Recent Cases

R v GSD – A Huge Win For Our Client At The Preliminary Inquiry

Our firm recently defended a man charged with possession of fentanyl and methamphetamine for the purposes of trafficking and proceeds of crime contrary to the Criminal Code. Mr. GSD is a permanent resident of Canada. This means that if convicted of possession for the purposes of trafficking, not only would he face a significant jail sentence, but he would almost certainly face deportation. He would no longer be admissible in Canada with these criminal charges. The consequences, if convicted, of these very serious charges can be life changing. His wife would no longer have a life here in Canada either.

Mr. GSD was a passenger in a vehicle when arrested for possession. Police also arrested the registered owner, driver and another passenger. These two people also retained lawyers to assist them. We took a different approach than the other lawyers. We advised Mr. GSD to elect to be tried by a Judge and Jury in the Court of Queen’s Bench and to have a preliminary inquiry. The other lawyers and their clients had elected to proceed in Provincial Court without a preliminary inquiry.

There are different reasons to choose the mode of trial. Your lawyer must always be mindful of the strategic choice and must advise you on the pros and cons of each decision. In Mr. GSD’s situation, his election (Queen’s Bench Judge and Jury) meant that all accused would be tried in this mode because his election was for a higher court. Mr. GSD met with me to prepare for the preliminary inquiry.

We attended our preliminary inquiry set to argue against committal to stand trial. At a preliminary inquiry, the judge is there to hear the prosecution’s case to determine if there is some evidence that, if believed, could result in a verdict of guilt.

As this is an extremely low test for the prosecution to meet, most of the time, defence lawyers choose to have a preliminary inquiry for other strategic reasons.

In Mr. GSD’s case, we choose to run the preliminary inquiry because, after a careful review of the disclosure and an analysis on what the Crown must demonstrate, we had a strong chance that the Crown would fail the test. There were other vital reasons we choose this path. At the preliminary inquiry, the Crown chose to stay Mr. GSD’s charges. This resulted in a fantastic outcome for Mr. GSD. He is no longer facing any type of legal jeopardy of jail or deportation. We choose this path and convinced the prosecutor that this was the best result for her case and for Mr. GSD’s.

It also exposes why it is so critical that you retain a lawyer who has experience dealing with these types of charges as well as experience in making critical strategic decisions so you can get the best possible outcome. That is what we did for Mr. GSD, and that is what we will do for you. We are serious lawyers who defend serious charges.

We are here for you at Ross Lutz Barristers. Our experience is your best defence. Contact us to defend your case.