RECENT CASES

Assault Offences

R v A.T.
A police officer pulled A.T. over for failing to yield to a pedestrian outside of the Calgary Courthouse. Rather that speak with A.T. in a respectful manner, the officer escalated the situation by telling A.T. that he was being given an $800 ticket to “educate him”. A.T., who had been polite and respectful to this point, became very angry and yelled at the cop for several seconds. After calming down, A.T. began to walk back to his vehicle but was stopped by the policed officer and told he was under arrest of disturbing the peace. A.T. pulled away from the officer’s grasp who then threw A.T. to the ground. After a brief skirmish, all of which was captured on body worn camera, A.T. was placed in the back of the police vehicle bleeding and unable to catch his breath due to a medical condition. After being transported to the police station, the arresting officer continued to be aggressive and repeatedly caused A.T. harm by twisting his arms, pushing him to the ground and making him lay on the frozen concrete.

A.T. was charged with assaulting a police officer, mischief and causing a disturbance. After reviewing the video of the incident, Cory was able to convince the Crown Prosecutor to withdraw all charges including the traffic ticket based on the police officer’s conduct. This was a great outcome for the client and saved him the stress and cost of having to go to trial.   

SEE ALL ASSAULT OFFENCES CASES > >


Drug Offences

R v. N.S.
N.S. was charged with 13 offences including possession of cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl and heroin for the purposes of trafficking. He was also charged with two counts of possession of a firearm while prohibited, possession of a stolen firearm, careless storage of a firearm and proceeds of crime. N.S. was facing over 10 years in prison if found guilty. Shortly after his arrest, N.S. provided police with a lengthy statement. He pled not guilty and proceeded to trial.

At trial, Cory was able to prove that the officer who interviewed N.S. shortly after his arrest lied to him about his fingerprints being found on the gun case. The trial judge took this into consideration in assessing the weight of N.S.’s statement to police. Despite N.S.’s personal documents being found in the vehicle in which the drugs and guns were found, the trial judge agreed with Cory that the Crown had failed to prove N.S. had the requisite knowledge to prove he had possession of the guns and drugs. N.S. was found not guilty on all charges.

The Federal Crown Prosecutors appealed the trial judge’s decision. Cory represented N.S. at the Court of Appeal and the not guilty verdict was upheld. N.S. was left with no criminal record for this incident.

This was the best possible outcome for the client.


Impaired Driving / DUI Offences

R v. C.R.
After a night of heavy drinking at a bar, C.R. was observed getting into a physical confrontation with his girlfriend in the parking lot of the bar. He was then seen entering his vehicle and driving away. Police were called and attended the residence listed as belonging to the registered owner of the vehicle. When police arrived, C.R. was in the driver’s seat of the vehicle parked at the bottom of the driveway. As police approached, C.R. drove into the garage and exited the vehicle. Police requested C.R. exit the garage and after a brief conversation, read him an approved screening device demand. C.R. was taken to the police vehicle where after being provided with instructions, attempted to walk away from the officer. C.R. was immediately arrested for obstruction and placed into the police vehicle. He was then provided multiple opportunities to provide a sample of breath and failed to do so. Rather than releasing C.R. with a Promise to Appear in court, the officer chose to detain C.R. in police custody for over 9 hours.

There was no justification for C.R.’s detention and Cory filed a Charter Notice alleging that C.R. was arbitrarily detained contrary to section 9 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. After reviewing Cory’s Charter Notice, the Crown withdrew both charges on the morning of trial.

This was the best outcome for the client.


Domestic Violence

R. v. A.G.
A.G. was accused of assaulting his wife, teenage son, and breaching both a recognizance and Protection Order. The allegations were made during an ongoing matrimonial and custody dispute between A.G. and his estranged wife.

It was alleged that A.G. assaulted his son by choking him during an argument to the point he was unable to breathe for a brief period of time. It was further alleged that A.G. caused injury to his son’s foot, chest and arm. Without his knowledge, A.G.’s daughter had secretly audio recorded the entire incident from another room and then disclosed the recording to police.

A.G. maintained his innocence and pled not guilty. Shortly before trial, Cory Wilson approached the Crown Prosecutor and outlined the significant contradictions between the complainant’s statement and the audio recording. Most importantly, the teenaged complainant, who alleged he could breathe or talk, was screaming obscenities at his father throughout. A.G., who was unaware he was being recorded, actually narrated what he was doing when he physically restrained his son who had just punched a window in what appeared to be an attempt at property damage.

As a result of the significant issues, the prosecutor agreed to withdraw the assault charge in relation to A.G.’s son.

