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 found not guilty of Over 80 charge after trial. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger an evidence to the contrary defence based on the client’s drinking pattern that may have placed the client under the legal limit at the time of driving. In addition, Joseph Neuberger, alleged a Charter violation in that the Intoxilyzer 8000C is an instrument that is not readily available to the independent scientific community. After all the evidence was in, the trial judge found the R.H. was credible in his testimony and the charge was dismissed.
Charges of Dangerous Driving and Refuse to Provide Breath Sample withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was able to establish that the pattern of driving was not consistent with “dangerous driving” as set out in the relevant case law but was more closely related to the type of driving indicative of a careless driving charge under the Highway Traffic Act. Further, there were issues related to the reasonableness of the demand for the breath sample. As a result, the client plead guilty to one count of careless driving under the Highway Traffic Act and the criminal charges of Dangerous Driving and Refuse Breath Sample were withdrawn.
Charge of Over 80 stayed at Old City Hall courthouse after Defence Counsel brings an Application under s. 11(b) of the Charter alleging unreasonable delay. Judge agrees that Neuberger & Partners should have been provided breathalyzer simulator calibration checksheet 18 months before trial.
Client found not guilty of impaired driving and over 80 after trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger advanced a section 8 application challenging the grounds for arrest and the breath samples, as well defences of evidence to the contrary and a delay application. The client was found not guilty of both charges.
R v. B. (R.) (2011)
Client is acquitted of Over 80 after Neuberger & Partners cross-examines arresting officer on his grounds for breath demand. Crown concedes that after Neuberger & Partners cross-examination there was no reasonable prospect of conviction and invited the Court to dismiss the charge.
Charges of Impaired Driving and Over 80 withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice prior to trial. The client was found at the ramp of a highway with two blown tires and damage to the side of the car. The police investigated and demanded samples of the client’s breath. The client gave readings of 106 mg and 98mg. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger sought a copy of the in-car video recording of the interaction at the roadside. The recording showed a conflict in evidence between the two officers, such that one did not notice any odour of alcohol and the second “smelled something” but was unsure whether they should make the demand under section 254(2) of the Criminal Code. As a result, defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger argued that there was no reasonable suspicion to demand a breath sample and the readings ought to be excluded. The Crown agreed and the charges were withdrawn.
Client found not guilty of Over 80, readings of 106 and 98 mgs after two day trial. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was able to establish that the readings were outside of the two hour time period that would allow the Crown to rely upon the statutory presumption. As such, Joseph Neuberger ran an evidence to the contrary defence and as part of the defence, he subpoenaed the general manager of the restaurant where S.L. had dinner in order to establish the drinking pattern and that a “double” means two ounces. The court accepted the evidence of S.L. and the other defence witnesses in finding S.L. not guilty.
Charge of over 80 withdrawn after extensive negotiations with the Crown. The readings were 108, and 103. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was able to establish to the Crown that at the time of driving the client may have been under the legal limit and as a result the charge was withdrawn in favour of a plea to the Highway Traffic Offence of careless driving.
Charge of dangerous driving withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket, prior to trial. The client was charged with having driving through neighbourhood streets at speeds in excess of 60 km an hour over the speed limit along with exhibiting very aggressive and dangerous driving. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger through careful and detailed negotiations, was able to resolve the case so that the client was allowed to plead to a related Highway Traffic Act offence with the criminal charge of dangerous driving being withdrawn.
Client found not guilty of charges of Over 80 and Impaired Driving after a trial. Trial judge finds that, after cross-examination the by Defence Counsel, civilian witness was too unreliable. Neuberger & Partners successfully argues that Toronto Police Officer violated client’s rights under Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Client is acquitted of impaired Driving and Driver Over 80 charges after trial in Newmarket. Neuberger & Partners successfully argues that the client’s right to counsel of choice was violated and that breath readings should be excluded from the trial. Cross-examination by Neuberger & Partners of the arresting officer from York Regional Police Force lead the Court to comment that the officer’s reliability was too weak, and accused found not guilty.
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.
