Results

Here are some examples of successful criminal law results.

    • Client found not guilty of injury with intent to injure.  The client was alleged to have stabbed her partner with a knife.  The jury acquitted the client after deliberating for only 30 minutes following counsel discrediting the partner during cross-examination and calling into question the inadequacies of the forensic evidence. 
    • A client charged with assault with intent to injure was discharged without conviction.  The Crown had refused to move on the charge so the client elected a jury trial, knowing the likelihood of imprisonment if he lost.  After defence counsel cross-examined five prosecution witnesses the Crown changed its position and agreed the complainants' evidence was lacking.  The charge was reduced to common assault and the client was discharged without conviction - a deemed acquittal and no criminal conviction. 
    • Charges of male assaults female and threatening to kill dismissed following cross-examination of police witnesses by counsel. 
    • Not guilty on charges of assaulting police and resisting arrest because police were not on the client's property lawfully. 
    • Assault charge dismissed on the basis of lawful self-defence. 
    • Discharge without conviction on a charge of male assaults female.
    • A client had been convicted on importing drugs when represented by another lawyer.   We were instructed to appeal the conviction to the Court of Appeal.  The trial lawyer had run a defence based on what was said to be the prosecution's inability to prove the imported substances were drugs (because they had never been tested).  The problem with that defence was that the police had searched the client's computer and found emails ordering drugs - the emails were basically admissions that the substances were drugs.  On appeal we successfully argued that the emails were inadmissible because the application for the search warrant speculated that the substances were drugs.  The convictions were set aside, because there was no evidence the substances were drugs without the police being able to rely on the emails.  Several other lawyers had told the client there were no grounds for appeal.  They were wrong. 
    • Successful challenge to a police search and the admissibility of a significant amount of methamphetamine.  Client faced multiple charges of possession of large quantities of methamphetamine and LSD for supply.  After the admissibility challenges the drug quantities were reduced to such an extent that the client was granted home detention on the remaining charges without facing trial. 
    • Not guilty after trial on a charge of possession of methamphetamine for supply due to discrepancies in weight and colour of the substance seized compared to that tested. 
    • A client had been convicted and sentenced to over 4 years prison on methamphetamine charges prior to us becoming involved in this case.  We prepared appeal submissions based on the lawfulness of the police search.  The Court of Appeal accepted the legal argument, quashing the convictions and releasing the client. 
    • Charges of possession of cannabis for supply and of selling cannabis withdrawn.  Client sentenced to community work and community detention on a guilty plea to cultivation of cannabis, in relation to a quantity of some 300 plants initially alleged by police but negotiated down by us. 
    • Possession of ecstasy and cannabis charges dismissed because police could not prove who had control of drugs found in a common area in a house. 
    • Possession charges dismissed because police had not stopped the client's car lawfully.
    • Client charged with possession of a large quantity of ecstasy for supply.  A challenge was signalled to the search warrant as it contained numerous deficiencies.  An application was also made for an order that police disclose confidential informant information that had been redacted from the search warrant application.  The judge granted the order for disclosure of the informant information and, as a result, police then withdrew the charge. 
    • This client was charged with importing 165 grams of MDMA, 6 grams of cocaine and 25 tabs of LSD.  A lengthy period of imprisonment could be expected for this type of offending however, after successful negotiations with the prosecution and submissions to the judge the client received a sentence of home detention.   
    • Client was charged with participating in an organised criminal group and with receiving some $770,000.00 of jewellery after being arrested at the airport with the jewellery in luggage.  Co-accused were imprisoned.  Strong defence challenges were signalled and prepared on the admissibility of evidence from a search and DVD interview.  Following that the Crown agreed to a resolution and the client received a sentence of home detention, which lasted four weeks. 
    • Not guilty of unlawful interference with motor vehicles.  After counsel cross-examined the prosecution witnesses a successful argument was advanced that there was no case to answer.
    • Burglary case dismissed because police could not prove that the client had entered the house. 
    • Discharge without conviction on a theft charge, due to impact on prospective employment.
    • Two burglary charges not pursued by the prosecution after counsel raised challenges to the admissibility of evidence and the insufficiency of the remaining evidence. 
    • This client faced multiple charges of receiving stolen cars and possession of drugs.  The police theory was that the client was involved in a car ring or chop shop.  Police had searched the property four times, searching a house, sheds and over 100 cars.  All charges were dismissed prior to a jury trial as a result of our successful appeal to the Court of Appeal.  All search warrants were declared invalid as a result of a police officer's earlier trespass, illegal search and his "plain misuse of statutory powers".
    • Successful appeal to the Court of Appeal on a sex charge on the grounds of police entrapment. 
    • A client faced multiple charges of possession of objectionable publications.  Counsel prepared appeal submissions based on the lawfulness of the police search.  The Court of Appeal accepted the legal argument and excluded evidence obtained from a police search.  As a result the client was discharged, meaning he did not face trial and was deemed to have been acquitted. 
    • Obstructing police charge dismissed because police could not prove they had permission from the client's mother to be in the house. 
    • Assault police and resisting arrest charges dismissed after police could not prove they were acting in the execution of their duty.
    • This client had a charge of indecent exposure dismissed as a result of insufficient identification evidence. 
    • "Thank you.  You did it for me.  I'm very grateful for all you did for me and how you treated me and my family over the last two and a half years was a long stretch and I always knew I had the right lawyer for the job.  You're a very good man in how you deal with your clients I wish you all the best man and hope to see you around..." (ON 2013)
    • "First of all we would like to say TY for all your help, understanding & patience towards us.  We thank God for having placed you on our way so that we could have met you, you’re an incredible human being and an extraordinary lawyer." (NS 2012)