R v. Martinez-Cabrara - In June 2008, Toronto Police officers announced the arrests of 17 alleged members of a notorious Latino street gang called MS-13. To read the original article on the arrests click here. One of those arrested was Ms. Martinez-Cabrara. At the time of her arrest, Martinez-Cabrara faced over 30 criminal and drug related charges. In just over six months, Daniel Brown was able to secure a complete withdrawal of all of her charges. Click here to read what went wrong with the Crown's case.  

 

R v. Bains- A sexual assault case dealing with the issue of mistaken identity. The complainant was 100% sure she had correctly identified the man who sexually assaulted her- but was the court convinced she got it right? Click on the case name to read the judge's reasons for finding Mr. Bains not guilty.

 

R v. Franklin - A drug trafficking case involving an illegal arrest and search of the accused's vehicle by two Durham Region Drug Squad Officers. The judge refused to allow the illegally obtained evidence of cocaine and marijuana to be used during the trial and dismissed the case.

 

R v. D.H.T  - D.H.T. was acquitted of assault causing bodily harm and violating his bail conditions. It was alleged that D.H.T., a man in his twenties, shot a lit firework at the back of an eight year old boy from point blank range causing second degree burns to the boys upper back. It was also alleged that D.H.T. did this while he was subject to a house arrest bail condition prohibiting him from being outside of his residence.

 

After cross examining the young complainant, the judge was not convinced that the youth was telling the truth about how he obtained his injuries. The judge ultimately ruled that it was probable the boy suffered his injuries accidentally and not intentionally as the Crown Attorney alleged and acquitted D.H.T. of all charges.

 

R v. Sappleton- Mr. Sappleton was charged along with his brother of being in possession of a gun and drugs located inside their residence. During Mr. Sappleton's interrogation at the police station after his arrest, he was advised by the police officers that if he didn't admit to knowing that the gun was hidden in a vent in the basement of his house, his entire family, including his two sisters and mother, would all be arrested for possession of the gun and taken to jail. Eventually, Mr. Sappleton admitted his knowledge of the gun in an attempt to protect his family from being arrested.

 

At his Preliminary Inquiry, the admissibility of this statement to the police was challenged. The basis for the challenge was founded on the fact that the statement was obtained by coercive and illegal tactics on the part of the police when they threatened to arrest Mr. Sappleton's entire family if he did not admit his knowledge of the gun.

 

The Judge agreed with the defence that the statement was not given voluntarily on account of the police coercion and excluded the statement from evidence on the hearing.  Click here to read the judges ruling on that issue.

 

Without the evidence of Mr. Sappleton's statement, the Crown had no direct evidence to present to the court to support the charges of gun possession and drug possession.  The Judge discharged Mr. Sappleton on the offences before the Court -meaning he did not have to stand trial for the offences.

 

Mr. Sappleton was immediately released from custody at the end of the judge's ruling. Click here to see the Judge's reasons for discharging Mr. Sappleton and his brother on all charges.

 

R v. Dennis - Mr. Dennis was accused of being  in possession of marijuana, a knife, violating a condition of his bail and obstructing a police officer by falsely identifying himself to the officer. All of the evidence obtained by the police to support these allegations was excluded from the trial resulting in an acquittal on all counts.

 

The evidence was excluded on account of an illegal stop, search and questioning by a Peel police officer of Mr. Dennis, who was a passenger in a motor vehicle. 

 

The judge concluded that the police officer lied when he testified at Trial that Mr. Dennis was committing a Highway Traffic Act infraction (not wearing his seatbelt) when the officer investigated and searched him.

 

The Judge ruled that the police officer had no lawful basis to question Mr. Dennis and locate the evidence he later found on him.

 

This is an example of a suspected case of racial profiling by the Peel region police officer.

 

R v. Ferrigon - A drug case involving an iilegal search and arrest of Mr. Ferrigon conducted by two Toronto Police officers. The Judge refused to allow the illegally obtained evidence to be used at trial and dismissed the case on the basis of the illegal search and arrest.  

 

R v. S.V. - A breach of bail allegation dealing with an illegal stop and search of three youths by police. The Judge ruled that the police officers had no basis to detain and question the  three boys on their way to play basketball based solely on the type of clothing they were wearing.

 

The evidence that S.V. was violating his house arrest bail was excluded at trial, resulting in an acquittal.

 

R v. Williams - a case where the client was acquitted of an assault on two police officers following an illegal arrest by the officers.

 

R v. Myers - a case concerning the legality of Toronto street signs not written in both English and French.