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
Charges of impaired driving, dangerous driving and mischief over $5,000.00 withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger took over the file from previous counsel who had been defending the case for over one year. Vigorous pressure by defence to assess the case and the evidence, combined with a defence investigation resulted in the Crown withdrawing all charges prior to trial in the Ontario Court of Justice.
Charges of Impaired Care and Control and “Over 80” dismissed in the Ontario Court of Justice after a lengthy trial conducted by Stacey Nichols. Cross examination of civilian witnesses and police officers revealed inconsistencies in the Crown’s case, ultimately rebutting the presumption under the Criminal Code that the client was in care and control of the vehicle.
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.
Charges of Dangerous Driving and Racing withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice after detailed attack on the Crown theory.
Charges of Impaired Driving, Over 80, and G2 License infraction withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
