Findings of not guilty after trial/crown withdrawing charge

Practice Areas

Findings of not guilty after trial/crown withdrawing charge CASE SUCCESSES

Richard Lawyer has a long track record of findings of not guilty after trial/crown withdrawing charges:

R. V. M.M. (TORONTO)
  • Allegations:  M.M. faced serious charges of possession of a loaded firearm; possession of Fentanyl and Heroine for the purpose of trafficking; as well as possession of proceeds of crime. If convicted, he was facing a jail sentence of 4-6 years.

    The police observed a male exit a residence, approach the driver’s side of the vehicle and engage in a what they claimed was a “hand to hand” drug transaction. The police then followed the vehicle and arrested M.M. During the search incident to arrest, officers located a firearm and drugs inside a satchel M.M. was wearing.

  • Defence Strategy: Charter application filed to exclude the gun and drugs from evidence. Mr. Fedorowicz argued M.M. was arrested without just cause and thereafter engaged in unreasonable search, in violation of his client’s rights under sections 8 and 9 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
  • Result: Charter application was successful. Gun and drugs excluded. M.M. was found not guilty of all charges.

R. v. D.Z. (TORONTO)

  • Allegations: After execution of search warrant, police locate firearm and drugs. Client charged with unlawful possession of firearm and possession of controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking. Facing lengthy custodial sentence if convicted.
  • Defence Strategy: By thoroughly and methodically reviewing the evidence, including the affidavit filed by police in support of the search warrant, Mr. Fedorowicz established significant issues with the Crown’s ability to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Result: All charges withdrawn by prosecutor before trial.

R. v. M.O. (BARRIE)

  • Allegations:  M.O. was charged with two counts of breaking and entering. Police alleged that M.O. broke into two residences in the middle of the night, but ran off after being confronted by the home’s residence.
  • Defence Strategy: Mr. Fedorowicz undermined the reliability the eyewitness evidence and police procedure: during cross-examination of witnesses identifying inconsistencies in the description of the suspect; the inability of the main witness to provide any descriptors of the suspect during a police statement; and, the failure of the police to conduct a police line-up or collect security video from the residence.
  • Result: Client found not guilty after trial.

R. v. Brennan (APPEAL)

  • Allegations: Police locate firearm and large of drugs at residence after execution of a search warrant. Appellant convicted after trial of Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking x 7; Possession Proceeds of Crime; and Possession of a Loaded Firearm and sentenced to over six years jail.
  • Argument on Appeal: The trial Judge unfairly denied the Appellant the opportunity to proceed to trial after the denial of a Charter application to have the evidence excluded.
  • : Appeal granted. The Court of Appeal ruled, “The trial judge wrongly held she had no jurisdiction to allow the appellant to resile from the undertaking to plead guilty… The appeal is allowed, the convictions are quashed, and a new trial is ordered.”

R. v. A.W. (BRAMPTON)

  • Allegations: While the client’s vehicle was pulled over at a R.I.D.E. check stop, police claim they small the odour of cannabis. Therafter A.W. and the vehicle are searched, revealing several drugs. Client faced charges of possession of heroin and cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.
  • Defence Strategy: During pre-trial discussions with the Crown Attorney, Mr. Fedorowicz pointed to issues with the search of the vehicle and other evidentiary issues that undermined its case.
  • Result: Charges withdrawn by Crown before trial.