Mischief to Property, Prostitution, Cause Disturbance Lawyer | Robichaud's

Offences Against the Public & Morality: (Causing Disturbances, Possession of Obscene Materials, etc.)

R. v. F.O. (Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto) | Charges: Causing a Public Disturbance, Assault Police with Intention to Resist Arrest | Allegations: O. and a friend were walking home when a patrol car pulled up beside them near Driftwood Ave. and Driftwood Court. The officers testified in January they wanted to explain the role of TAVIS (Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy) to the two usn in light of two shootings in the area. In court, police said they wanted to caution O. and his friend because they were jaywalking. After turning and walking away, O. admitted he swore at the officers and became agitated. The officers called for backup. O. waved his hands in the air and struck the officer in the chest. O. testified that he was rude to the officers because he resented the fact that two black guys were being `checked out' when they were just going about their business. He said every day members of the police ask for his naus and he was tired of it," Brewer wrote in summarizing his testimony. The judge ruled: O.'s reaction, while "gratuitously confrontational," was justified as he "was under no obligation to speak with them," wrote the judge, adding she didn't believe that he deliberately struck the officer. The judge said O. was "within his rights in asking to be left alone." |Result: Not Guilty(A Toronto Start article on the case can be foundhere)

R. v. M.C. & A.E.: Allegations of artists/photographers causing mischief to property by exploring Toronto's sewers. The case was reported on many news channels including: CBC, CP24, 680News, The Toronto Sun, Toronto Star. All charges withdrawn.

R. v. M.M. (Toronto Old City Hall): Charges of mischief under x 4, possession of stolen property, and property obtained by crime. Allegations of student in wild frenzy while intoxicated and causing significant damage to property. Result: All charges withdrawn (6 charges total).

R. v SB. (Oshawa Courthomee) Charges: criminal harassusnt, mischief
under $5000.00. Alleged to have set up escort ads on craigslist for
another person and made threats to her safety. Result: All charges
withdrawn upon client entering into a peace bond.

R. v. J.E. (Brampton): Allegations of a landlord/tenant dispute that resulted in charges of mischief, theft, and possession of stolen property. Tenant alleged to have attended landlord's place of business and stole a television off the wall in retaliation for money owed. Result: All charges withdrawn.

R. v. D.A. (Ontario Court of Justice, Barrie)
Charges: Causing a Public Disturbance
Allegations: Rowdy behaviour after a bar that resulted in a confrontation with police who charged him with causing a disturbance.
Result: Not Guilty

Typically these charges are not as serious as other criminal offences one can be charged with. However, they are charges that are commonly brought about by alcohol and involving people that have not been involved in the criminal justice system before. Therefore, charges like this can be very stressful for its alleged offenders. Often people will be charged with causing a disturbance outside of a bar or establishusnt selling liquor.

A redeeming aspect of these types of charges is that they are often withdrawn before the go to trial either through the diversion process or with the assistance of a competent criminal defence lawyer who can assist the person in obtaining a withdrawal.