impaired driving icon

Experienced Impaired Driving Lawyer in Toronto

Impaired Driving Charges Include:

  • Impaired driving by alcohol, drug, or a combination of both
  • “Over 80”
  • Refuse or Failure to Provide a Breath Sample

Facing a charge of impaired driving can be very distressing. Your were detained at the roadside and likely taken to the police station, where you were told to take certain tests. Your driver’s license is suspended for 90 days and your vehicle was towed away. Eventually you are handed some documents, which the officer says to give to your lawyer. You feel lost, overwhelmed and now face the prospect of a court date in a few weeks.

SPEAK WITH SOMEONE BEFORE CONSIDERING PLEADING GUILTY

The stakes are just too high to do otherwise.

The result of a guilty plea or a conviction after trial are the same: a fine, you will have a criminal record (which can impact your employment and ability to travel) and a prohibition from operating a vehicle across Canada. In order to get your license back you must complete a Remedial Measure Program (“Back on Track”), which you must pay for yourself. Other potential consequences include probation, a seizure of your DNA, and increased insurance rates.

While the Ignition Interlock Program seems like a good deal, for the great majority of individuals it is not. Even if you do quality, the only benefit is that you have the opportunity to drive earlier. That is because you still must plead guilty to a criminal offence, which means all the above consequences are the same: fine, criminal record, and rise in insurance rates.

Richard has successfully assisted individuals defend impaired driving offences since 2001. In certain circumstances, Richard can negotiate with the prosecutor for a plea to a non-criminal offence or even a complete withdrawal of the charges.

Winning Strategies & Defences

If the matter goes to trial, Richard has a long history of identifying winning strategies and defences, including:

  • Whether the police violated your constitutional rights, including:
    • Was there a lawful reason to stop your vehicle?
    • Did the police follow the proper procedures when making the breath demand?
    • Was your right to speak to a lawyer respected?
  • Can the Crown prove you were in “care and control” of the vehicle”?
  • Is there evidence of impairment (drug or alcohol), and if so, to what degree?
  • Did the police use the proper equipment to analyze your breath and, if so, was it in proper working order?
  • Did the police complete the tests “as soon as practicable”?

Schedule a Meeting

Richard is always available to meet with you one-on-one to review the evidence, answer your questions and identify strategies for a successful result.

Call today to schedule a no charge consultation.

Richard acts for individuals facing impaired driving charges in Toronto, Mississauga, Brampton, Oshawa, Barrie, Hamilton, Newmarket and throughout Southern Ontario.

Impaired Driving Case Successes

  • R. v. R.P. (Old City Hall, Toronto)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Seek exclusion of evidence based on violation of 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 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 trial judge.
  • R. v. S.K. (Newmarket)
    • Charges: Impaired by Drug
    • Strategy: Point to Crown to frailties in its case, including failure to read demand and lengthy detention of client in rear of vehicle while awaiting evaluating officer to arrive on scene
    • Result: Charge dropped by Crown prior to trial.
  • R. v. R.M. (1911 Eglinton, Toronto)
    • Charges: Impaired Driving, Over 80
    • Strategy: Convince Crown Attorney that client’s right to be tried within a reasonable time will be violated if continue with prosecution.
    • Result: Charges withdrawn by Crown.
  • R. v. P.S. (Oshawa)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Identify police violations of client’s constitutional rights and seek exclusion of evidence pursuant to Charter of Rights.
    • Result: Application granted. All charges dismissed.
  • R. v. M.G. (Newmarket)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Application brought to stay charges based on violation of client’s right to tried within reasonable time as required by s. 11(b) of the Charter of Rights.
    • Result: Charge stayed by trial judge.
  • R. v. R.P. (Old City Hall, Toronto)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Seek exclusion of evidence based on violation of client’s constitutional rights under s. 8 and 9 of the Charter of Rights.
    • Result: Application successful. Charges dismissed.
  • 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: Trial judge agrees test not administered “as soon as practicable. Client found not guilty.
  • R. v. N.G. (Kitchener)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Seek exclusion of breath results based on police breaching client’s rights to counsel pursuant to s. 10(b) of the Charter of Rights
    • Result: Application granted. All charges dismissed by trial judge.
  • R. v. S.G. (1000 Finch, Toronto)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Identify issue with delay in seizure of client’s breath samples at the police station.
    • Result: Client acquitted of all charges.
  • R. v. S.Q. (Brampton)
    • Charges: Over 80
    • Strategy: Argue that police violated client’s constitutional rights and evidence should be excluded
    • Result: Application successful. All charges 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 prior to 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: Trial judge agrees. Not guilty.
24/7 Service

Richard Fedorowicz is a Criminal Lawyer Serving Toronto, Brampton, Newmarket, Hamilton, and Oshawa