Drug offences can generally be classified into three categories: possession; possession for the purpose of trafficking; and trafficking. Types of drugs range from marijuana, dode, hashish, cocaine and heroin, to name just a few. Each drug has been categorized in Schedules in the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act, which is Canada's federal drug control statute. The Federal Department of Justice generally prosecutes drug offences under the Act.
The severity of the charge depends on the type of drug that is involved. The trend in Canada has been to treat drug charges quite seriously since the use and selling of drugs are considered to be a societal problem that can destroy lives.
We work aggressively to insure that your rights are not breached or otherwise compromised at any point during the legal process. Most drug cases involve issues regarding the Charter of Rights & Freedoms. We will be able to identify any violation of rights that occurs during search and seizure, arrest, interrogation, the subsequent collection of evidence, or any other instance of rights violations.
We will dedicate large amounts of time and energy into your case in order to best protect and maximize your legal rights in a criminal defence case. We will also provide a realistic and objective perspective about the anticipated course of legal proceedings and what can be expected during the case.
- Possession- The Crown must establish that the drugs were in your possession or in your control/knowledge
- Type of Drug- The Crown must prove the drugs have been tested by an analyst and it was infact a controlled drug
- Search Issues- Often there are grounds to argue, the police may have conducted an illegal search of your body, car or home
We have the experience, resource and tools required to provide you with the most effective legal defence, often not resulting in a criminal record. It is important to remember that every allegation of drug possession is a fact specific inquiry. Consulting a lawyer will assist you with identifying potential defences to this type of allegation.
R. vs. S.D.
CaseOur client was pulled over by the police. The police say that they believed my client was Impaired by Alcohol. In the course of arresting him, they found 3 grams of Heroin in his pocket.
Result I argued that the police conducted an illegal search on our client. They had no basis to charge him with Impaired Driving. As a result, any search conducted after that illegal arrest was unlawful. The Court agreed with this and excluded the Heroin from evidence. Our Client was found NOT GUILTY.
R. vs. S.S.
CaseOur client was alleged to have sold over $2000 of cocaine to undercover police officers at a local bar.
Result We scheduled a trial on this matter. Shortly before the trial we learned that the police officers involved in the case were under investigation for stealing a statue from a drug dealer in another case. Using this information we were able to convince the Crown to WITHDRAW the charges against our client, as the police officers would have serious credibility issues.
R. v. V.J.
Case Our client was charged with having possession of 20 grams of Marihuana. Our client readily admitted that he had possession of the drugs, but wanted us to do everything we could to try to win the case.
Trial The Crown attempted to prove that the drugs were in fact Marihuana by relying upon a Certificate of Analysis as they commonly do. The Certificate was served upon our client's mother at our client's home. I brought to the attention of the Crown that service was flawed as our client never actually received the Certificate evidence. As a result the Crown decided to withdraw the charges against our client.
R. v. P.D.
Case Our client was apprehended with a small quantity of Marihuana. He was a University Graduate and held a very responsible job. I brought to the attention of the Crown the details about our client and the fact that a Criminal Record would adversely affect his employment situation. The Crown agreed that upon the making of a charitable donation the charges would be withdrawn.
Result Charges were withdrawn.
R. v. T.S.
Case The police had stopped our client's car because it had a loud muffler. The police officer became suspicious of our client as he appeared very nervous. The officer asked him if he could search the car. Our client felt he didn't have a choice and simply let the police search the vehicle. The police officer located $400.00 worth of cocaine and $150.00 worth of Marijuana.
Trial It was argued that the police had no authority to search the vehicle. The consent that the police relied upon was not an informed consent. Our client was unfairly treated in the manner in which the vehicle was stopped and subsequently searched.
Result The Court held that our client's Charter Rights had been violated and dismissed the charges.