Impaired driving charges dropped by prosecutor after pre-trial discussions regarding numerous issues in the case. – NO CRIMINAL RECORD
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. A.B.
R. v. R.L.
Client charged in international drug trafficking case involving kilos of Methamphetamines and Cocaine.Police arrest a number of people in Utah, Alberta and B.C. The entire case was dismissed as the Accused’s Right to be tried within a Reasonable time was violated.
R. v. A.L.H.
Client was charged by indictment with Assault Causing Bodily Harm after he was involved in a street fight. The client claimed he was acting in self-defence. Mr. Beckett took the case to trial, challenged the complainant’s evidence, argued his client was acting in self-defence, and the client was found – NOT GUILTY
R. v. A.H.
The client was charged with domestic assault involving his wife. Anger management was arranged, and bail conditions were varied to allow some contact and, ultimately, to permit Mr. Shapray’s client to return to the family home. After a period of delay and cooling off, the prosecutor agreed to DROP THE CHARGES. _ NO CRIMINAL RECORD.
R. v. P.
T found driving while disqualified as a result of a previous impaired driving conviction. P facing multi-year driving prohibition if convicted plus possible jail sentence. Judge agrees with defence argument that insufficient evidence in crown’s case. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. D.H.
Mr. Shapray’s client was charged with a domestic assault against his wife after an evening of alcohol and recreational drug use led to conflict and the police attending after a 911 call. Damage control plan put into place involving immediate substance abuse and anger management counselling which led to case being resolved by way of a Peace Bond and client returning to the family home with wife and children. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. B.L.
Client charged with sexual assault and indecent act. Defence counsel outlined all weaknesses in Crown’s case to persuade Crown to cease the continuation of the prosecution. As a result of defence counsel’s diligence and trial preparation, all charges were stayed a week before trial was scheduled to commence.
R. v. G.J.
90-day Immediate Roadside Prohibition overturned in response to counsel’s arguments that G.J. was not in care or control of his motor vehicle. Driver’s license returned and vehicle storage and impound costs reimbursed.
R. v. B. M.
Client charged with eighteen counts of serious firearms manufacturing and possession offences and facing potential lengthy prison sentence if found guilty. The Crown’s case seemed strong, but Ms. Shamess challenged the production orders and search warrants police used to obtain the evidence, and the judge agreed with Ms. Shamess that the searches violated the client’s Charter right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. Ms. Shamess argued that all the evidence should be excluded from trial, and the judge agreed, resulting in the client being found NOT GUILTY of all charges.
M. v. RCMP
Client pulled over for an alleged unsafe lane change. Police searched his person and his vehicle, and seized the vehicle, a cell phone, and a quantity of cash the client used for his lawful business. Police returned the vehicle after being contacted by counsel, but refused to return the cash and cell phone. Ms. Shamess argued successfully that the police had no basis to continue detention of the cash and cell phone, and a judge ordered it returned to the client.