina v. J.G. (2006)
Charges of fraud and counterfeit money withdrawn prior to trial.

Regina v. Mohammadi (2003)
Charges of fraud under and theft under. Client acquitted after a successful 11(b) Charter Application.

Regina v. Huc (2000)
Charges of Fraud Over $5000 withdrawn as a result of defence application alleging improper search and violations of client's right to counsel.

Regina v. D. Singh (2000)
Client acquitted of Fraud Over $5000 charges.

Regina v. H.L.J.L. Ltd. (1999)
Charges under Customs Act for False Declarations of over $1,000,000 stayed by Department of Justice.

Extradition

D.K. v. United States of America
Application for transfer of sentence to Canada from the U.S. granted under Treaty regarding Transfer of Offenders.

Constitutional Applications

Regina v. Lopresti (2002)
Charges of bookmaking, gaming and betting, proceeds of crime. All charges withdrawn subsequent to constitutional challenge.

Search Warrants

Regina v. Tang (2006)
Client acquitted after a two day trial in the Ontario Court of Jusitce of Possession Stolen Property Over; Possession of Credit Cards and Credit Card Reader, Fraud . Charter Application to exclude evidence based on a violation of the client's rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and detention was successful resulting in not guilty verdicts on all counts.

Regina v. Izzo and Izzo (2005)
Charges of Production of Marijuana withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice after successful challenge to the authority of the police to search.

Regina v. Huc (2000)
Charges of Fraud Over $5000 withdrawn as a result of defence application alleging improper search and violations of client's right to counsel.