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Charges of Domestic Assault and Failure to Comply X 2 were withdrawn after extensive discussions with the Crown. SG was in a relationship with the Complainant for a few years but separated thereafter. They share custody of their three children. The Complainant alleged that SG assaulted her on one occasion when she came to drop off their daughter at SG’s residence. The Complainant also made two other complaints for violation of bail conditions by SG on two different occasions. Mariya Protsenko and Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners LLP were retained to represent SG against the charges. The Crown was not willing to resolve because SG had been convicted for robbery and manslaughter in the past. After several pre-trial discussions with the Crown, Mariya and Yuvika were able to show that the Complainant’s allegations were false. The Crown reviewed all materials disclosed by the defence and concluded that the Complainant was filing false allegations. Crown withdrew all charges as prosecuting SG was not in public interest.
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn prior to trial, Brampton, Ontario. X.L. had an argument with his common law spouse. Unfortunately, when X.L. left the residence to take a walk, the complainant called police and alleged an assault. X.L. was charged with Assault. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal lawyer to defend the allegation. Joseph Neuberger obtained disclosure and the statement of the complainant read like a list of all the reasons why X.L. was a bad spouse save and except for being abusive or assaultive. With a proper read, the allegation was extremely weak. Joseph Neuberger wrote to the assigned Crown with a breakdown of the statement and messages sent by the complainant sent to X.L. subsequent to the charge seeking all sorts of financial compensation. After a productive pre-trial, the agreement was that the Crown would withdrawn the charge and the client would sign a peace bond. As a result, the charge was withdrawn.
Charges of Assault x 2 withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice, Scarborough. Z.G. had a dispute with two tenants that turned into a physical altercation. The two tenants called police and Z.G. was charged with Assault x 2. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the Criminal Lawyer Toronto to defend the charges. Once disclosure was obtained, Joseph Neuberger turned over a recording made by Z.G.’s witness wherein the complainants are making threatening and disturbing comments to Z.G. Joseph Neuberger conducted a judicial pre-trial and presented a transcript of the recording. Although Z.G. did assault both complainants, this was in the context of him perceiving a serious physical threat, and as such, a resolution was worked out for a peace bond and all charges were withdrawn.
Charge of Aggravated Assault withdrawn prior to jury trial, Kingston. The client was in a bar and was surrounded by a group who were intoxicated and after some words back and forth racial slurs were directed at C.H.L. and one member of the group approached C.H.L. and in reaction C.H.L. punched the complainant. Police were called and the client was charged. There was a video of the incident taken by a friend of the complainant that was shown to police. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the Criminal Lawyer to defend C.H.L. Joseph Neuberger conducted a preliminary hearing and cross-examined all of the members of the group including the complainant. The video in fact supported the defence position as the explanation for making the video was that the friend wanted a video record in case there was a fight. That was dealt with in cross examination as if anyone was worried about an altercation, the best action is to leave or step in to stop the altercation rather than record it. The video when played several times has no sound but demonstrates 90 seconds of the group taunting C.H.L. In addition, Joseph Neuberger, collected data of racial incidents in Kington and at the particular university supporting the fear of the client that he was going to be assaulted. A forensic psychologist was hired to assess the client which determined the client had experienced trauma from numerous racialized incidents. The defence put forth was self-defence. As the jury trial approached detailed discussions ensued and it was agreed that it was not in the public interest to prosecute the case and as such the charge of Aggravated Assault was withdrawn. Of note is the fact that there is a legitimate argument for someone who is experiencing verbal racial assaults may in the moment, in particular if surrounded by a group, to fear for their safety and act in a manner to protect themselves that comes within the self-defence law in Canada.
Charge of Assault with a Weapon withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto. M.F. was involved in a neighbour dispute and oddly was charged over a boundary issue that allegedly involved M.F. using yard instrument to strike the neighbour. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal defence lawyer. Photographs were taken of the property and after the disclosure was obtained, it was apparent that the complainant neighbour was on M.F. property at the time of the alleged assault. After two pre-trials with the assigned Crown, it was agreed that M.F. would sign a common law peace bond and the charge was withdrawn.
