Assault Defence Lawyers in Toronto

In R. v. S.Y. [2022], Donich Law represented a client charged with one count of assault and one count of assault with a weapon after an alleged altercation with her ex-partner. The accused was alleged to have hit the complainant with her hands while holding a cell phone after getting into a heated altercation inside the complainant’s workplace. Police were called by an uninvolved third-party who witnessed the incident. The Crown initially sought a criminal conviction due to the seriousness of the charge and the fact that it occurred in the context of a domestic relationship. The Firm engaged in negotiations with the Crown for some time, providing important context to the situation, before ultimately securing a withdrawal of both charges.

In 2021, the Firm represented an individual charged with false information, indecent communications and criminal harassment in R. v. B.K. [2021]. The accused was alleged to have sent private messages over Instagram, using a fake account, to a mutual friend of his ex-partner, indicating that she wished to engage in particular sexual acts. The mutual friend contacted the complainant and showed her the message, resulting in law enforcement using IP address information to track down the sender. The Firm negotiated the matter for over a year, ultimately resolving the case without a criminal record for the accused.

In R v. A.M. [2021], the Firm defended an individual charged with assault, assault causing bodily harm and choking after an alleged altercation with his same-sex domestic partner. After roughly nine months of negotiations, the Firm was able to resolve the matter without a criminal record by way of peace bond. This was accomplished through affidavit evidence. Choking charges are difficult to defend because of the violent nature of the offence. In many cases they will proceed to trial, but can be avoided where the complainant has independent legal counsel.

In 2021, the Firm successfully resolved a case for a client who was charged with assault and assault with a weapon in R. v. J.D. [2021]. The accused was alleged to have assaulted his domestic partner with a weapon during an argument. Once charges were laid, a no contact order was put in place prohibiting the accused from contacting the complainant. The complainant hired independent legal counsel to assist her in restoring contact. The complainant’s counsel and the Firm presented a united defence, ultimately leading to a withdrawal of the charges.

In 2021, the Firm successfully represented an accused charged with simple assault after allegedly assaulting his domestic partner in R. v. A.R. [2021]. The complainant alleged that while intoxicated, the accused became angry and struck her in the face and pulled her hair during an argument. The complainant hired legal counsel of her own to help vary the no contact order put in place by the court. External legal counsel worked with the Firm to present a united defence, ultimately resulting the charges being withdrawn at the request of the Crown.

In the Firm’s R. v. P.C. [2020], it secured a withdrawal of assault on a permanent resident after allegedly pulling a kitchen knife on his spouse in Brampton. The Firm was able to protect the accused’s license as an accountant and his immigration status. The accused completed significant upfront work which assisted the Firm in achieving the position. Also, the complainant later changed her mind and provided a different story of events, which was used by the defence during litigation.

The Firm also previously resolved two separate Domestic Assault allegations for second offenders on the same victim without a criminal record in its R. v. A.V. [2019] and R. v. M.R. [2019]. It is rare to be charged twice with a domestic assault, but it does happen. The Crown will naturally be more aggressive and less inclined to offer a lenient position. The accused will have the uphill battle of showing the pattern of behaviour will stop and why they deserve another chance. From a sentencing standpoint, the law generally requires offenders receive a conviction for the second interaction with the law.

In addition to domestic abuse charges, Donich Law also frequently handles criminal harassment charges between domestic partners. Criminal harassment generally involves the accused repeatedly contacting an individual despite that individuals request to be left alone. These situations often arise when there has been a breakdown of a relationship. For example, in 2016 our Firm secured a withdrawal of all charges in R. v A.C. [2016]. after a Hollywood Actor was accused of criminal harassment after sending numerous emails and voicemails to an ex-partner.

In the Firm’s R. v. W.V. [2017], it secured a withdrawal of Assault with a Weapon against a provincial healthcare employee charged with throwing an over-baked pizza at her boyfriend’s head, causing lacerations. People are often surprised to know they will be charged with a weapon related offence for using almost any object. Assault with a weapon charges carry a negative stigma because the charge does not describe what the weapon actually was. As such, employers or border officials automatically assume it’s a dangerous object, such as a knife, when viewing the charge.

In January 2019 after a year of litigation, the Firm resolved an assault bodily harm allegation without a criminal record, where the accused fractured the jaw of the complainant in an altercation. This result was achieved after discovering exculpatory evidence on video surveillance in its R. v. S.G. [2019]. Defending violent assaults can be challenging because there is a strong public interest in their prosecution where there are injuries. Many times, these charges will not resolve favourably unless there are positive medical updates from the complainant.

In 2014, the Firm secured a full withdrawal of all charges in R v. E.T. [2014]. which involved a financial services employee charged with domestic assault, as well as in R v. C.L. [2015] where domestic abuse was alleged against an IROC regulated professional. If the offenders has a license extra care must be taken to ensure the proceeding is resolved without a conviction or finding of guilt. Even if the matter is resolved favourably from a criminal standpoint, fingerprints and photos will still be visible which could affect the any professional license the person may have.

In addition to domestic abuse in heterosexual relationships, the Firm has also handled a variety of cases dealing with domestic abuse in same-sex relationships. In 2016 the Firm secured withdrawals of all charges relating to assault where both male partners in a same-sex relationship sustained serious injuries during a mutual fight. In R v. P.T. [2016]. The Firm secured a withdrawal of an assault with a weapon charge after a dispute between same-sex partner’s caused one partner to pull a kitchen knife on the other partner. In some cases particularly with male offenders, sentences can be higher because there is a higher probability of their being injuries.