Client arrested for possession of controlled substances for the purpose of trafficking and released at the scene without charges. Police seized his vehicle and refused to return it until counsel filed an application with the court for its return, after which they returned the client’s vehicle.
Case Results
At Stern Shapray, we provide legal representation across a wide range of criminal and quasi-criminal matters, from serious charges to regulatory and provincial offences.
R. v. RCMP
R v. D.C.
D.C. was charged with offences under the Immigration and Refugee Act for assisting the illegal entry into Canada of a person who tried to run across the border. There was evidence that D.C. had being involved I dropping of this “border jumper” in Blaine and arranging to pick them up in Canada. After five days of trial, we were able to convince the Court that D.C.’s actions did not constitute the criminal act that was charged. D.C. was found not guilty at the end of trial. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. G.D
Client was charged with sexual assault. The matter proceeded to trial, where Mr. Beckett challenged the complainant’s version of events and argued for an acquittal. The client was found. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. P. D.
Client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference against his nine year old grandson. – ACQUITTED
R. v. M.M.
Multiple assault charges in family dispute dropped prior to trial after extensive negotiations between us and the prosecutor. Client entered into Peace Bond resulting in no criminal record. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. A.M.
Client charged with historical sexual offences. Mr. Sharpray extensively cross-examined the complainant during preliminary inquiry. Case no longer met charge approval standard. Mr. Shapray made submissions to the prosecutor prior to setting case for trial.
R. v. S.D.
Domestic assault charges dropped by prosecutor prior to trial date after significant challenge to the complainant’s credibility. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. R.S.D.
Client was charged with impaired and dangerous driving after various witnesses observed the him driving erratically, ultimately colliding with a telephone pole in the middle of the day. After first responders extracted him from the vehicle and was on his way to the hospital, police formed grounds that he was impaired, took samples of his blood, and ultimately found his blood alcohol content well-exceeded the legal limit. Mr. Beckett was nevertheless able to persuade the Crown to agree to resolve the charges under the Motor Vehicle Act instead of the Criminal Code. The client was also able to avoid a driving prohibition. – NO CRIMINAL CONVICTION
R. v. A.R.
Client received a 90-Day Immediate Roadside Prohibition (“IRP”) after blowing two “FAIL” readings. IRP overturned after the adjudicator agreed with defence counsel’s arguments that, despite the officer’s claim to the contrary, the second breath test was not performed on a different approved screening device.
R. v. O.P.
Client was charged by indictment with committing an indecent act in a public place. The indecent act was captured on a witness’ cellphone video. The Crown initially sought a jail sentence, but Mr. Beckett was able to persuade the Crown to agree to a joint submission for a Conditional Discharge with only one year of probation and which would ultimately leave the client. – NOT GUILTY