Criminal charges of Assault causing bodily harm withdrawn. R.M. was charged with a road-rage type incident at a Tim Horton’s parking lot. It was alleged that he got into an argument with another driver. The argument culminated in a large fight involving several different people. R.M. Client hired Christopher Assie as his Criminal Lawyer Toronto. Unknown to the Crown, several videos had been posted to social media. Christopher Assie collected the videos and put together a compilation that caused the Crown to reconsider its reasonable prospect of conviction. The Crown ultimately withdrew the charges when R.M. agreed to enter into a peace bond.
Charge of Domestic Assault Causing Bodily Harm withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice. R.J. and his wife were married for over 35 years. The relationship had deteriorated and R.J. was the caregiver for his wife who suffered from a very serious diabetic problem. The wife fell due to a drop in her blood sugar and R.J. called 911. The wife was admitted to hospital and while in hospital called police and alleged that R.J. punched her in the face causing the injuries. R.J. was arrested. The police DID NOT obtain the paramedics notes, or the hospital records. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal defence lawyer. Joseph Neuberger had a detailed meeting with the client and found out that in fact over a two year period R.J. had called police and ambulance on over 50 occasions including due to aggressive behavior of his wife. Joseph Neuberger sought disclosure of all of the 911 calls, brought an application to obtain the medical records and interviewed family members. All of the defence gathered evidence was provided to the Crown during a pre-trial. The medical records confirmed R.J.’s evidence that the complainant was hypoglycemic and had fallen. The injury was related to the fall and not a punch. The 911 calls also demonstrated a pattern of aggressive behavior of the complainant and multiple urgent medical issues. Further, the complainant contacted R.J. 32 times after charging him. Joseph Neuberger instructed R.J. to not answer but keep the voicemail messages. They were turned over as well to the assigned Crown. Oddly the assigned Crown did not want to withdraw even in the face of convincing evidence that R.J. was innocent. Joseph Neuberger scheduled a judicial pre-trial, filed a pre-trial memo and attached the evidence. After the judicial pre-trial the charge was formally withdrawn.
Criminal charges of Assault, Assault causing bodily harm and Assault with a weapon withdrawn. S.K. was alleged to have attended the home of the complainants with two other people. During an argument, S.K. and his co-accused were alleged to have started a physical altercation and then grabbed broken chair leg and assaulted the complainants. S.K. was in Canada on a student visa. Any conviction would have immediately lead to his inadmissibility to Canada and lead to his deportation. S.K. hired Christopher Assie. A careful review of the evidence revealed that the allegations of who started the physical altercation and who introduced a weapon during the altercation revealed that it was not cut and dry. Through discussions with the Crown, counsel was able to convince them to withdraw the charges in exchange for S.K. entering into a peace bond and completing some anger management counselling. All charges withdrawn and S.K. was permitted to remain in the country.
Charges of Utter Threats withdrawn prior to setting trial date. Client was charged with Uttering Threats to cause death/ bodily Harm. One night, AP and the Complainant engaged in a heated verbal argument. The argument escalated when the Complainant proceeded to call AP’s father to report AP’s behavior. The two proceeded to struggle over the phone. The Complainant alleged that AP made threats to stab her with a knife her if she did not stop. Yuvika Johri was retained as the Toronto Criminal Defence Lawyer to represent A.P. against the charges. After reviewing disclosure, Yuvika convinced the Crown to not prosecute A.P. as there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. After extensive discussions, Crown agreed to withdraw the charges by way of a peace bond.
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn prior to trial. The client was charged with Assault. The Complainant alleged that they had an argument over infidelity. G.M. allegedly pushed her into a door that caused her to fall and get hurt. The Complainant also alleged that G.M. caused soreness to her hands, and allegedly tried to avoid getting arrested by the police by running over to a nearby construction site. Yuvika Johri was retained as G.M.’s criminal defence lawyer. After much back and forth with the assigned Crown, Yuvika Johri negotiated the charge to be withdrawn in exchange for the client signing a peace bond. The evidence clearly established a motive to fabricate due to the issue of infidelity and numerous implausible facts in the statement to police. This was a classic example of a revenge 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.
