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
Client was charged with Over 80 as a result of a traffic stop by Toronto Police Services. The first trial date was missed because of late disclosure by the Crown of officer misconduct, which was demanded by Neuberger & Partners. At the second trial date Neuberger & Partners filed a Motion to stay the proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Charter because of delay in bringing the case to trial. The Crown conceded the Application in Court and asked to have the charge stayed.
Client was charged with Dangerous Driving. After persistent and extensive disclosure requests which were not met in a timely manner, lawyer Stacey Nichols successfully argued in the Ontario Court of Justice that the charge should be stayed under section 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms due to unreasonable delay in the charges coming to trial.
Client was charged with Impaired Driving and Over 80. After extensive cross-examination of the police officers and presentation of defence evidence by lawyer Stacey Nichols, client was acquitted of both charges on the basis that the Crown could not prove that he was driving at the relevant time periods
Client was charged with Impaired Driving and Refuse Breath Sample after a traffic stop by Toronto Police on the Don Valley Parkway. At trial lawyer Neuberger & Partners argued that the client’s rights under s. 11(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated because late disclosure of police evidence forced an adjournment of the first trial date. This argument was accepted by the Court and all charges were stayed.
Client charged with Impaired Driving and Over 80 after a single motor vehicle collision in Toronto. On the day of the trial the Crown agreed with Neuberger & Partners that the civilian identification evidence as poor and the charges were withdrawn.
The client was charged with Dangerous Driving and Refuse Breath Sample as a result of an incident in York Region. Neuberger & Partners filed a Notice of Charter Application before a trial date was set to exclude the Breath refusal based on a violation of the client’s rights to counsel. Neuberger & Partners also provided the Crown with civilian witness statements which the York Regional Police failed to investigate, and which cast doubt on the Dangerous Driving charge. As a result, the client pleaded guilty to careless driving under the Highway Traffic Act and the criminal charges were withdrawn.
Client charged with Impaired Driving and Over 80 after a motor vehicle collision in Toronto. Neuberger & Partners convinced Crown Attorney that the case for the Crown was sufficiently weak that a Careless Driving charge was appropriate, and the client pleaded guilty to careless driving. The Impaired Driving and Over 80 charges were withdrawn.
At trial, the issue was whether the Crown could prove that N.C. was the driver or in the care and control of the vehicle involved in an accident. Mr. Navarrete vigorously cross examined the various Crown witnesses including the owner of the vehicle, who alleged that N.C. was the driver. In acquitting the accused, the trial judge commented on the cross examination conducted by Mr. Navarrete and stated that the credibility of the owner of the vehicle could not meet the civil standard of proof let alone the criminal standard of proof. He also found that the owner of the vehicle possessed the type of character that he would blame his own actions on someone else. With respect to the charges of obstruct peace officer, Mr. Navarrete argued that legally N.C.’s actions did not constitute the offence as charged. Client acquitted on charges of impaired driving, Over 80 and Obstruct Peace Officer after trial in the Ontario Court of Justice in Kitchener.
The client was charged with Impaired Driving and Drive Over 80 as a result of a single motor vehicle collision on Yonge Street in Toronto. Toronto Police investigated. Neuberger & Partners applied at trial to exclude the breath readings based on a failure to provide adequate translation services for the client at the police station. At trial, Neuberger & Partners cross-examined the proposed court translator on his qualifications and the trial expertise. After this, the Crown stayed the charges.
Client was charged with Over 80 after being stopped by the Toronto Police Service. Neuberger & Partners researched the as soon as practicable provisions regarding delay in taking the breath samples because of unnecessary calls to Duty Counsel. After speaking with the Crown on the day of trial the Crown withdrew the charge because there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.
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.
