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
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn prior to trial.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 After much back and forth with the assigned Crown, Yuvika Johri negotiated the charge to be withdrawn in exchange for the client signing a peace bond.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.
A.D. was charged with molesting his niece. He hired a lawyer (not Christopher Assié or anyone from Neuberger & Partners LLP). There was no physical evidence – only her word against his. A.D. told his lawyer he was innocent and that he never touched his niece inappropriately. His lawyer told him that he could not withstand being cross-examined by a professional Crown Attorney. His lawyer didn’t explain to him that if he didn’t testify in his own defence, the jury would be left with only his niece’s allegations. Effectively, his lawyer made the decision that A.D. would not testify. A.D. was promptly convicted by a jury. A.D. hired Christopher Assié to represent him for an appeal. A.D.’s allegations of how his trial lawyer failed to prepare him for trial were shocking. On appeal, Christopher Assié argued that the verdict was unfair because A.D. had been provided ineffective assistance of counsel. Ineffective assistance of counsel allegations are very difficult to prove and appeals on those grounds are seldom granted. On appeal, Christopher Assié cross-examined A.D.’s trial counsel and established that he failed to properly advise A.D. regarding whether he should testify in his own defence. His trial lawyer believed after a few conversations with A.D. that he would not do well during cross-examination because he was a nervous and timid man. He never attempted to prepare A.D. to testify. The Court of Appeal found that Christopher Assié had succeeded in establishing that A.D. was provided ineffective assistance of counsel and that a miscarriage of justice arose. They overturned the conviction and ordered a new trial. A.D. has hired Christopher Assié to represent him at his re-trial.
JW had been dating the Complainant for over a year. During a heated argument, police were called by room mates of the Complainant who allegedly saw injury marks on the Complainant and observed that his clothing had been ripped off as well. JW was charged with one count of Assault. Mariya Protsenko and Yuvika Johri were retained by JW. After a lot of back and forth with the Crown, a resolution for a peace bond was reached.
Client was charged with Domestic Assault. AR and the Complainant were new immigrants in Canada. Complainant and AR were engaged in a heated argument when a neighbor called the police. Upon police’s arrival, the Complainant alleged that AR slapped her and pushed her. Yuvika Johri of Neuberger & Partners LLP, Criminal Lawyers Toronto, was retained to represent AR against the charges. After reviewing disclosure, Yuvika convinced the Crown to not prosecute AR as there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. After extensive discussions, Crown agreed to withdraw charges against AR.
Client was charged with Domestic Assault. This case involved an allegation of the client assaulting his spouse on their driveway after a night out of drinking. Mr. Navarrete was able to show the weaknesses in the Crown’s case with the Crown’s eye witness and the real possibility for the defence to argue of self-defence. Charges against the client were withdrawn on Christmas Eve 2020, and the client entered into a peace bond at the courthouse in Milton.
Charge of Sexual Assault withdrawn prior to setting trial date in the Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton. Client was charged by a co-worker of allegedly touching and kissing her after a shift. Y.H. retained Joseph Neuberger as his criminal lawyer. Joseph Neuberger sought disclosure immediately and for some reason it took over six months to get the complainant’s statement. When it was transcribed and reviewed, the defence had a private investigator take a statement from another co-worker that disputed the event given that they were all present at the restaurant after the shift at the time the alleged sexual assault took place. The statement was disclosed by the defence to the Crown. Several judicial pre-trials were held, and a resolution for a common law peace bond was negotiated and the charge of sexual assault was withdrawn.
Client found not guilty after five (5) day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket. K.Q. was a teacher at a school. He was very close with a number of other teachers at the school. On the eve of March break the teachers got together for an end of term social event. At the end of the night four people attended back at the complainant’s home for food, and more drinking. At some point later in the evening, K.Q. and the complainant were in the complainant’s bed. The two were intoxicated. The two had sexual relations. Within about a week, the complainant alleged a sexual assault to the school where they worked, and then went to police and a charge of sexual assault was laid. Joseph Neuberger, Mariya Protsenko were retained as the criminal defence lawyers. Diana Davison joined the defence team as a specialist in false accusations and legal research. The disclosure was carefully reviewed, and a trial strategy was put in place. Careful attention was paid to cross-examination of the Crown witnesses, and developing the client to be ready for testifying at trial. In addition, much of the prosecution’s case revolved around capacity and male sexual stereotypes. The defence, assailed the evidence on the basis that the complainant was not too intoxicated to consent and the stereotypes are unfair to a male accused. In addition, there were text messages between the complainant and K.Q. prior to and after the alleged sexual assault. The defence was able to establish that the complainant had a prior interest in K.Q. that undermined her evidence at trial, and that the post messages from K.Q., although apologetic, were nevertheless simply acknowledgement of the feelings of the complainant but NOT a confession of doing something criminal. The evidence was complex, but after reliance upon relevant case law and focused submissions on key areas of reliability, the defence was able to establish that the crown could not prove lack of consent beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court agreed that the complainant did not lack capacity and had reliability issues that compromised the Crown’s case. The complainant through cross-examination conceded that her memory was essentially unreliable due to “flashback” type memories and reconstructing her memory piece by piece over a week. The trial judge came to the conclusion that K.Q. was not guilty.
Client found not criminally responsible on charges of assault, mischief, assault with a weapon, dangerous driving x 3, assault peace officer, and criminal harassment. D.A. after being discharged from a short stay in hospital for a mental health issue, unfortunately had a number of encounters with past friends that resulted in damage and criminal charges. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal defence lawyer. After reviewing the disclosure, and the past medical records, it was apparent that D.A. was suffering from a major mental illness that was operative at the time of the offending conduct. Two defence forensic experts were retained. After extensive pre-trial discussions and trial was conducted and the defence established that D.A. was not criminally responsible due to a mental disorder.
Charges of Assault (Domestic), Threatening, and Assault with Weapon, withdrawn prior to setting trial date in the Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton. M.M. was in his car with the complainant, his girlfriend, and an argument ensued about M.M. wanting to end the relationship. The argument got so bad that M.M. stopped his car at an intersection and asked her to leave his car. She refused and grabbed his arm. He then pushed her and opened the door. During the struggle, the complainant called 911 and then eventually exited the car. M.M. was charged. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal defence lawyer. Joseph Neuberger obtained the full 911 call had it transcribed and then conducted a pre-trial with the Crown. The 911 call seemed quite clear that M.M. had stopped the car, and asked the complainant to leave who refused. The complainant then is heard swearing at M.M. and threatening him. The struggle can be heard but there were no injuries and M.M. is heard as saying to the complainant to stop hitting him. Joseph Neuberger agreed to a common law peace bond and all charges were withdrawn. * It was unfortunate that the 911 call was not more carefully reviewed.
Charges of Domestic Assault x 2, Threatening and Assault causing Bodily Harm, withdrawn prior to setting a trial date in the Brampton. V.D. and his wife were have ongoing arguments about financial issues. During an argument, V.D. was doing his work in the office of their home. The complainant knocked away his computer and the two struggled over the computer. The complainant called police and alleged a very serious assault including punching to the head. Joseph Neuberger and Yuvika Johri were retained as the criminal defence lawyers. The disclosure was obtained and the police notes did not have any observation of injury. The office of the home was noted to be in disarray consistent with V.D.’s version of events. The statement of the complainant was not consistent and in fact had internal inconsistencies. Numerous pre-trials were conducted and V.D. undertook private therapy. The bail was amended and the couple entered into joint therapy to address their marital issues. V.D. signed a peace bond for 6 months and all charges were withdrawn.
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.
