Impaired Driving Cases

June 26, 2023

Impaired-Driving-Cases Our track record in handling impaired driving cases speaks for itself. We have successfully defended numerous clients, securing favourable outcomes and protecting their rights.

R. V. R.P. (OLD CITY HALL, TORONTO)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Seek exclusion of evidence based on violating the client’s constitutional rights under s. 8 and 9 of the Charter of Rights. Result: Application successful. Charges dismissed.

R. V. A.M. (ORANGEVILLE)

Charges: Impaired, Over 80 Strategy: Notice filed to exclude breath readings based on violation of client’s constitutional rights. Result: Application successful. Charges dismissed by the trial judge.

R. V. A.S. (NEWMARKET)

Charges: Impaired Driving, Over 80 Strategy: Application to stay charges based on violation of client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time as mandated by s. 11(b) of the Charter of Rights Result: Charges stayed by the trial judge.

R. V. S.K. (NEWMARKET)

Charges: Impaired by drugs Strategy: Point to Crown to frailties in its case, including failure to read demand and lengthy detention of the client in the rear of the vehicle while awaiting evaluating officer to arrive on the scene Result: Charge dropped by Crown before trial.

R. V. R.M. (1911 EGLINTON, TORONTO)

Charges: Impaired Driving, Over 80 Strategy: Convince Crown Attorney that the client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time will be violated if they were to continue with the prosecution. Result: Charges withdrawn by Crown.

R. V. P.S. (OSHAWA)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Identify police violations of the client’s constitutional rights and seek exclusion of evidence pursuant to the Charter of Rights. Result: Application granted. All charges were dismissed.

R. V. M.G. (NEWMARKET)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Application brought to stay charges based on violation of the client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time as required by s. 11(b) of the Charter of Rights. Result: The charge was stayed by the trial judge.

R. V. C.J. (1000 FINCH, TORONTO)

Charges: Over 80. Strategy: Cross-exam arresting officer at trial respecting delay in conducting roadside breath test. Result: The trial judge agreed the test was not administered as soon as practicable. The client was found not guilty.

R. V. N.G. (KITCHENER)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Seek exclusion of breath results based on police breaching the client’s rights to counsel pursuant to s. 10(b) of the Charter of Rights Result: Application granted. All charges were dismissed by the trial judge.

R. V. S.G. (1000 FINCH, TORONTO)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Identify issues with the delay in the seizure of the client’s breath samples at the police station. Result: The client was acquitted of all charges.

R. V. S.Q. (BRAMPTON)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Argue that the police violated the client’s constitutional rights and that evidence should be excluded Result: Application successful. All charges were dismissed.

R. V. K.F. (1911 EGLINTON, TORONTO)

Charges: Over 80 Strategy: Point Crown Attorney to police violation of client’s constitutional rights. Result: All charges withdrawn before trial.

R. V. Z.K. (OWEN SOUND)

Charges: Impaired, Over 80 Strategy: Argue that Crown failed to prove that breath samples were seized “as soon as practicable” Result: The trial judge agreed. Not guilty.