With respect to the alleged assault against his wife, A.G. maintained his innocence and pled not guilty. The case came down to a credibility contest between A.G. and his wife as nobody else was present during the alleged assault. A.G. maintained he was assaulted by his wife who fell over as she was trying to steal a set of car keys to A.G.’s van. This van became the matter of another criminal matter as A.G.’s wife, prior to trial, forged documents getting her access to the van that was at an impound lot. Armed with this knowledge, Cory presented the criminal charges to the prosecutor who was unaware prior to trial that the complainant had been criminally charged. As a result, the Crown Prosecutor withdrew the charge.

As a result of the complainant’s credibility issues, Cory Wilson was able to convince the prosecutor to withdraw both charges as there was no likelihood of success.

A.G. was set to have three trials over the course of two weeks. Cory Wilson was able to have each charge withdrawn and A.G. did not face trial for any of the alleged offences.

Having charged from three separate trials was the best possible outcome.


Theft/Fraud Offences

R v. S.V.
S.V. was charged with theft under $5,000 after being caught shoplifting several pairs of sunglasses. She was caught red-handed and gave a full confession when confronted. She was a mother of two children and her employment required a clean criminal background.

Cory was able to have S.V. entered into the Alternative Measures Program on her first court appearance. After she successfully completed a small amount of community service, the charges were withdrawn. This was the best possible outcome as it allowed S.V. to continue her employment as a result of having no criminal record.


Mischief Offences

R v A.T.
A police officer pulled A.T. over for failing to yield to a pedestrian outside of the Calgary Courthouse. Rather that speak with A.T. in a respectful manner, the officer escalated the situation by telling A.T. that he was being given an $800 ticket to “educate him”. A.T., who had been polite and respectful to this point, became very angry and yelled at the cop for several seconds. After calming down, A.T. began to walk back to his vehicle but was stopped by the policed officer and told he was under arrest of disturbing the peace. A.T. pulled away from the officer’s grasp who then threw A.T. to the ground. After a brief skirmish, all of which was captured on body worn camera, A.T. was placed in the back of the police vehicle bleeding and unable to catch his breath due to a medical condition. After being transported to the police station, the arresting officer continued to be aggressive and repeatedly caused A.T. harm by twisting his arms, pushing him to the ground and making him lay on the frozen concrete.

A.T. was charged with assaulting a police officer, mischief and causing a disturbance. After reviewing the video of the incident, Cory was able to convince the Crown Prosecutor to withdraw all charges including the traffic ticket based on the police officer’s conduct. This was a great outcome for the client and saved him the stress and cost of having to go to trial.   

SEE ALL MISCHIEF OFFENCES CASES >>


Sexual Offences

R v. B.S.
B.S. and his younger brother were accused of sexually assaulting their younger sister for approximately 5 years in the 1970’s. The allegations were made in 2015 after the complainant had been estranged from the family for decades. If convicted, B.S. was facing a lengthy jail sentence. B.S. and his brother unequivocally denied the charges and pled not guilty.

The complainant made incredible allegations of years-long abuse including gang rapes in which she was strung up to the ceiling by bedsheets by her brothers and multiple unidentified individuals. The allegations amounted to over 1500 sexual assaults in a small house shared by 8 siblings, parents, grandmother and foster children. Remarkably, none of the many other people residing in the house witnessed a single act of sexual assault.

During the course of the investigation, the complainant gave a number of statements and subsequently testified at a preliminary inquiry. Over the course of 4 days, Cory cross-examined the complainant on her ever-changing versions of events and provable fabrications. On one significant allegation, Cory had had the complainant admit to committing perjury by intentionally lying under oath at the preliminary inquiry.

At the conclusion of cross-examination, the Crown Prosecutor asked the judge to dismiss all of the charges against B.S. and his brother.

This was the best possible outcome for the client.


Violent Offences

R v. N.N.
N.N. was charged with first degree murder and offering an indignity to a body. The police theory was that the murder was a gangland hit and the post-murder beheading of the victim was to send a message to a rival gang. The case against N.N. was almost entirely circumstantial. N.N. pled not guilty and the matter was set for trial.

After an in-depth review of the disclosure, Cory and co-counsel, Derek of Jugnauth (Wolch Watts Wilson & Jugnauth), concluded that there was insufficient evidence to convict N.N. of first degree murder. There were significant gaps in the Crown’s theory that could not be remedied at trial. As a result of the significant issues discovered by Cory and Derek, the Crown agreed to reduce the charge to manslaughter on the day of trial.