Home Our Services About Us Recent Successes Testimonials News And Vidoes Contact Us 中文
The criminal justice system can be daunting, but you don’t need to go through it alone. Our Criminal lawyers are here to guide you every step of the way.Contact Our Firm
RB was charged with an escalating series of domestic offences: assault, assault with a weapon, uttering threats, and Criminal Harassment, culminating with an alleged Arson Damaging Property and Arson Endangering Life. The Crown sought R.B.’s detention pre-trial, on the basis that RB was a danger to the public. Liam Thompson of Neuberger & Partners, a leading criminal defence firm in Toronto, conducted the bail hearing. Liam Thompson prepared a strong release plan with two sureties. After extensive submissions and a hard-fought hearing, the Court released RB on bail.
E.P. was charged with an Aggravated Sexual Assault. The Crown sought to detain E.P. pre-trial, on the basis that he was a danger to the public and that reasonable members of the public would be shocked if he were released on bail. After receiving disclosure, Liam Thompson of Neuberger & Partners, leading Toronto criminal lawyers, prepared detailed submissions that pointed out the flaws and weaknesses in the Crown’s case. After detailed submissions, the Court agreed with Mr. Thompson, and E.P. was released on his own recognizance.
DW was charged with Robbery, Assault with a Weapon, Possession of a Weapon, Carry a Concealed Weapon, Aggravated Assault, and Resisting Arrest. While DW was on trial on his original charges, D.W. was again arrested for Possession of Schedule 1 Substance for Trafficking, Possession of Schedule IV Substance for Trafficking, Failure to Comply with Release Order, and Possess Proceeds of Property Obtained by Crime for Trafficking/ Not Exceeding $5,000. It was alleged that while D.W. was released on his original bail, he was dealing drugs from his surety’s home. It was alleged that a search warrant produced several illegal substances that were found inside a black jacket that was kept inside his closet. This closet was in his bedroom at the surety’s residence. Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners, Toronto Criminal Lawyers, conducted the bail hearing. Yuvika Johri prepared a comprehensive release plan to overcome the risk factors involved in releasing D.W. on bail. After detailed submissions, the Court agreed with Ms. Johri and D.W. was released on bail.
G.S. was charged with three counts of voyeurism, one count of making child pornography, and one count of possessing child pornography against his daughters. G.S. was released on a surety bail. However, few weeks after his release, it was alleged that G.S. had breached his recognizance by sending gifts and birthday cards to the complainants. G.S. was arrested and charged with eight counts of Failure to Comply with Release Order. Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners, Toronto Criminal Lawyers, was retained to represent G.S. at the bail hearing. Yuvika Johri conducted the bail hearing, put forward a comprehensive release plan with a strong surety to overcome any risk factors. The allegations, although a breach of a release order, involved gifts and there was no indicated of an attempt to dissuade the complainants from giving evidence. After a two-day bail hearing, G.S. was released.
D.D. was charged with various serious fireams related offences including trafficking a firearm out of Toronto courthouse. D.D. had a criminal record as well. D.D. was held for a bail hearing as the Crown Attorney did not consent to his release. D.D.’s family retained the services of Mariya Protsenko. Mariya interviewed potential sureties, drafted various documents including surety declarations and proposed release plane. In addition, Mariya applied for an electronic monitoring ankle bracelet to increase the chance of the client’s release. In the process, the Crown Attorney provided Mariya with numerous disclosure items including information that implicated one of the sureties. Mariya interviewed another surety and amended the proposed release plan. Mariya prepared the sureties and successfully conducted a bail hearing. As a result, the client was released.
Client charged with accessing, distributing, and possessing child pornography was released on bail after a one-day bailing hearing. Police were informed by a digital networking company that images that qualify as child pornography were allegedly uploaded on their server by JM. A search warrant was executed at JM’s residence and several electronic devices were seized. JM was charged with one count of accessing child pornography, distributing child pornography, and possessing child pornography. Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners, Toronto Criminal Lawyers, was conducted the bail hearing. Yuvika Johri reviewed the crown’s package, prepared a comprehensive release plan with a strong surety to overcome the risk factors involved in releasing JM on bail. After much deliberation and a one-day bail hearing, JM was released on bail.
Client charged with trafficking of cocaine and proceeds of crime was released on bail after a one-day hearing. During a drug trafficking investigation, police were conducting a surveillance on PG’s residence and a search warrant was executed. A total of three kilograms of cocaine and bundled Canadian currency estimated to be around $500,000.00 was found in PG’s residence. PG was charged with possession of property obtained by crime (currency) and Possession of Controlled Substance for the Purposes of Trafficking (Cocaine). Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners, Toronto Criminal Lawyers, was retained to represent PG at the bail hearing. Yuvika Johri conducted a bail hearing and showed weaknesses in the Crown’s case. Yuvika also prepared a comprehensive release plan with a strong surety to overcome the risk factors involved in releasing PG on bail. After much deliberation and a one-day bail hearing, PG was released on bail.
Client charged with robbery and other related charges was released after a one-day bail hearing. The Complainant alleged that RH and co-accused(s) attended his residence under the pretense of buying luxury items from him. When the Complainant asked for money, RH and the co-accused(s) allegedly took the items without giving any money and threatened him with a gun. RH was charged with Robbery with a Firearm, Uttering Threats to Cause Bodily Harm or Death, Possession of Property Obtained by Crime, Possession of Weapon for Committing an Offence, Possession of Restricted Weapon, Conspiracy to Commit an Indictable Offence and Having Mask or Face Disguised to Commit an Offence. Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners, Toronto Criminal Lawyers, was retained to represent RH at the bail hearing. Yuvika negotiated with the Crown Attorney’s office and prepared a comprehensive release plan for RH to be released with a strong surety. After a one-day bail hearing, RH was released on bail.
Client charged with trafficking charges regarding cocaine, fentanyl, proceeds of crime and several firearm related charges released on bail after a two day bail hearing. Client represented by Joseph Neuberger and John Navarrete obtained disclosure on the firearms related offences and were able to expose flaws in the evidence that made the client’s connection to the firearms offences very tenuous. In addition, a comprehensive release plan was put forth with a strong surety and as a result the client was released on bail.
To read more, click
Client charged with breach of recognizance at the Ontario Court of Justice in Scarborough. Lawyer John Navarrete conducted the bail on this matter and called evidence showing that the bail terms were never breached. After a successful bail, the Crown decided they had no reasonable prospect of conviction and withdrew all the charges.
Neuberger & Partners defended this client on a charge of Fail to Comply with Recognizance for breaking his bail while on release for the Charge of Aggravated Assault. The Court in Milton rendered a verdict of not guilty.
Neuberger & Partners obtained Bail in Superior Court for client facing Second Degree Murder Charge.
Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results and that the amount recovered and other litigation outcomes will vary according to the facts in individual cases.